Russell Degnan
@knottedpaths.bsky.social
Non-sport tweets. Some planning, the rest random. For the sport follow @idlesummers
When the cable tram was introduced it was relocated to Spring Street on the site of what is now Parliament Station. Then relocated again for the City Loop in the 80s
It was on Swanston for less than 40 years and would block pedestrians if returned
More shots below throughout the 20thC
It was on Swanston for less than 40 years and would block pedestrians if returned
More shots below throughout the 20thC
![City Square as shown in a Long Way to the Top - AC/DC. No statue [1976]](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:q74xe2rbbkmod6okrljz3u5s/bafkreic6fnxfcjousophqqzhhwrmbkwxblocdqshgpppzjdkxmjcyq2gta@jpeg)
![I.C.I. Building, and Burke & Wills Statue. [1955?]](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:q74xe2rbbkmod6okrljz3u5s/bafkreibptszo7xnvdbwbopgexggdavtq4zwjtcpm34jn26vdkfo5htwkwq@jpeg)
![Burke and Wills Monument [1900-1905]](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:q74xe2rbbkmod6okrljz3u5s/bafkreihncjo3qmkcpfsgydjwtijew2m6earap37btgalrghurbkrtkosty@jpeg)
![Burke & Wills Statue, Spring Street. [1945-1954]](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:q74xe2rbbkmod6okrljz3u5s/bafkreicgtuzgfwdljqgez56glkte5gdcfyazbdfpgqkahm4t36hbpkeotu@jpeg)
November 29, 2025 at 2:10 AM
When the cable tram was introduced it was relocated to Spring Street on the site of what is now Parliament Station. Then relocated again for the City Loop in the 80s
It was on Swanston for less than 40 years and would block pedestrians if returned
More shots below throughout the 20thC
It was on Swanston for less than 40 years and would block pedestrians if returned
More shots below throughout the 20thC
Except, as the drawing in the article shows, it wasn't at the corner of Swanston and Collins in 1865. It was smack bang in the middle of Collins at Russell St.
Here are several shots of it courtesy of the SLV.
Here are several shots of it courtesy of the SLV.
November 29, 2025 at 2:10 AM
Except, as the drawing in the article shows, it wasn't at the corner of Swanston and Collins in 1865. It was smack bang in the middle of Collins at Russell St.
Here are several shots of it courtesy of the SLV.
Here are several shots of it courtesy of the SLV.
On the scale, Afghanistan/Iraq was an occupation not just an invasion - permanent troop presence to suppress population. It was far more impactful than the Gulf War for example which left the regime intact.
November 16, 2025 at 8:58 PM
On the scale, Afghanistan/Iraq was an occupation not just an invasion - permanent troop presence to suppress population. It was far more impactful than the Gulf War for example which left the regime intact.
I think this is why you are misunderstanding me as I'm talking about the long run political/social implications not the military operation that can be anything from massed forces to special ops.
It matters whether the invaders withdraw or remake the nation
It matters whether the invaders withdraw or remake the nation
November 16, 2025 at 8:58 PM
I think this is why you are misunderstanding me as I'm talking about the long run political/social implications not the military operation that can be anything from massed forces to special ops.
It matters whether the invaders withdraw or remake the nation
It matters whether the invaders withdraw or remake the nation
The issue isn't that it is inaccurate. The issue is that people consider it positively.
In the hierarchy of foreign intervention (invade, subjugate, occupy, colonise, settle) it is by far the most destructive. The one that most often accompanies genocide.
imo, "invade" is a weak term
In the hierarchy of foreign intervention (invade, subjugate, occupy, colonise, settle) it is by far the most destructive. The one that most often accompanies genocide.
imo, "invade" is a weak term
November 16, 2025 at 3:09 AM
The issue isn't that it is inaccurate. The issue is that people consider it positively.
