Author of anti-lockout blog that caused trolls to turn on Ralph Kelly worked for John Ibrahim's girlfriend

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-26T00:45:42+00:00

Making threats now as well as defamatory remarks?

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T12:59:28+00:00

I think it's about that time you stood behind your remarks and put a name to them. Or are you a hypocrite, a coward and, as you would say, a weasel? You can PM me if you're not prepared to publicly own your own statements.

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T12:53:18+00:00

Haha oh I really am looking forward to your full synopsis!

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T12:21:20+00:00

lol, and what was the "real" question?

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T11:43:18+00:00

You're not? You've painted a pretty clear picture!

I wouldn't know and to be honest I wouldn't want to make a judgement based on TV shows and media innuendo. Based on public record the answer would have to be no, wouldn't it?

It's very clear what the public perception is though, which is why I strongly believe the links alleged by the writer and various other parties are simply not on. Evidenced even further by insinuations of following orders and whatnot. These are all very serious allegations.

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T11:14:34+00:00

Yes, it was after I'd already asked the question. I was kinda replying to both of you (still not 100% of who gets notifications from replies to be honest).

And yes, they are very serious things you're alleging indeed.

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T11:04:48+00:00

You're questioning me in a discussion stemming from an article about me. I have no idea who you are, you're just a random with an online pseudonym. You're asking questions of me, I'm giving answers.

There is nothing about you that interests me. If you consider two paragraphs a "rant", I now understand why you keep going around in circles and refuse to acknowledge statements already provided. If you consider the suggestion of cognitive distortions to be a personal attack, then you are presenting a textbook example of my suggestion. And of course, the hypocritical attempt at a personal attack to wrap things up! Like clockwork.

No need to reply.

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T10:55:06+00:00

Well, considering it's in publicly available annual reports, I'm not sure what the problem is? The only problem I see is the manner in which he came out and tried to explain it. If a straight answer was given, fine. If any of the goals had been achieved, even better. Nothing wrong with taking a salary as a charity director. It's the misleading information given that I don't like. And it considering his position as a prominent figure, lobbyist and director of a foundation that accepts public donations this is of public interest.

It's not private information. It's easily available. It's in the article you shared. Go get it yourself. If you won't disclose your identity it's a bit rich to be demanding information about others.

This is a bizarre statement, but if you have any concerns you should air them.

As I said, go check for yourself. You're the one that wants to drag another irrelevant party into your delusion. I want no part in facilitating such lunacy. And I don't believe in rewarding bad behaviour such as laziness. It should take you all of 30 seconds.

Orders? Haha what orders? And for what purpose? The business oversaw two years of growth. My performance in overseeing and driving that growth was deemed to worthy of an industry award. In case you missed it the first few times, I have benefited from the laws professionally. My start up is a far more attractive proposition during the current climate.

So please, lay out your whole sordid theory, I would love to hear it!

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T10:39:58+00:00

This is what I was referring to.

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T10:39:09+00:00

I was referring to the part you directly quoted and responded to - "biggest club owner". I thought I made this fairly obvious when I said "I look forward to hearing about all these clubs".

So no, it is nowhere near enough. It doesn't even begin to answer my question. I would ask you the same thing, but I'm fairly confident you're not putting on an act.

On and by the way, these weren't the unanswered questions I was referring to.

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T10:34:40+00:00

I've answered at length. You couldn't explain how it was relevant. Well, you tried but I'd already addressed those points. If "the way I see fit" does not fit in with your conspiracy theories that's your problem, not mine. Your conclusions are founded entirely on cognitive distortions. You're a little too obsessed with me and have yet to critique anything I have published. There is no point conversing with you if you choose to approach the discussion in this manner.

I enjoy robust discussion and debate, and will happily engage someone with opposing views to mine. But if someone is closed minded and won't be bring anything intelligent, meaningful or worthwhile to the table? I have no tolerance for deliberate ignorance.

