Quarantine
Posted on
January 01, 1968 by
Rev. Stuart Campbell
If people really can’t behave in other comment threads and insist on derailing them with irrelevant and disruptive posts, as a last resort the comments in question will be moved here. People are also free to use it for general off-topic chat.
@RevStu
“but if he’d rather just rant away in his own wee corner about how I’m a [REDACTED]“
I never called you a [REDACTED], only referred to the tactic used by you as [REDACTED], where you tried to disingenuously sow the untruth that myself and Captain Caveman are one and the same person. What does that say about your alleged principles or moral code or whatever you want to call it?
I don’t suppose it makes an iota of a difference. And I guess you’ll probably throw this comment into some kind of censor bin where you can kid yourself on that you’re not censoring it. But really. If you do, you know you are.
As for the ‘as others see us’ piece. Didn’t you find it ironic in the RT report that one of the complaints raised of alleged BBC bias was from the Labour party? I did. Seems to have passed you and your commenters by that one. Seems like Mr Murdoch had a point at Leveson.
I’m more than willing to debate on the points. You were too busy trying to provoke me because I used [REDACTED] as a moniker for the First Minister.
Longshanker
@Scott Minto
“Im afraid that your blog is nothing more than ATL Trolling (Above the Line), as can be seen from these excerpts:”
I’m afraid that this reply is BC Trolling (Beneath Contempt), as can be seen from your extended greetin polemic. I’m glad you read the piece though, because the Bay of Pigs ’groupthink’ essay was in my mind when I wrote it.
Now this may have been good enough to illustrate my point …
Hmm. Not convinced at all. Most of what you illustrated was lifted from a site outlining the 14 warning signs of a cult. So if that’s your idea of diatribe maybe, just maybe, you should look at yourself first before casting stones of injured self righteousness.
When you calm down from your BC Troll, take a look at some of the things Captain Caveman said regarding the “As Others See Us” piece.
In the comments RevStu had the temerity to suggest we were both the same person. That tells me more about perception, blindness and potential bitterness than anything you’ve said here.
When I first posted on this site, I was new to comment posting, yet RevStu still saw fit to ridicule and cajole – he could have given a warning regarding site policy if I was considered out of line.
He also called me a ‘hate blinded idiot’ without any context. When someone uses ad hominems without justification, the gloves come off. Bear that in mind when you next deign to launch an attack on me – at least you’re justifying your attack.
Captain Caveman strikes me as pretty clever, and I recognise when someone is able to articulate a superior argument to me. That seems to have bypassed RevStu.
The idea for the cult piece was inspired by comments made by both McWhirter and Hassan when referring to the SNP and it’s leadership virtually parallelling Tony Blair and New Labour in terms of the Murdoch fiasco – so are they hate blinded and bitter too?
Or does the ironic hypocrisy of this escape you considering you were the author of the ‘groupthink’ piece?
Humour’s in the eye of the beholder Scott. I find this attack on me mildly funny, if a little disappointing (I thought you were smarter than that). Other people might grant it credibility. Big deal. Well done for the indignation though, it provided a wee chuckle.
I’m pretty sure Joan McAlpine wouldnt appreciate you calling her Foxy.
I don’t think she’d care one way or the other considering that it’s Moan McVulpine who’s being called Foxy. Did you miss that?
Longshanker
Of course you were, dear, what with you being such a big fan of the SNP and all.
Some people are as clearly incapable of thinking outside of the box, honey bunny, as they are at providing evidence for accusations made.
Longshanker
@RevStu
…but no-one else has had the bottle…
If you’re so brave and fearless in the face or debate, tell me why you blocked my twitter account? I never tweeted anything untoward or offensive, yet you blocked it anyway. That was brave of you. Took a lot of bottle I’ll bet. I salute your indefatigability in the face of craven censorship.
Others might say it was gutless and hypocritical. I couldn’t possibly comment, you’d censor me.
Regards
Longshanker
“If you’re so brave and fearless in the face or debate, tell me why you blocked my twitter account?”
