Flag

jegga

Have Robyn Malcolm or Lucy Lawless endorsed the red peak yet?

No Quarter

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Mokey" data-cid="514144" data-time="1441659711">
<div>
I'm not a fan of the peak at all. It's all very well to have paragraph after paragraph of explanation - this represents dawn, earth, southern alps blah blah blah, but that context will never be anywhere near the flagpole. Are we saying that dawn and earth and mountains are unique to NZ?
 
The fern is instantly recognisable as New Zealand. No paragraphs required. Saying a criteria is easily drawn, what a crock of shit (a fern is still much easier than the bird of paradise on the Papua New Guinea flag for example - instantly recognisable, don't hear them bitching about how hard it is to draw.)
</div>
</blockquote>
 
If we are going to have the Fern then I would rather it look like an actual Fern, not a bloody feather like the Lockwood designs do.
 
The guy that did the AB Fern said he would be happy to help redesign it to make it look better - let's hope he gets taken up on that offer if we vote to change.
 
Edit - the comparison to the PNG flag is a good one. Very difficult to draw but I think they have one of the most beautiful flags of any nation. :)

Winger

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Hooroo" data-cid="514127" data-time="1441650849">
<div>
To me that is the equivalent of saying GJ Gardner should have designed the flag because they designed a nice house
</div>
</blockquote>
 
 
The design process was good
 
But the process part from seems very poor. Esp the membership of the Flag Consideration Panel

Winger

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Kirwan" data-cid="514156" data-time="1441661725">
<div>
Even it comes down to four or five designs, I think it's clear that NZ is going to vote to keep the current flag.
 
I like the Red Peak one, I can separate the crazy leftards from my own opinion on simplicity being better for a flag. Personally, I think we should ignore the ISIS issue and have a black flag with a white fern on it. 
</div>
</blockquote>
 
 
Agree. That should have been one of the options. And maybe only one more fern option.
 
Then let the public decide. Is the ISIS issue really an issue or not.

Baron Silas Greenback

The vast majority of the peak flag nonsense is driven by politics. Just another ill conceived attempt by the social media left in NZ to sabotage the process.
Firstly they whinged about the cost, then they whinged about the desire to change the flag at all, then they whinged about the final 4 options, then they whinged about the process.
It is now just a way that the left in NZ can justify the hypocrisy of their position, they campaigned on changing the flag... then they reliased John Key was going to do it.. so they strew a strop...now they want back in again... but with their own option.
 
Sorry fellas..

No Quarter

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Kirwan" data-cid="514156" data-time="1441661725">
<div>
Even it comes down to four or five designs, I think it's clear that NZ is going to vote to keep the current flag.
 
I like the Red Peak one, I can separate the crazy leftards from my own opinion on simplicity being better for a flag. Personally, I think we should ignore the ISIS issue and have a black flag with a white fern on it. 
</div>
</blockquote>
 
The ISIS argument is such bullshit. We are actually going to let a group of fucking nutjobs from the other side of the world have an influence on what flag we choose to represent our nation?
 
And I don't care if people say it looks like a pirates flag either, I've always quite liked the idea of being a pirate searching for treasure. I had the epic collection of pirates lego when I was a kid.

taniwharugby

if they were to amend the process to allow the Red Peak, whats to stop another campaign to include a black flag with the white fern? Where does it stop?

Crucial

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Winger" data-cid="514160" data-time="1441662538">
<div>
The design process was good
 
But the process part from seems very poor. Esp the membership of the Flag Consideration Panel
</div>
</blockquote>
 
I'm not sure that it was.
 
Looking back on it I think we would have a better result of choices if the panel included designers that had studied flagology and had gathered public ideas then tweaked them as needed to correct proportions, colours, definitions etc before then just presenting the public with a few ideas to debate. The results of that public debate could then go back for any further tweaking or change.
The way it was done was that the debate was done before people saw the options. The decisions were made by a well meaning committee and the designs were as presented and without peer review on the finished product.
 
Lets say the panel presented a black fern on a white background then the public feedback was overwhelming that people not only preffered but would vote for a white fern on black. The debate could be held about 'black flags' and whether we were happy to stand by any criticism and support it no matter what. That option could then be presented back to us in a referendum....
 