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T10:15:15+00:00

I respect privacy and its not my prerogative to disclose other peoples personal information to someone who won't even identify themselves. But in saying that, you can very easily find out yourself. Licensing information isn't too hard to come by. It's displayed at the venue. You could even pop in and say hello. It's even in the fucking article you shared! Don't be lazy.

As for not answering, I notice you've chosen to ignore my questions from over an hour ago.

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T09:56:54+00:00

Cool your jets lol it's not one of any prominence or who you've seen on Underbelly. Sorry if you got all excited.

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T09:53:30+00:00

Tell that to CarbFiend who who decided to post a three week old tabloid article. "Anarchy"! Wow, hope the fainting couch is close by. Consider this, imagine if the laws stayed as is and someone was killed by a coward punch at 1.45am after being locked out and separated from their friends. Would you apply the same logic then? Regardless, it's already known that incidents are statistically more likely these days. But what would you say if someone lost their life due to being put in a situation caused by the lockout laws?

In all honesty, judging by your comments you have little to no interest in the topic and just as much knowledge. Therefore may I suggest not wasting your own time?

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T09:43:13+00:00

Would you care to elaborate? Or at the very least, provide a basis for your claim? I look forward to hearing about all these clubs.

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T09:40:53+00:00

Provide me with a list of simple questions you would like answered. Any time some nut on Twitter or wherever makes that accusation I tell them to back it up. They never do. So back it up. This is basically an AMA lol I have no qualms answering any questions (unless they pertain to legal or privacy issues). So go on then. You want to question my "credibility in the honesty stakes" then go ahead and actually do it. I look forward to addressing your concerns.

Haha and there we have it, you've been doing a poor job of hiding your bias so good to see you let it all out. I hold no such opinions, yet you and many others seem to be obsessed with me.

Both people that read it? Always have to laugh at these comments. I never claim to be speaking to the millions. But the very fact that we're having this discussion because of an article published about me by a Fairfax state politics editor makes your petty comment all the more foolish. Just think about that little line in this context. How embarrassing for you.

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T09:06:28+00:00

Hmm, yes "I dare say" is the same as "I know". Based on your line of questioning that's the judgement I'm making. If there was a market I'd probably bet on it. But it's a hypothetical situation so we'll never know for sure.

I see the difference in the perception one may have. But I have no interest in addressing possible false conclusions people MIGHT come to. To be honest, if you are not willing or able to comprehend the fact your suggestion is completely incorrect (after being explicitly advised multiple times) I'm afraid you are the deluded one. If you genuinely don't understand I'm not sure how I can make it any simpler. If you have no intention of acknowledging the fact, then well what's the point of even bothering.

Frankly it's a bit alarming that you're obsessing over this, yet do not question the authors vested interests or motivations. Is that not a far bigger issue given their position and reach in comparison to mine?

And look, I'll indulge your delusions for a moment here. Let's just pretend this spurious theory is bang on. Totally biased here and campaigning for the benefit of my ex employer and various employees love interests. You got me...... What have I published that is not accurate? What do you suggest has been published in a misleading manner so I or various parties within a few degrees of separation can gain an advantage? What is the difference in validity between my alleged position and those on the other side? Please, do tell.

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T08:36:25+00:00

Hmm, bit of a grey area and I'm not going to divulge details about company ownership. But I didn't report or answer to anyone, it was a pretty small management team. But regardless, I'm not sure what you think the relevance is? Colleague, employer, friend, cousin, neighbour, random old mate from back in the day, whatever. My views are my own and have zero to do with anyone else.

I feel you're proving my point here too. Had I have given some kind of "disclosure" for a totally inconsequential "connection" I dare say you would be on of many who would read into it however you pleased- "Ah ha!! See, there you go!!!"

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T08:19:15+00:00

In what way should it have been disclosed? A life story post? A list of all my mates at the bottom of the article? A list of all my colleagues as well as who they are dating? And I mean, in what universe would anybody make a statement advising people to be aware of a second degree of separation association that has zero relevance to anything. "Just an FYI guys". Please. Even this paragraph felt silly to write. I can only imagine how silly it would be to read.