Oh, that’s an easy one. It’s because I have no desire to be alerted and copied in every time you post another screed of poisonous hatred about me to someone else in a pathetic attempt to ingratiate yourself with them. No “bravery” is required: rather, like someone who’s a devoted Christian and doesn’t want to watch Jerry Springer – The Opera in case it upsets them, I’m choosing not to go and see it, instead of demanding it be shut down so that nobody can. I’ve had enough stalkers for one lifetime, thanks – assuming that you’re actually a different person to the last one, of course.
Blocking you on Twitter doesn’t affect your free speech one iota, so it has nothing to do with “censorship” whatsoever. You can continue to say whatever vile bollocks you like about me there, to anyone who’ll listen. Blocking you just means that *I* don’t have to.
Rev. Stuart Campbell
Blocking you on Twitter doesn’t affect your free speech one iota, so it has nothing to do with “censorship” whatsoever.
Yeah, whatever hunny bunny. You keep telling yourself that. Bet your mum and dad agree with you. Your actions and posts over the blockings you’ve ‘suffered’ undermines your own sophistry. Nice own goal there. I salute your hypocrisy concerning your hypocrisy.
Even the fact that this post is here is testament to your censorship policy. Gutless, mean spirited, no true conviction and, most of all, no bottle.
I’ve had enough stalkers for one lifetime, thanks – assuming that you’re actually a different person to the last one, of course.
Don’t flatter yourself sonny. Stalking – another instance of your total lack of perspective, scale or sense of reality. You plainly have no idea of what a stalker actually is, just as you have little idea of what’s actually happening on the ground in Scotland. Didn’t Kate Higgins refer to you as being ‘creepy’ and a ‘misogynist’ recently? Wonder why that was?
You call me poisonous and a stalker – no evidence. You accuse me of being a unionist – no evidence.
I accuse you of being a misanthropic narcissistic solipsist – abundant evidence throughout the net and this site.
Just as a send off. You’ve mentioned poker on this site. From the evidence I’ve seen, I wouldn’t play against you. You’re the type that plays with a stacked deck and then deludes themselves into believing that the credit being given for winning is deserved.
Keep going the way you’re currently going and another big public slap down will no doubt be heading your way. Guys like you can’t help the pathological pattern of inevitability. Just why were you doorstepped by the Star for instance? Any links to that story? Or were you just a victim of happenstance? Or, as I suspect, was it something to do with your narcissistic behaviour?
Longshanker
Another arbitrary censorious blank. Oh my!
Was that whoosh I heard the whoosh of a so called moral code Winging it over Scotland?
I think we should be told.
Quick couple of questions.
1) Don’t you find that Scottish rhinoceros hide is a wee bit too thin these days?
I’ve found that it borders on being laughably diaphanous.
2) Do you find that dealing with a stacked deck is more conducive to ‘constructive’ debate?
I’ve found, through experiencing it, that stacked deck play personifies humbug, hypocrisy and weakness in action.
Regards
Longshanker
“Another arbitrary”
Tip: learn the meaning of the word “arbitrary”. The last two (out of a grand total of, I think, three) have been for the exact same phrase. Take the hint.
Rev. Stuart Campbell
Tip: Learn the meaning of censorship and then learn the meaning of ‘playing with a stacked deck’.
You do both. Kinda makes you look like a cheap mean spirited cheat.
Well done. You must be proud of how clever you are.
Longshanker
Clearly “censored” is another word you need to look up as well as “arbitrary”. Not a single word of your posts has been removed. Stop behaving like a petulant spoilt child and you’ll stop being treated like one.
Rev. Stuart Campbell
Not a single word of your posts has been removed. Stop behaving like a petulant spoilt child and you’ll stop being treated like one.
You clearly don’t know the meaning of irony or REMOVED oh Reverend Stacked Deck Censor of Pot-Kettle Blackness.
Q. What is the Scott Minto reply doing here?
A. It was RE-MOVED.
You REMOVED it as an act of censorship because you have a penchant for hypocrisy when dealing with your own brand of medicine. Don’t fret though, it’s not much diifferent from the actions of the majority of mean spirited cheap cheats.
I take it the definitions of ‘arbitrary’ and ’censored’ I should be looking for are in the Official Rev Stuart Campbell dictionary? Re: The person saying it is the one who gets to decide what it does and doesn’t refer to.