Forget issues of ISIS. It has nothing to do with them. Traditionally black flags are a sign of aggression just as white flags are a sign of surrender. However, the counter argument is that lots of countries have white based flags and aren't surrendering. we can buck the 'tradition' and show that a black flag does not have to mean aggression. 
 
I came into this process as someone that would like a change of flag and always said I would be happy to vote for one that I thought was good. However, the more I look at the options the less I like them and am now pissed off that through this whole process we couldn't present a decent option. I like the story behind red peak, I like the fact that it is well proportioned and looks like a flag not a logo, but for some reason it just doesn't grab me or give me a feeling of 'that's our flag'. If it was already our flag I wouldn't be bothered changing it though.
 
I still believe we should change our flag as part of our country 'growing up'. We aren't a British Colony any more and the Union Jack has no relevance to me (it has historical relevance but so does whaling or beating schoolkids for speaking Maori). The Southern Cross may show how we were colonised initially by people navigating here and I have nothing against it but it doesn't really work on it's own

Crucial

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="514164" data-time="1441663242">
<div>
The vast majority of the peak flag nonsense is driven by politics. Just another ill conceived attempt by the social media left in NZ to sabotage the process.
Firstly they whinged about the cost, then they whinged about the desire to change the flag at all, then they whinged about the final 4 options, then they whinged about the process.
It is now just a way that the left in NZ can justify the hypocrisy of their position, they campaigned on changing the flag... then they reliased John Key was going to do it.. so they strew a strop...now they want back in again... but with their own option.
 
Sorry fellas..
</div>
</blockquote>
 
 
I know some of you are reading the nutjobs on Stuff as an indication of where opposition lies but my experince from those around me or friends or family is that it is overwhemingly those of a conservative bent that don't want change and were against it from the start.
It seems almost like the right wing nutjobs are keeping quiet and letting the left wing nutjobs do their arguing for them

taniwharugby

Can we vote to have no flag? Now that'd be better, do away with that worthless flag picker cult from our society!

jegga

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crucial" data-cid="514171" data-time="1441664444">
I know some of you are reading the nutjobs on Stuff as an indication of where opposition lies but my experince from those around me or friends or family is that it is overwhemingly those of a conservative bent that don't want change and were against it from the start. 
It seems almost like the right wing nutjobs are keeping quiet and letting the left wing nutjobs do their arguing for them</blockquote>
As BSG says though this was something labour wanted, now the left have made it all about Key. Talking of stuff I haven't seen any reporting on how red peak polled before the final four were picked. This is not surprising because it polled very badly but that doesn't fit the narrative . 
The only upside to this is seeing people finally showing some passion about it, shame it took so long. 
Here's how the red peak originally polled <a class="bbc_url" href="http://www.radiolive.co.nz/DUNCAN-GARNER-The-unpopular-truth-about-Red-Peak/tabid/615/articleID/97289/Default.aspx">http://www.radiolive.co.nz/DUNCAN-GARNER-The-unpopular-truth-about-Red-Peak/tabid/615/articleID/97289/Default.aspx</a>

jegga

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="taniwharugby" data-cid="514174" data-time="1441664981">Can we vote to have no flag? Now that'd be better, do away with that worthless flag picker cult from our society!</blockquote>
 
First they came for the flag pickers then thry came for the banner fans then it was the armband wearers......

Rancid Schnitzel

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crucial" data-cid="514168" data-time="1441664089">
I'm not sure that it was. 
Looking back on it I think we would have a better result of choices if the panel included designers that had studied flagology and had gathered public ideas then tweaked them as needed to correct proportions, colours, definitions etc before then just presenting the public with a few ideas to debate. The results of that public debate could then go back for any further tweaking or change. 
The way it was done was that the debate was done before people saw the options. The decisions were made by a well meaning committee and the designs were as presented and without peer review on the finished product. 
Lets say the panel presented a black fern on a white background then the public feedback was overwhelming that people not only preffered but would vote for a white fern on black. The debate could be held about 'black flags' and whether we were happy to stand by any criticism and support it no matter what. That option could then be presented back to us in a referendum.... 
Forget issues of ISIS. It has nothing to do with them. Traditionally black flags are a sign of aggression just as white flags are a sign of surrender. However, the counter argument is that lots of countries have white based flags and aren't surrendering. we can buck the 'tradition' and show that a black flag does not have to mean aggression. 
I came into this process as someone that would like a change of flag and always said I would be happy to vote for one that I thought was good. However, the more I look at the options the less I like them and am now pissed off that through this whole process we couldn't present a decent option. I like the story behind red peak, I like the fact that it is well proportioned and looks like a flag not a logo, but for some reason it just doesn't grab me or give me a feeling of 'that's our flag'. If it was already our flag I wouldn't be bothered changing it though. 
I still believe we should change our flag as part of our country 'growing up'. We aren't a British Colony any more and the Union Jack has no relevance to me (it has historical relevance but so does whaling or beating schoolkids for speaking Maori). The Southern Cross may show how we were colonised initially by people navigating here and I have nothing against it but it doesn't really work on it's own</blockquote>
 