In the hierarchy of foreign intervention (invade, subjugate, occupy, colonise, settle) it is by far the most destructive. The one that most often accompanies genocide.
imo, "invade" is a weak term
In the hierarchy of foreign intervention (invade, subjugate, occupy, colonise, settle) it is by far the most destructive. The one that most often accompanies genocide.
imo, "invade" is a weak term
True but Jesaulenko is a good example. Didn't play Aussie Rules until 14 and played soccer before hand. Indian immigration is pretty recent. This article is like writing about recent European immigrants not playing footy in the early 60s. Give it 20 years
November 15, 2025 at 12:43 AM
True but Jesaulenko is a good example. Didn't play Aussie Rules until 14 and played soccer before hand. Indian immigration is pretty recent. This article is like writing about recent European immigrants not playing footy in the early 60s. Give it 20 years
Related, there was a lot of Italian immigration at the start of the 20thC and Barrassi, Silvagni Snr etc were third generation of that period. They provided an opening for post war Italians that maybe doesn't exist for recent arrivals
November 14, 2025 at 11:45 PM
Related, there was a lot of Italian immigration at the start of the 20thC and Barrassi, Silvagni Snr etc were third generation of that period. They provided an opening for post war Italians that maybe doesn't exist for recent arrivals
There was a study of player descent for cricket a few years ago and it found that second generations rarely made the top level but third were quite common. Will be the same for Aussie rules.
We are many many years from third generation immigrants of Asian descent but they'll come around.
We are many many years from third generation immigrants of Asian descent but they'll come around.
November 14, 2025 at 11:45 PM
There was a study of player descent for cricket a few years ago and it found that second generations rarely made the top level but third were quite common. Will be the same for Aussie rules.
We are many many years from third generation immigrants of Asian descent but they'll come around.
We are many many years from third generation immigrants of Asian descent but they'll come around.
Taken together he is top-5 all time WAR per season even with the injuries (though his only truly great batting season came when he wasn't pitching)
And he plays DH so not defending.
In cricket terms it is more like if Sehwag bowled like Shane Bond.
And he plays DH so not defending.
In cricket terms it is more like if Sehwag bowled like Shane Bond.
October 18, 2025 at 9:58 AM
Taken together he is top-5 all time WAR per season even with the injuries (though his only truly great batting season came when he wasn't pitching)
And he plays DH so not defending.
In cricket terms it is more like if Sehwag bowled like Shane Bond.
And he plays DH so not defending.
In cricket terms it is more like if Sehwag bowled like Shane Bond.
He's not particularly close.
His pitching ERA+ would be top-20 all time but is marred by numerous injuries. 15 WAR over 8 seasons would be well short of HoF.
His batting OPS+ would also be top-20 all time. 35 WAR over 8 seasons is borderline HoF.
His pitching ERA+ would be top-20 all time but is marred by numerous injuries. 15 WAR over 8 seasons would be well short of HoF.
His batting OPS+ would also be top-20 all time. 35 WAR over 8 seasons is borderline HoF.
October 18, 2025 at 9:58 AM
He's not particularly close.
His pitching ERA+ would be top-20 all time but is marred by numerous injuries. 15 WAR over 8 seasons would be well short of HoF.
His batting OPS+ would also be top-20 all time. 35 WAR over 8 seasons is borderline HoF.
His pitching ERA+ would be top-20 all time but is marred by numerous injuries. 15 WAR over 8 seasons would be well short of HoF.
His batting OPS+ would also be top-20 all time. 35 WAR over 8 seasons is borderline HoF.
I feel like his solution to the problem being "flip a coin" is also emblematic of his leadership
October 13, 2025 at 8:42 AM
I feel like his solution to the problem being "flip a coin" is also emblematic of his leadership
The transport cost equation assumes a circular city so costs increase with the sqrt of city size. But GC (and Perth) are basically linear so the cost to go anywhere is higher.
Except the beach. Both are basically constructed around the idea that the beach is the only destination worth being near.
Except the beach. Both are basically constructed around the idea that the beach is the only destination worth being near.
October 4, 2025 at 2:55 AM
The transport cost equation assumes a circular city so costs increase with the sqrt of city size. But GC (and Perth) are basically linear so the cost to go anywhere is higher.
Except the beach. Both are basically constructed around the idea that the beach is the only destination worth being near.
Except the beach. Both are basically constructed around the idea that the beach is the only destination worth being near.
Hugh Stretton made similar points in Ideas for Australian Cities but on equity grounds (that you'll appreciate). I don't have the text to hand, but the argument is that once you get above 2m the centralised cultural institutions are serving the inner city (wealthy). Funding should be dispersed.
October 4, 2025 at 2:32 AM
Hugh Stretton made similar points in Ideas for Australian Cities but on equity grounds (that you'll appreciate). I don't have the text to hand, but the argument is that once you get above 2m the centralised cultural institutions are serving the inner city (wealthy). Funding should be dispersed.
Optimal city size was a significant thread of academic thought in the 1970s. It isn't clear what happened to it, but they broadly concluded that transport costs overwhelm economic benefits at around 2m people.