Regards.
Longshanker
Feel free to explain your inaccurate addition of the prefix “re-” to the accurate statement “moved”.
Rev. Stuart Campbell
For illustrative purposes – clearly. You don’t get that? Jeez.
I’m beginning to think you’re not very clever at all.
Playing the lexiphanic Gauleiter indeed! How predictably repetitively dull of you.
Regards
Longshanker
“Illustrative”? Illustrative of what, exactly? You’re really testing my patience.
Rev. Stuart Campbell
Reluctantly, I’ve taken the decision to ban Longshanker’s account and IP address for a long list of offences including repeated spamming, persistent trolling and personal abuse. My opinion is that he deliberately pursued that outcome by dint of increasingly provocative attacks, in order to score what he’d consider a point, which I’m happy to award him. As ever, dissent is welcome on WingsLand, spammers and abusive trolls are not.
Rev. Stuart Campbell
Good job Stu, although I must say it was quite amusing!
Triskelion
In case anyone came here to discuss the 11th Sept attacks, I watched this video last night: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnbMjAN7Bws. It is a brief and rather compelling documentary which primarily focuses on the physical evidence that calls into question the cause of the attacks. If you don’t believe there is anything suspicious about how the towers collapsed, give this a watch.
The Man from Delmonte
/drama
pmcrek
Just popped in for a quick drag…
You always get the best conversations outside…
Anyone got a light?
ianbrotherhood
George Bush confesses to 911
Scott Minto (Aka Sneekyboy)
truthjihad.com/news/?p=288
Hope this links okay.
ianbrotherhood
I’m going to stay here, chain-smoke, and talk to myself.
I write fiction. I don’t make a fortune at it, but do alright. At the moment I’m working on a novel which was originally a novella, then rewritten as a telly-drama, then sketched as a drama series, and is now being reassembled as a conventional novel.
I’m anxious to pick the brains of anyone who has strong feelings on whether or not the upcoming referendum and/or the following GE is a suitable backdrop for the story.
The original novella was about a killing which happened in Glasgow in the mid-eighties. It was a brutal sectarian murder witnessed by a friend, and he told me about it approx 14, 15 years ago.
The recent stushie about Alasdair Gray’s essay set me thinking about how the average reader might react to the story – it’s about sectarianism, yes, but it’s about much more than the usual blue/green Billy/Tim stereotypes, and this independence debate is focussing attention on many of the themes touched-on e.g. the behaviour of the State in dealing with ‘enemies’, covert operations etc. It’s very much a character-driven story, the main players don’t sit around having discussions about politics etc – they just try to get on with their lives but end-up being drawn into conflict without ever really understanding why. I can imagine that a lot of the ‘don’t scare the horses’ brigade will hate it, and unionists will also cry foul when they see how the British State is portrayed – that’s the ‘problem’, and what I’m keen to hear any views on.
Should writers and artists in general stay away from the politics, or do we have a duty to acknowledge that these important societal changes are happening, that they have a real effect of people whether or not they have any interest in them?
Curious – and very very grateful – for any thoughts.
I’m currently awaiting the go-ahead from the publisher of my first novel, Bulletproof Suzy – if he thinks it’s a go-er then I’ll just have a few weeks to knock the thing into shape, so I have to make decisions quickly. Even if he doesn’t want to take it on, I’ll probably go ahead and self-publish.
ianbrotherhood
Hi Ian,
The novel sounds very interesting indeed.
I read your comment the other night shortly after you posted it. I did start to write a reply, but felt that it didn’t reach the points that you were making. I decided to sleep on it over night to think a reply through further as you have clearly been considering things through yourself. Having done that I have more questions for you rather than answers.
Might the following be true? In hard economic times, people seem to want to be entertained or informed, they probably don’t wish to watch or read stuff that they feel further frightens or threatens their beliefs. In better times these same people might well be happy to watch or read something that is more challenging to the establishment.
‘Should writers and artists in general stay away from the politics’
Some certainly do stay away from politics as a subject and this could be down to any number of reasons including being uninterested, focusing on their work rather than the interference and distraction of politics, because that is what matters to them or feeling scared away from the subject by others. There are many writers, artists and for that matter musicians that do get involved in politics.