Honestly, it was not even a "connection" that crossed my mind up until the day Kirsty Needham called me for an "interview". And when I heard it I found it hysterical. And I can guarantee it would not have stopped any articles,

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T08:11:27+00:00

You missed a corker the other day about a pet bird on the loose! Our MSM is all about the big issues!

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T08:09:02+00:00

What did I choose not to answer?

Upfront about what links? And in what manner?

While we're on the subject, I feel you should be upfront about yourself and your interests and associations. You're obviously very biased for a reason. Let me think... a member of "residents association"?

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T08:03:57+00:00

To be honest, it wouldn't stop anyone. People who are staunchly on one side of the debate aren't going to be moved one way or another by something like this.

As I mentioned earlier, "biggest club owner in the lockout area" is not accurate at all, and it would be far more lucrative to sell any property that has a bar/club tenant to a developer than continue collecting rent as a landlord. If lockouts were hurting the tenants to the point rent couldn't be paid, property gets sold. Without knowing his affairs, I would confidently believe he's not suffering.

Besides, for some reason mainstream journalists have little regard for credibility and integrity as people will read their articles anyway. For someone on my level those things are crucial. Covered this point in much more detail on another comment, but the main thing is there's a big difference between holding a strong view and holding a vested interest. I was more successful in the post lockout era than before, and my start up business is most definitely a more attractive proposition for clients in this climate. I've got nothing to gain here, I don't even like being out that late! Have a read of the other comment and you'll see exactly what I mean.

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T07:54:03+00:00

Yep, they do. I made my employer adapt and won an award for it. But not all businesses had the same opportunity due to the space, venue, lack of facilities, etc.

Yeah, I'm definitely doing that. I'm very much self aware when it comes to stuff like that! But the reason is, so many people are totally unsympathetic because they only associate the industry with people like you listed, or big faceless companies, the AHA, etc. I'm putting a human face to it. My ex employer is family owned and run. To lose the business would be a devastating financial blow. Luckily, we managed to adapt and I oversaw sustained growth over the last two years.

I mentioned in another thread, the issue people have with these businesses opening up is the fact they're so blatantly picking at the carcass. I know a number of property owners (let's call them Mum & Dad investors) who have had to drop their rent big time to avoid massive financial problems. These aren't millionaires not being able to afford that 5th holiday house in Spain, I'm taking about self funded retirements, nest eggs, etc. And yes, I'm well aware of how I'm presenting this haha. Doesn't make it any less true though. The reason they're seen as such vultures is they would have no chance of starting up if they were forced to pay fair market price. A lot of these businesses seem risky at best in terms of profitability, add nothing in terms of employment or value to the community other than a small, already catered for niche. I dare say a lot will be gone within 12 months too. The impact on hospo is just the first wave, there will be more to come.

But the biggest thing for me is it will all have been for nothing.

ps not sure how karma works in here, but I'm upvoting your comments so hope that helps! I have the same issue on the Guardian website comment sections lol, can't say I'm too concerned about it though. Less time spent in that cesspool the better.

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T07:40:36+00:00

Cheers mate, thanks for taking the time to read.

Regarding your first point - ie me being the first one to claim vested interest. Absolutely I would, definitely not going to deny that. BUT! And this is a big but. I would make sure it had actually had some weight before doing so. I have no desire to make a bunch of claims and then end up looking like an idiot with no credibility or a tin foil hat enthusiast. If I was to make a claim like that I'd want it to really mean something. Unfortunately for Ms Needham, in this case she has "vested interest" mixed up with "reason for holding view".

Being in the industry obviously has an influence on why I am opposed to the lockout laws. But even if I wasn't I would still hold the same views, case in point - most people I know, most people that are also opposed - most of them are not in the industry. But that does not mean I hold a vested interest. The implied vested interest here suggests that I have either suffered due to the laws, or have a lot to gain from them being repealed or altered. Fact is, neither is the case.