October 4, 2025 at 2:32 AM
Optimal city size was a significant thread of academic thought in the 1970s. It isn't clear what happened to it, but they broadly concluded that transport costs overwhelm economic benefits at around 2m people.
I think this reflects a basic truth about the electorate that they take literally the name "representative".
They vote for someone who will deal with the political on their behalf but don't have much faith that Labor is for anyone but themselves.
They vote for someone who will deal with the political on their behalf but don't have much faith that Labor is for anyone but themselves.
September 28, 2025 at 10:33 AM
I think this reflects a basic truth about the electorate that they take literally the name "representative".
They vote for someone who will deal with the political on their behalf but don't have much faith that Labor is for anyone but themselves.
They vote for someone who will deal with the political on their behalf but don't have much faith that Labor is for anyone but themselves.
Would argue the best recent-ish films set in cities is the work of Adam Elliott (particularly Mary and Max).
Animated shorts generally have been a good source of city based Australian film, but will concede they are short.
Animated shorts generally have been a good source of city based Australian film, but will concede they are short.
September 22, 2025 at 10:16 AM
Would argue the best recent-ish films set in cities is the work of Adam Elliott (particularly Mary and Max).
Animated shorts generally have been a good source of city based Australian film, but will concede they are short.
Animated shorts generally have been a good source of city based Australian film, but will concede they are short.
If you were looking forward you'd bet on Labor losing primary votes and Liberals stabilising. I don't see large numbers of people coming back to the Liberal party, but nor do I see Labor increasing. The elections where that happened are characterised by Other vote returning out of fear.
September 21, 2025 at 12:36 AM
If you were looking forward you'd bet on Labor losing primary votes and Liberals stabilising. I don't see large numbers of people coming back to the Liberal party, but nor do I see Labor increasing. The elections where that happened are characterised by Other vote returning out of fear.
The point is that historically changes in primary vote are generally large for the government and small for the opposition.
So both party's primary vote change (mostly down) relative to Others while in power while staying fairly stable while in opposition, and for Labor that was 2007-2013.
So both party's primary vote change (mostly down) relative to Others while in power while staying fairly stable while in opposition, and for Labor that was 2007-2013.
September 21, 2025 at 12:36 AM
The point is that historically changes in primary vote are generally large for the government and small for the opposition.
So both party's primary vote change (mostly down) relative to Others while in power while staying fairly stable while in opposition, and for Labor that was 2007-2013.
So both party's primary vote change (mostly down) relative to Others while in power while staying fairly stable while in opposition, and for Labor that was 2007-2013.
Labor's vote collapsed prior to 2013. Taking the longer view, following 2007 every election saw a vote against the incumbent and minimal change for the opposition.
2025 is an anomaly (Dutton?) because it hurt the opposition (with a tiny gov't gain). There is no parallel election in recent history
2025 is an anomaly (Dutton?) because it hurt the opposition (with a tiny gov't gain). There is no parallel election in recent history
September 20, 2025 at 10:51 PM
Labor's vote collapsed prior to 2013. Taking the longer view, following 2007 every election saw a vote against the incumbent and minimal change for the opposition.
2025 is an anomaly (Dutton?) because it hurt the opposition (with a tiny gov't gain). There is no parallel election in recent history
2025 is an anomaly (Dutton?) because it hurt the opposition (with a tiny gov't gain). There is no parallel election in recent history
There was a jeopardy question on Greyhound ridership in the USA a while ago and the number was so low I looked it up to confirm it meant what I thought.
September 7, 2025 at 10:09 PM
There was a jeopardy question on Greyhound ridership in the USA a while ago and the number was so low I looked it up to confirm it meant what I thought.
If the sun was a factor we probably wouldn't construct the upper floors of buildings out of light weight materials with poor thermal insulation either.
But planning law doesn't allow those floors to be constructed in line with side walls so we get higher construction costs and energy bills.
But planning law doesn't allow those floors to be constructed in line with side walls so we get higher construction costs and energy bills.
August 5, 2025 at 12:35 PM
If the sun was a factor we probably wouldn't construct the upper floors of buildings out of light weight materials with poor thermal insulation either.
But planning law doesn't allow those floors to be constructed in line with side walls so we get higher construction costs and energy bills.
But planning law doesn't allow those floors to be constructed in line with side walls so we get higher construction costs and energy bills.