‘do we have a duty to acknowledge that these important societal changes are happening’
I think where there is relevance many writers do acknowledge societal changes – how they show them and what significance they place upon them varies
How do you deal with the political and sectarianism issues? How do you wish to deal with it? How other writers, critics, readers and your publisher views your work or solely do you write for your self? Who’s advice you you normally take on board about you writing and what do they think? One thing I will say right here, right now is I don’t want to see the Indy Referendum or even a UK General Election mired by violence – we have to deal with the threat of Political parties fighting for their lives at the moment and its not pretty. Not at all keen on the idea of spilt blood being the back drop of real politics. I will however engage in conversation about it with you.
Are you prepared to make compromises – what are those compromises and are you willing to go that far? Would you consider publishing a politically correct version now and release a warts ‘n’ all ‘writers version’ a year to two down the line?
Adrian B
Adrian, many thanks – the questions you’ve raised are the same I’ve been asking, but for very obvious reasons it’s been difficult to find a forum to air them. No-one wants to see any trouble. Period. It’s one of the very few things all parties agree on.
Avoiding the possibility that it might happen, or not ‘talking it up’ is understandable, but I don’t know if it’s wise – the UK is presented with an existential threat, and one would expect that those charged with the preservation of the Union will do anything to make sure it survives. In trying to understand ‘the opponent’, any decent chess player tries to anticipate all possible moves, but this is not a game, and there are no rules.
I’ll have to think carefully about the questions you raised, and will address them, but this is just to acknowledge your response and thank you again for taking the time to reply.
Cheers for now.
ianbrotherhood
A-
I want to take your points one at a time. Good thing about being here in ‘Quarantine’ is that it’s not quite so frenetic as the regular threads – I sometimes find it very difficult to keep up with good discussions, and Rev Stu puts up new stuff so often, it’s easy to lose track of conversations, especially if they go O/T.
‘Might the following be true? In hard economic times, people seem to want to be entertained or informed, they probably don’t wish to watch or read stuff that they feel further frightens or threatens their beliefs. In better times these same people might well be happy to watch or read something that is more challenging to the establishment.’
No argument there. It’s difficult not to come across as an intellectual snob when discussing the general quality of discourse in this country. It’s appalling. I know there are all sorts of theories about dumbing-down, but in the end-up it’s a question of personal responsibility – I don’t recall there ever being a govt-funded campaign encouraging people to be careful about what they consume via MSM/Hollywood etc. There seem to be endless ‘health’ campaigns aimed at getting us to stop eating this, smoking that, drinking the other, but nothing about what we consume mentally i.e. advertising & propaganda/spin. It surely doesn’t require in-depth academic studies to establish that non-stop consumption of soap-operas, US sitcoms and PMQs cannot be healthy.
But that’s maybe beside the point – if people are averse to reading or watching material which frightens them, it perhaps help explain why the MSM is so timid in giving us ‘the truth’. Then again, it could be a self-perpetuating Catch-22: ‘people will be scared, so don’t show them that’ ; how can the ‘people’, unaware of whatever it is that someone else has decided they shouldn’t see, be afraid of something they don’t know about?
An example pertinent to the story – there are many people in Scotland, especially outside the Central Belt, who live full normal lives from cradle to grave, completely untouched by sectarianism. It has absolutely nothing to do with their lives. The character in the story who is killed by teenaged bigots has no real awareness of what lies behind his killers’ hatred. But – importantly – the killers themselves don’t really understand what it is that they ‘hate’ and murder their victim for no other reason than he happens to be wearing an item of jewellery that marks him as ‘one of them’.
Aside from Just Another Saturday (McDougall, 1976/7??) I can’t, off the top of my head, think of a Scottish drama where this subject has been examined. (Maybe No Mean City, but not sure too what extent.) Even then, McDougall had experience of the Orange Order and was relating some of his own experiences and disillusionment. I’ve never seen a telly drama which treated the issue in a way which reflects the day-to-day reality. Jim Kelman’s work does it – it’s always there, surfacing in ‘normal’ conversations, wee remarks here and there which are, in effect, code, and not decipherable to outsiders.
