46 posts in this thread / 0 new
Last post

Pages

Bilby's picture
#27

With Solomon's loss in the Supreme Court today, it seems AXF hasn't got a hope of demolishing their state listed 'Total House': http://www.smh.com.au/business/property/solomon-lew-loses-supreme-court-...

Time to wrap up plans for a tower on the site, it seems.

Back to top
Adrian's picture
#28

Worst f*****g decision ever ...

We are now stuck forever with a site that is virtually impossible to redevelop or modernise without keeping that god awful urine stenched carpark.

Billboard remains while the Palace/Metro crumbles ....

Back to top
Aussie Steve's picture
#29

YAY!!!

This is indeed wonderful news for recognising contemporary architecture in Melbourne.

Back to top
3000's picture
#30

Double post.

Back to top
3000's picture
#31

Considering what sites actually do get demolished to make way for developments I would just put this one behind you.

Back to top
Bilby's picture
#32

All my posts on this topic have been deleted from the front page of Urban.com.au as of this morning. It would appear that questions regarding AXF and Richard Gu's claims of "discussions with State planning officials" to keep their project at the VHR listed 180 Russell St. "...firmly on track" are unwelcome on Urban.com.au. Has anyone else had their comments deleted recently?

Back to top
Melbourne Muse's picture
#33

Bilby, who here would care if a few of your whining, carping posts have been deleted? You produce so many more by the hour it matters not - you are indeed relentless.

In a sense this mind-numbing torrent of negativity against pretty much every reasonable development of significance devalues the rightful and important protection of those truly important examples of architecture and heritage streetscape which contribute to Melbourne's greatness.

Perhaps you could be a little more strategic in spending your colleral as it is not unlimited.

Marvelous Mega-Melbourne

Back to top
Bilby's picture
#34

Who cares about censorship of contributors' posts? I'd say anyone who cares about democratic speech in public forums, MelbourneMuse. In any case, I've posted plenty of "positive" comments and reviews of buildings and developments in Melbourne - if you choose to applaud everything going up around town in an uncritical way, that's your prerogative. So, it's to be development at any cost it is, then - forget about the law, planning, democratic freedoms and responsibilities or cultural heritage - none of it matters when there's a tower at stake, does it?

Back to top
Alastair Taylor's picture
#35

All my posts on this topic have been deleted from the front page of Urban.com.au as of this morning. It would appear that questions regarding AXF and Richard Gu's claims of "discussions with State planning officials" to keep their project at the VHR listed 180 Russell St. "...firmly on track" are unwelcome on Urban.com.au. Has anyone else had their comments deleted recently?

Your comments were in unrelated article threads and completely off-topic and therefore I deleted them.

And in response to your question of why an article didn't have comment threads open, it's because I made an editorial decision to have the comment thread closed - many other publications do this, we're no different.

Back to top
Dean's picture
#36

Such an angry man.

Before you unleash on all and sundry it's probably advisable to just take a few deep breaths and:

CBD | 180 Russell Street | 271m | 70L | Mixed Use

Back to top
Bilby's picture
#37

So, Adrian, are comments about Richard Gu and AXF permitted by the webmaster on this thread, or do you require silence on that particular topic?

Back to top
Melbourne Muse's picture
#38

You are confusing people being sick and tired of your negative carping with democratic process and freedom of speech Bilby.

Don't bother lecturing me on democracy either, I hold it high in my value-set having actually majored in both Politics and Political History at uni back in the day.

You seem to lack an understanding of the very essence of democracy - recognising that everybody should have their say. You seek to dominate and take WAY more than is your right - democratic or otherwise.

Marvelous Mega-Melbourne

Back to top
Nicholas Harrison's picture
#39

The outcome in the Solomon Lew case will have no bearing at all on this case. Completely different legal issues.

