Putting aside my evidence-based archaeological method, I'd like to think that it was curiosity and a sense of adventure, or perhaps even a dash of wanderlust, that motivated those ancient folk to head off into the unknown.
The old sins, greed, gluttony, desire all wrapped in hubris, the tale had to have deep social origins somewhere!
The apples are sweeter over the hill, and there is no more basic craving than to want something somebody else has already got!
All those things and also something much simpler… the carrying capacity of the land.
It's quite wrong to form an opinion based in current modern assumptions, the very article @PaulP links is an example of that, desserts now where forests used to be, and a total population that was just a fragment of what it has been for most of modern history.
Managing the pill is a big part of cricket, and being able to swing or seam the pill is a big part of cricket.
I'd assert the majority of the cheats aren't people who can and do swing or seam the pill, it's likely the duds who bowl a million miles an hour and barely get it off straight!
As for bowling fast, it's not the thing that determines effectiveness. Terry Aldermann, Max Walker and Gary Gilmore weren't express, Aldermann wasn't particularly quick at all, and they often had batsmen in knots. In his later years, Lillee had lost 10 - 15kph, but was a better bowler because he could do it all. McGrath was a good 15 - 20 kph slower than Starc, and a better bowler in my opinion.
The spuds you hear commenting about conditions not suiting bowlers, most likely batsmen, they have NFI! Blokes like Aldermann and Hadlee could move the ball in any conditions on any surface.
However, FoI is not a Royal Commission and the diarist can be compelled to explain their diary entries.
And they can explain the contents however they like, you just can't infer meaning outside of a direct interpretation by the author!
In the R&D sector, be it somewhere like CSIRO or commercial, it's very common for researchers to use their own task specific shorthand that is designed to avoid reproduction if the diary is lost or stolen. It's considered a safeguard, and they do it for both communications and math. Equations can look completely wrong or unintelligible.
I tried this myself once, but I could never remember what I was going to write.
PS; I have a mate who is a globally renowned engineer, he has dyslexia and documents everything in minute detail. You can't read a line of it because he's invented his own written language.
I suffer from something I've labelled Scribolepsy, give me a pen and paper and it's like sedative!
Before HD Video, pretty much every bowler would be running their thumbnail around the seam on the way back the mark, every bowler at every level from every country. I'm sure it was always illegal, any attempt to tamper with the seam of the cricket ball is, but doing so was ubiquitous.
The thought back in the old days was that opening the seams increased both swing and seam, but actually it's since be proven to be bogus with results unable to be reproduced.
Now if it happens, it's more about damaging a dud pill to get it replaced with a new one, and there is one specific country that does this far far more than any other!
I’m not sure what the public servant was thinking, but apparently even the unredacted version of his diary doesn’t make a lot of sense.
The problem with a diary is that there are no demand on syntax or language, it can be as cryptic, vague or specific as the notetaker likes but it doesn't need to be consistent.
I had heard about sweets being used before, but as a young cricketer I first overheard about a very particular brand / type of sweet used to varnish the pill from Tony Grieg. We were in the practise nets at VFL park where I had been acting as a net bowler for the WSC players. It wasn't because they were using or discussing the use of the sweets in WSC, but because he was explaining to someone how they did not work for the coating on the white cricket balls of that era.
I gather the redacted evidence probably means legal contracts, it's likely all sides of this case will do the same when commecial confidentiality and non-disclosure applies, but only the government side will be labeled a cover up.
I believe the commission can go into camera and have those issues address, but then the same critics would claim a cover up by the commission.
In many cases it's not just an arbitrary decision to redact but a legal requirement, but the media never report it that way.
So if seems a pretty safe bet that Jess Wilson will be the new premier. It may be a bit of a poison chalice.
The really interesting watch will be how long before the 'old men in blue suits' try to wrest back control of their party......
The hardcore rusted on Libs she would have needed to battle in the olden days are dying off pretty quickly, they were Jack Elliott's generation who grew out of the post war years.
Also what has recently been diminished is the fundamentalist Christian component, they have moved out of Liberal further right towards more Libertarian alignments and closer to PHON.
Much the same is also happening on the other side of politics, which is why I suppose so many now view either side as the same, they all seem to be approaching the median.
The figures in reality are somewhat arbitrary and generally always reported as totals rather than a differential, they do this to make the general public perceive it as worse than it really is which is good for ratings. That's not to say it isn't bad, but it won't ever be as bad as reported, because even after the fact it will nearly always be reported in totals not differences, even in official reports they list totals and then percentages of possible savings or waste.
If there was no corruption or other nefarious practises, what would be the saving, it's not the same as not having the project at all, and is virtually never reported and never sounds as bad as the spin.
Furthermore, in my experience in the union and corporate administration, the very people complaining about union corruption tend to have fingers in the pie from another angle. Short circuiting tenders to block competition for example is very common, and just another form of corruption, sometimes this happens in the very early stages, before the request for tender is even written and well before anybody gets a job. To find "the fix" you might have to go back a decade and several consecutive governments as the process is usually very long. The fastest ever State / Federal project I was ever invovled in was relartively small, and took 5 years spanning two elections, but the public and media by default would blame the people at the finishing line for the result.
Give it up mate and just have the balls to admit your views are skewed like most of us are.
@shawny your problem is you debate based on fantasy, sovereign citizen social media libertarian rubbish.
Whether any of us agree with or disagree with @DJC is largely irrelevant, because he is at least speaking in facts about the Westminster and other analgous politcal systems, genuine systems.
You gather opponents because of the rubbish views you post, not because of your genuine poltical views. If you want to be taken serious and listened to, you can't make sh1t up about the system of checks and balances. At least base your arguments about Australian politics on the mechanism and systems that our democracy works on!