If our MSM, in the past thirty years or so, had made any effort whatever to produce work which holds a mirror up to the real society a lot of us are living in, many of us would have seen long before now just how ugly and insidious sectarianism is, how it festers and, ultimately, wrecks lives.
It’s worth pointing out that first drafts of the story were completed as far back as late 2009 – well before any of us had an inkling that a referendum was about to appear on the horizon.
I don’t think I’ve even dealt with your point. Yet!
Enough for now.
Cheers.
ianbrotherhood
Outside again, having a quiet drag…
It’s nice and quiet here.
Spring is in the air.
Thank fuck for that.
ianbrotherhood
@ Cameron B
Don’t really see the point in this. Someone who has taken such a perverse and wilful objection to a patently reasonable argument in favour of more egalitarian and representative politics is most assuredly going to be blind to any explanation of it. It doesn’t require explanation – ergo it’s pointless. But you know, I’ve had a shitty day (just made worse by stumbling across a re-run of the new Yes Prime Minister ‘comedy’ in which the pompous PM runs rings round Robbie Coltrane’s … (? I don’t know – was he meant to be Salmond, or an SNP MP?) with a mixture of Daily Mail-esque racism, the old myths about subsidy junkies and new lies about North Sea oil and having to join the Euro. All ‘light entertainment’ of course, anyone who gets hot under the collar about it is just being silly and hyper-sensitive … yet you can tell from the joyous whooping and cheering from the English studio audience how much they thought it was all made up.)
So, where was I? Oh yes …
Part of the reason the UK state is so rotten to its core is that, like Royalty (yeah -I’m a republican as well – any issues there?) it is in-bred, self-serving and self-preserving. From Privy Councillors and Govt ministers to civil servants, senior judiciary, think tanks and the top jobs in the BBC and ‘Fleet Street’, it is dominated by a privately educated middle class who have also attended either Oxford or Cambridge … or have a bloody good reason not to have done so.
Braco spoke of a self-preserving loop of politicians and policy makers in the context of the debate on female representation. I merely broadened the argument to say that an independent Scotland would ideally (in my view) also give us the opportunity to anchor its politics in the real lives of the vast majority of its citizens, be truly representative of the population – not of a cabal of old school chums and members of the same undergraduate societies. We want politicians who have experience of life – all of it, from running businesses to working on farms, from organising labour forces to caring for the vulnerable in society. Yes, we want them educated to a high level if necessary (not always for that rare commodity in politics, common sense) but need we equate such an education always with Fettes or Glasgow High or Loretto? Of course not.
And I took heart from the current SG cabinet make-up – one that is in stark contrast to that of a UK Govt containing more old money and privilege than any for decades.
Do we need any of our legislators to come from fee-paying schools? Until such times as equal educational opportunities are provided for all in society then yes, I am sure we will. Would I be gutted if Eck appointed a minister who’d been to Watson’s instead of the local comp? Of course not. It’s not an argument about ex public school pupils – it’s about diversity, fairness, equal opportunities and openness.
If you want to get all precious about your own education then I suggest you do that in your own time. This is a forum for discussing the politics of Scotland now and the potential for making it better in the future. And I am pretty sure I stand with the majority (some of them ex public school boy pals of mine) who don’t want Scotland’s body politic to follow the example of the London establishment in its narrowness, selectivity and prejudice.
As for my comment being a ‘disgraceful example of realpolitik’. Eh? Either you are referring to the pejorative usage of it being the politics of power and coercion in which case I genuinely have no idea what you are talking about. Or you are referring to its actual definition as the politics of realism and pragmatism … in which case I genuinely have no idea what you are talking about.
And finally – and assuming you do know the meaning of the term bigotry – I would caution you against being so inflammatory in your language simply because someone says something online you take exception to. I take exception to that. But that is all you need to know.
FreddieThreepwood
Good comment.
Firstly I am not a swivel eyed “eat the rich” Commie. I was “encouraged” to leave school at 14 and have made my own life on my own. I have travelled far seen and done many things. A lot of them I would rather forget. Some I will treasure.
