Sixth miner dies while advisory committee fails to meet because of gender quotas

[bilby]

Try to think of it like this:

1) Government boards like this are the only thing that protect the safety of the people from rapacious greed of the greedy profiteering miners.
2) Despite the fact this gender rule is causing this board not to function, this gender rule could not possibly be causing harm.
3) Pause. Pause. Pause. See #1.

The trick lies in letting what you want to believe overwhelm any logical contradictions.

there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that your #2 is true, and i spent a good 30 minutes trying to find some evidence that it WAS true for the sake of thoroughness.
the actual known facts are these:
1. a mining lobbying group submitted several candidates for the position(s).
2. it is unknown how many other people may have also applied for the position.
3. there is no evidence suggesting that placement on this committee is by election, the logical conclusion being that it's an appointment, likely by either the head of the overseeing governmental department, or by a sub-committee.

given these facts there are two possible reasons that the position(s) wasn't filled and the safety board never assembled:
1. the mining safety department is such an austere institution of classical governmental purity that it couldn't possibly deign to sully its good reputation and the integrity of the execution of its duties as to allow the appointment of persons who are either ill qualified for the job, or else potentially agents of third parties with notions of influence outside the strictest adherence to public safety.
2. somewhere in the command chain of this department is a bigoted fuckwit in the mold of several posters in this thread who shall remain nameless who knows that stupid whores should keep their mouths shut because they don't know anything about mines and by god no uppity bitch is going to get a governmental job if they can help it, so stonewalled the appointment to satisfy their ego rather than just put some women on the safety committee to keep it going and in a worse case scenario ignore their input.

now, given the history of governments on this planet and the natural inclinations of the human race, i find one of those two possibilities rather stupendously more likely than the other.

1) It's Queensland.
2) The Fitzgerald Enquiry only scratched the surface.

https://amp.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jul/03/thirty-years-after-the-fitzgerald-inquiry-corruption-remains-rife-in-queensland

 

[dismal]

No, not 'sexism'. Gender quotas are not 'sexism'.

The article I posted had an implication in its headline that the mining deaths might be related to the lack of the advisory board meeting. I discussed the possibility that the lack of an advisory board meeting might have implications, because either boards do something useful or they don't.

I think it's a bad thing that a board doesn't meet because it lacks a 50:50 split between men and women on the board. I think that's a very stupid reason not to have board meetings.

Try to think of it like this:

1) Government boards like this are the only thing that protect the safety of the people from rapacious greed of the greedy profiteering miners.
2) Despite the fact this gender rule is causing this board not to function, this gender rule could not possibly be causing harm.
3) Pause. Pause. Pause. See #1.

The trick lies in letting what you want to believe overwhelm any logical contradictions.

1) Regulations designed to ensure workplace safety, proper enforcement of those regulations, conscientious management, engineering and planning, and the professionalism of miners themselves are the things that protect the safety of people working in the mining industry.

2) Mining safety advisory boards examine mining operations and recommend improvements in operations and equipment to further improve safety.

3) The recommendations of such boards are not binding and not immediately adopted across the industry; it can be years before they are implemented if they are implemented at all.

4) When a mining safety advisory board doesn't meet, the improvements and recommendations it might suggest may be delayed, but that doesn't mean the existing regulations, practices, and safety measures cease to exist, therefore

5) linking a mining accident to the failure of a board to meet in the previous 6 months is stupid.

The trick to avoiding logical contradictions lies in being logical in the first place.

OK, so this board performs vital work, but there's no harm if the board doesn't work. Got it.

 

[Arctish]

1) Regulations designed to ensure workplace safety, proper enforcement of those regulations, conscientious management, engineering and planning, and the professionalism of miners themselves are the things that protect the safety of people working in the mining industry.

2) Mining safety advisory boards examine mining operations and recommend improvements in operations and equipment to further improve safety.

3) The recommendations of such boards are not binding and not immediately adopted across the industry; it can be years before they are implemented if they are implemented at all.

4) When a mining safety advisory board doesn't meet, the improvements and recommendations it might suggest may be delayed, but that doesn't mean the existing regulations, practices, and safety measures cease to exist, therefore

5) linking a mining accident to the failure of a board to meet in the previous 6 months is stupid.

The trick to avoiding logical contradictions lies in being logical in the first place.

OK, so this board performs vital work, but there's no harm if the board doesn't work. Got it.

The harm done isn't retroactive.

Honestly, if you can't grasp that point I have no idea how you manage to live in this time continuum.

 

[bilby]

1) Regulations designed to ensure workplace safety, proper enforcement of those regulations, conscientious management, engineering and planning, and the professionalism of miners themselves are the things that protect the safety of people working in the mining industry.

2) Mining safety advisory boards examine mining operations and recommend improvements in operations and equipment to further improve safety.

3) The recommendations of such boards are not binding and not immediately adopted across the industry; it can be years before they are implemented if they are implemented at all.

4) When a mining safety advisory board doesn't meet, the improvements and recommendations it might suggest may be delayed, but that doesn't mean the existing regulations, practices, and safety measures cease to exist, therefore

5) linking a mining accident to the failure of a board to meet in the previous 6 months is stupid.

The trick to avoiding logical contradictions lies in being logical in the first place.

OK, so this board performs vital work, but there's no harm if the board doesn't work. Got it.

The harm done isn't retroactive.

Honestly, if you can't grasp that point I have no idea how you manage to live in this time continuum.