Back to top
Bilby's picture
#40

You may be right there, Nicholas - although as I pointed out earlier, there is no precedent for full demolition and redevelopment of a VHR listed building in this state. And, Melbourne Muse and Dean, you interpret me as "angry", which is ironic, given the recent tone of your own posts. If you believe you have a response to the arguments I put, then make your case(s). Arguing ad hominem simply reveals the weakness of your ability to articulate your ideas effectively. I wasn't lecturing you on democracy, nor did I mention 'freedom of speech', Melbourne Muse. You asked me a question and I answered it - anyone concerned about the role of public contributions to democratic debate would be the sort of person concerned with censorship of comment when it comes to issues of public interest. You seemed to be advocating a position in which to suggest anything "negative" about a given development was bad, regardless of the direction provided by the planning scheme, and the social, economic, amenity and aesthetic costs associated with it. In the case of the article to which I have been referring, the interviewee makes some rather remarkable claims about negotiations with 'state officials' around developing a site that is registered with the Heritage Council as of state heritage significance - and all that before a pending court case. Don't you think it is readers' responsibility to at least ask a few questions about such claims? Who are these state officials, for instance; when did the developer meet with them and what did they say, exactly? It's all rather mysterious. And then to discover that the article is locked for comment makes it seem all the more concerning. But, as Alastair says - it is the prerogative of the publisher to do as they please. And while I'm permitted to comment, I don't see why I would refrain from asking these sort of questions. But since you have made the claim that I am taking "way more" than is my right, perhaps you could advise me on how many posts I can make per day, on what topics and what tone and content I may include in them? Or should I simply be banned from the forum so that you and certain other posters don't have to experience arguments that may be challenging?

Back to top
Mark Baljak's picture
#41

So no news on 180 Russell Street........

Back to top
Melbourne Muse's picture
#42

Bilby, given your persistent demand to express your opinion and be heard, at least have the respect for fellow posters to use paragraphs when you diatribe. Ad hominem? Mate, you haven't seen me in action when I actually do play the man have you?

You seem to be finding difficulty in understanding what I thought was a fairly clear communication - I do not for one moment deny your right (negative or otherwise) to contribute to discussion or discourse, I deny your self-proclaimed right to dominate the airwaves the way you now seem to do here.

IMO you have gone from an interesting (albeit predictably anti-development) part of the broad texture of this UM community, to, in this past month or so, someone who just tirelessly drones on about your agenda and your right to be heard. It's simply now taking value away from UM, or at least a number of it's threads which you're clogging up, your reputation and the very cause you represent. Can I suggest you maybe just take a step back from your current 50 posts per day output and do something else with your life as well?

Marvelous Mega-Melbourne

Back to top
Dean's picture
#43

I think we should all just take it easy.

I don't think anyone believes you should be banned from the forum bilby or that you don't have a right to your own opinions or free speech etc. I think we all agree on that. So perhaps you could harp on less about your rights.

Weather you're angry or aloof or not i don't really know. Perception is reality. It seems you do love to argue so it may be advisable to perhaps take yourself a little less seriously. Lighten up a little champ and im sure we'll all get along just fine :-)

Back to top
Bilby's picture
#44

No, Mark, no news on 180 Russell / Total House - although the developer seems to believe that the VHR heritage listing will have little effect on his plans.

Melbourne Muse - you haven't actually made a single reference to the substance of what I've been saying about the Richard Gu article, so I'll take the rest of your comments as comments and leave it at that.

Dean - I do take it easy and get along fine with others on this forum. I've never caused the least bit of offence to anyone on here to the best of my knowledge. If I have - certainly no one has ever said so. I'll try to make my posts more amusing for you in future, though, chief!

Back to top
Chris Seals's picture
#45

You have never offended Bilby, you are passionate as I hope all are on this site, you have never made grubby remarks like some, I hope to hear more of you;re passionate debate, even though we have the right to agree or disagree.

Back to top
Bilby's picture
#46

Cheers, Chris!

Back to top

Pages