There is no substitute for life experience. Career politicians? I would not cross the street to piss on one if he was on fire!
A mans a man for aw that. Etc.
The Man in the Jar
@ Braco
I have no desire to fall out with you and I hope I am able to express my self sufficiently clearly and without add further rancor. It might surprise you that I also think it unacceptable that your place in society is still largely defined by birth wright. I can assure you I do not come from a particularly privileged background, and experienced hostility from both sides of the educational divide. Not because of who I am, but because of what I was perceived as.
In an ideal world, everyone would have equal access to opportunities to advance their potential. However, that is clearly not the case now, so it must be considered utopian thinking. Desirable and potentially achievable following a Yes vote, but it will not come about over night.
As far as I was aware, bigotry means a prejudiced or intolerant attitude, which is exactly what you were directing towards those that are privately educated. How many kids do you know that got to choose what school they went or go to? If it is the majority, then perhaps I have an old fashioned attitude. But who says that private education should not be allowed, just because we do not agree with it. My disagreement is with the privileged access to opportunity that can comes through a private education, not the process or practice itself. What I think we need to do is improve the access to opportunities for those who have little, not take away from those who have too much. Otherwise we might as well admit that an independent Scotland will become a totalitarian communism and we all saw what a total feck up that was. As such, I do not think I was being particularly precious about my own experience, though I did take exception to the suggestion that the likes of myself are somehow undesirable. Especially just after reading Cath’s article.
With regard to my suggestion that you were possibly engaging in realpolitik, I was actually trying to give you the benefit of the doubt. As such, I thought you may may have been suggesting a pragmatic attitude should be taken towards educational background of the cabinet. As the majority of Scots are not privately educated, the logic would suggest the majority of Scottish votes would most probably be identified with more readily with the SNP, though I do not know the backgrounds of the other parties. Apparently I was wrong though and you were in fact being incredibly deterministic.
I try my hardest to chose my words carefully and hope I have given you sufficient explanations to why I responded to you in the manner that I did. As I said, I have no desire to fall out with you as your previous posts have been generally humane and amusing. However, I would ask you to consider what I have written here and on Cath’s thread.
As far as the repeat of YP goes, I’m sorry I can’t help you as I do not own a TV. I am not surprised that it appears to be a smoke and mirrors smear and fear exercise though.
Regards..
CameronB
Apologies for addressing my post to Barco and the scrambled third last paragraph. I missed the edit, but I hope you get the gist Freddie.
CameronB
@ Freddie T
You have a point. I could go up to 11, but I’ll tone it down a bit. I just get very passionate, I was told earlier today. I’m sure you know what it is like. I’ve been dreaming of this opportunity for almost 30 years now, since I was able to vote. Its like it dream coming true and I just don’t want anything to go wrong. We’ve just got to get it done.
CameronB
CameronB,
From my understanding of what Freddie was saying in response to my point, it was just to give an example from within the current Scots government of where he felt one of my self serving and selecting loops, so evident in UK politics, was effectively countered and missing in the Scots institution. I really did not read that as an attack on privately educated people in any way but rather an attack on the structural unfairness and advantage that networks formed through these exclusive institutions go on to then allow vast over representation in positions of power and influence for those lucky enough to be members.
I think we can all agree that the advantages spoken of and gained by this group have NOTHING to do with the relative qualities, intellectual or educational of either the private or comprehensive educated candidate.
Just to add petrol to the flame, I would happily ban all faith schools along with all private Schools for much the same reasons. Schools are there to educate, not to form networks to advantage some and disadvantage others. Similarly they are not there to reinforce religious difference by dividing children and communities from one another, during which process minor cultural and religious differences are amplified to the gaping chasms found in Norn Irelan and to a lesser (but still shocking) level in West Central Scotland. Schools should be hubs around which whole communities can revolve and could easily be turned into the location of most community resourcing. (such as free meals for the old or needy as well as all pupils in the form of breakfast and lunch clubs for example.)