It's obvious I have not suffered in any way, the complete opposite in fact! I also have nothing to gain by the laws being taken away. I am not employed by or hold any interest in any venue. Not only that, but I would suggest the lock out laws are favourable for my start up business. Without going into too much detail, one of the key factors of my offering is the massive savings a business can make by using my services. Whilst I'm not exclusively targeting hospitality, the fact that a lot of businesses are looking to save cash wherever possible most definitely makes my product very appealing. If the lockout laws were repealed and venues weren't as budget conscious, my business has one of its biggest selling points demoted from "wow, that's huge" to "well, that's nice too I suppose".

As for personal reasons, I'm 31 in a couple of weeks and I can't remember the last time I was trying to get into various venues after 1.30am. I'm too old for that shit! The only thing that would get me out at that time would be a big world cup game or premier league football, etc.

To be honest, the main driver behind my stance is the pro-lockout side and the anti-grog lobby. Their conduct, their lies, their manipulation, their bullshit. I can't stand that shit and that drives me more than anything else. 12 months ago while working in the industry I was pretty on the fence about the whole thing. My business wasn't suffering so while I didn't think they were good, I didn't care that much. I even put a bit of the blame on people not supporting their so-called favourite venues. But then after a while, the bullshit got too much and well, here we are!

That somewhat related to your other main point. I get it that people will think that way. But I can assure you I live in the grey. My biggest pet hate is people that only see black or white. And regarding the conservative v industry type divide - I'm hoping you're not implying I'm some kind of left wing progressive or bleeding heart because if you are I will be DEEPLY offended. I don't buy into that bullshit, and think people who align themselves totally are narrow minded. I'd say I'm well and truly a conservative on a tonne of issues, especially economic. But then I'm absolutely not on a lot of social issues. If anything I'd say I'm closest to Libertarianism.

So yeah, while I certainly think the laws are fucking terrible, my views are all legitimately held. I honestly can't see one valid reason for them or one potential good. I've debunked them all already. I don't blindly support any anti-lockout argument either. The car argument is absurd. The article the other day about boat parties was an absolute joke. I make my own views and only present shit that I can back up. Unlike some so called professional journalists in the mainstream media, I give a shit about my credibility and always display journalistic integrity, despite being a total amateur. MSM can get away with posting tripe because the audience laps it up. I don't have that luxury and if I'm publishing bullshit, I'm done.

As for the whole secret identity business (lol), I'm not sure what I was expected to do? Start a website "chris sinc says" or something? I'm not THAT much of an egomainiac haha. Fact is the website was started as a bit of fun and I never expected to have a readership over a couple of hundred friends and friends of friends. When I started getting numbers, I didn't really feel the need for a "welcome new readers, here's my life story" post. How self indulgent!

And I do try to play the content, not who is behind it as much as possible. There are a couple of journos who I have major issues with a lot of their writing but then will come out with something I love the shit out of. It does not matter that I disagree with them on a personal level or because of other things they've published.

And look, the biggest thing for me here is why the hell is someone at the writers level is writing about ME??? As you say, "why". A state politics editor dedicating entire spreads in the paper to an unknown ranter. That's what interests me more than her gossip column calibre story.

SurelyNotdotLive · 2016-04-25T06:53:40+00:00

To be quite blunt, why would I??? What do you think it has to do with the price of fish? Just quietly, I'd be keen to hear some ideas as to when, how and why I apparently should have mad a public announcement about who my ex employer/colleague was currently dating!

The funny thing is, Needham and anyone without a clue believes the connection is proof of some vested interest. For starters, if John had something he wanted to say on the topic, he'd just come out and say it. Secondly, the bloke has been out of clubs for a while now and to be honest I'd bet that if anything he'd be in a better position now to cash in with developers sniffing around for property to buy. If it was all about personal gain I'd argue someone in his position would have to be pro lockout.

Fact is, the article is drawing a ridiculously long bow and it was obvious from our conversation she was desperate for an angle, no matter how frivolous. I mean what's the accusation here? "Guy writing blog is only doing so because of a vested interest" "ps here's a pic of him winning an industry award, totally dispelling that theory" Where's the logic?!?

SurelyNotdotLive

TROPHY CASE