Are you really equating the union jack with whaling and beating kids for speaking Maori? I mean what have the British given us. Well apart from the nation and institutions we hold so dear. 
If growing up is about replacing the flag that covered my grandfather's casket while the last post was played with a fucking triangle, then call me Peter Pan. 
Every Nordic country has a cross in its flag. The percentage of them who even believe in God let alone go to church is miniscule. Perhaps they should "grow up" and change their flags as well.

Smudge

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Winger" data-cid="514088" data-time="1441621985">
<div>
Whats your preference Smudge
</div>
</blockquote>
 
A blue background with a stylised drawing of a Pakeha-Maori toddler smiling as they receive a MMR vaccine.

jegga

Rancid and a Smudge , my apologies I have run out of likes .

Baron Silas Greenback

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crucial" data-cid="514171" data-time="1441664444">
<div>
I know some of you are reading the nutjobs on Stuff as an indication of where opposition lies but my experince from those around me or friends or family is that it is overwhemingly those of a conservative bent that don't want change and were against it from the start.
It seems almost like the right wing nutjobs are keeping quiet and letting the left wing nutjobs do their arguing for them
</div>
</blockquote>
 
 
I thin you gave misunderstood. I agree 100% that many who are against change are conservatives. But they have been joined a significant element from the left who were pro change, but anti Key. The hatred of Key won over. Now they have realised they are shooting themselves int eh foot, so to save face.. they want a change... but to stick to the 'establishment' at the same time. It is pathetic.
 
Of course there some who just like red peak. But not many,

Crucial

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="jegga" data-cid="514175" data-time="1441665235">
<div>
As BSG says though this was something labour wanted, now the left have made it all about Key. Talking of stuff I haven't seen any reporting on how red peak polled before the final four were picked. This is not surprising because it polled very badly but that doesn't fit the narrative . 
The only upside to this is seeing people finally showing some passion about it, shame it took so long. 
Here's how the red peak originally polled <a class="bbc_url" href="http://www.radiolive.co.nz/DUNCAN-GARNER-The-unpopular-truth-about-Red-Peak/tabid/615/articleID/97289/Default.aspx">http://www.radiolive.co.nz/DUNCAN-GARNER-The-unpopular-truth-about-Red-Peak/tabid/615/articleID/97289/Default.aspx</a>
</div>
</blockquote>
 
All I am pointing out is that from people I come in contact with, those that are strong supporters of not changing are actually also strong supporters of Key.
 
I don't read the comments on Stuff for the obvious reason that it is just a soapbox for idiots irrespective of political persuasion.

Crucial

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="514184" data-time="1441667708">
<div>
I thin you gave misunderstood. I agree 100% that many who are against change are conservatives. But they have been joined a significant element from the left who were pro change, but anti Key. The hatred of Key won over. Now they have realised they are shooting themselves int eh foot, so to save face.. they want a change... but to stick to the 'establishment' at the same time. It is pathetic.
 
Of course there some who just like red peak. But not many,
</div>
</blockquote>
 
OK, I get where you are coming from.

Baron Silas Greenback

The left have just been flapping around trying to find a way to change the flag at the same time as criticise Key and try and give him a blood nose.
 
And... the result was this inane PR job with 'Red Peak'

Baron Silas Greenback

I would love to the genesis for this 'Red Peak' campaign. I bet dollars to donuts it wasn't simply.. 'hey this is a cool flag'.... it would have been 'hey this is a cool flag, why did Key and his puppets not allow this is an option?'
 
Then the Key haters in social media jumped on it.. and away we go.

The Silver Fern

Flag