Just also to apologise to Freddie for not replying to his post. I actually must have totally missed it somehow (?) At least this minor skirmish between the pair of you has finally brought it to my attention (winky). On your main point Freddie, I do agree there is an obvious difference in the demographic of Cabinet Secretaries here in Scotland but I am not as confident that it is a permanent feature.
To me the SNP in 2007 were a party of non ‘professional’ politicians that stormed the pillbox. None had held real high State office before and so were outsiders outside the loops. But, even now only in the second term, I sense the Party attracting more and more the type of ‘professional’ politician that is drawn to power rather than principle and so the party will inevitably be colonised, just as every successful political party has been.
This, along with the slow conversion of our principled politicians into the “professional party politicians’ that time in government always seems to insure, leaves me worried that without radical changes to or Party system of governance, we will eventually find ourselves back under the control of the same corrupt political class as we are now (although granted a Scots one).
Still this is just chat for now. Keep the head, stay united, get the YES we must get and the rest can be argued over in a free and independent (and hopefully radical) Scotland.
Vote YES
Braco
Sorry I edited para breaks etc but it did not change (unhappyface)
Braco
@ Cameron B
None taken
@ Braco
Hear hear.
Right, let’s move on.
FreddieThreepwood
@ Braco
re: Banning faith and private schools. Are you trying to get me banned here?
I just get very jittery when I hear the B word. There are better placed opinions than mine, on how best to ensure appropriate ethical, legal and educational frameworks exist, to prevent educational practice that is deemed unacceptable. My concern is with the consequence of education, not the process or method of its delivery. Who am I to say what can or can’t be done, so long as the action is not considered harmful to society or pose a clear and present danger to myself?
Bigotry and unearned privilege should have no place in the education system. Like hubs. Would share.
CameronB
Institutions, not people CameronB. You’d be safe enough with me (evilsmile)
Braco
@ Braco
Yes. (hopefulsmily)
CameronB
CameronB,
had another go at Žižek over on The Path Of God. Sorry (smillywink)
Braco
I’m just inserting a placeholder here to show that I really would like some constructive discussion of demarchy. I’ll have a serious go at writing a manifesto, but will need to depend on help from all here. Clear your heads, sharpen your pencils. Let’s see what we can come up with. We could be terrifying! Post any random paragraphs you think should be in there and we can stitch it all together as our little patchwork political quilt. Very therapeutic, and nice to pass on to the grandweans.
Vronsky
@ Vronsky
Is there any precedent for what you are suggesting?
CameronB
Vronsky,
I am here! Will do and I already have some general ideas on the structure that I would fancy. It’s just a question of the time. I am committed to this manifesto though and will do my best but certainly not for your grand weans alone, I want a Limo, statues, expense accounts, songs written to us (me) and about us (me) from a grateful nation.
Looking forward to reading (claiming) everybody’s ideas on this subject.
Braco
CameronB,
precedent, schmesherent ! WE are the Icebreakers! Are you for or agin us?
Braco
@ Braco
I’ll do anything I can to help, though I’m not sure what that might be. Can you suggest some reading material to get me started?
CameronB
CameronB,
It’s too late for reading! You’ve read enough! Start designing the political system sans parties that relies upon chance or ballot, (a la Jury duty) that you believe would revolutionise Scots society for the better.
If you don’t believe such a system will achieve the above requirements then maybe we can find you a spot as our tea boy. (winky)
BUT
In in this Demarchey (Quarantine, Vronsky) you are only as good as your last manifesto paragragh addition, so most likely, I will be making the tea!
Braco
@ Barco
Do I get a pageboy hat, or do I need to supply my own uniform? If so, can I claim against tax?
CameronB
I am now calling for an official headcount and roll call for the minutes of our Inauguratory meeting. Please sound off.
Braco
Braco
Cameron. Though I’ll probably need to wait until the ball is rolling, before I am able to contribute. I’m still not too clear on the proposal.
CameronB
“Quarantine” sounds terribly separate.
Seriously though, we’ll need to somehow fix the ballot so the we founders of the nation aren’t accidentally excluded from power. Wouldn’t like to miss out on the Limos, statues, etc.
Albert Herring
CameronB,
It’s dangerous to join a political movement the founding principles of which you don’t know or understand.
As Yoshi Pinkelstein found when he joined the embryonic NSDAP at his local pub in Moosach, 1919! (veryverysadsmily)
Braco
Right here goes my concept of Freemocracy!
1. A Written “Social constitution” is created and agreed on independence. This constitution is protected by the faculty of advocates. All advocates MUST swear allegiance to the sovereignty of the people of Scotland and to uphold the constitution free of political persuasion or personal gain. In essence, they are the protector of the people.
2. Local government (cooncils) are re-elected with party whips strictly banned.
3. Each cooncil elects MP’s (PR model) from within to serve in the National government for 5 years. These MP’s work within the framework of the Social constitution.
4. A new upper house (Civil representatives) made up of members of civil Scotland are drawn by lots (simillar to jury service). and act as the governments check & balance. Term to be discussed.
Meat on the bones:
The government has all the usual legal powers such as taxation, national budget, defence, foreign policy etc
All bills must be approved by the faculty of advocates to ensure they comply with the constitution and sovereignty of the people before becoming law.
The government elect a head of state (President if you will) to serve for the 5 year term of government. The president forms his ministerial cabinet free of party whip.
There is no general election. As above, MP’s are sent to government via local authority elections.
The upper civil house have the power to sack the head of state and his / her cabinet and force the government to install an alternative.
Power essentialy lies with local authorities which means power is closer to the people.
rabb
Yes Albert,
I think you may have stumbled upon the first paragraph of our peoples manifesto!
Braco
@ Braco
Join, I thought I was just to be the help.
Seriously though, I am keen to investigate alternatives to the shitsdome we have today. It would be a terrible waste of the opportunity we have here, as I don’t think internet freedom can be guaranteed for more than a few of years.
CameronB
@Albert Herring at 11.43
Separatists!
Wee winkeything
Just in here for a nosey.
The Man in the Jar
Lower House: Party politicians to be locked incommunicado in enclave with instruction to elect head of state. White smoke to be sent up chimney when this task has been accomplished. However said chimney has been capped due to smokeless zone regulations, so process may take some time.
Still working on next bit.
Albert Herring
Rabb,
First off the blocks in Quarantine! Your place in history is assured.
However, I worry that your very first point seems to directly politicise the judiciary! Even should they swear allegiance, with our historic experience of the law I would not trust them with the milk money never mind the upholding of our Revolutionary Constitution!
Party whips? NO Parties. (period!)
Maybe .3 and .4 should be reversed.
I see the Civil jury as the driver of Government policy making with the elected professional politicians chamber as a purely practical and advisory role. Much like a political wing of the civil service.
Most professional politicians could and would follow any party political agenda in order to progress their careers, so this would simply formalise that tendency (and utilise it).
Great start Rabb. Off to bed now, but will put my bear bones proposal to The Quintet ra morra…… Hopefully. Night Night all.
Braco
@cameron
Yes, there are numerous precedents. Start with the Wiki entry.
Vronsky
If youse are going to be spending time out here, please be mindful of the neighbours and use the ashtrays provided.
ianbrotherhood
And watch out for the trolls – they never come out to take part in any discussion, but they have been known to pish in the planters and nick tumblers and we end up getting the blame. Bastards!
ianbrotherhood
Interesting piece here:
http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/matt-hall/sorting-out-sortition
Vronsky
V-
Yeah, it’s interesting stuff, and I read a fair bit of it earlier via your suggestion to start with the Wiki entry.
Problem – this kind of thinking is so far out of the box that most folk cannot even begin to get their heads around it, and even the prospect of having to do so scares the living daylights out of them.
The line-up of the current UK Govt and opposition is living proof that the ‘Democracy’ we have doesn’t work. That should be as plain as day to anyone with a brain, but the majority of the population accept the status quo so long as they can see where their next meal is coming from, and can ‘believe’ that they’ll be looked-after when they’re sick and/or old. Despite growing evidence that old age and frailty is more likely to bring instantaneous stripping of every asset you have, along with the strengthening possibility that you’ll be humanely euthanised by the NHS, most folk don’t realise what a predicament they’re in – short of some calamitous event which results in them sitting in a pedestrian precinct with a hand-made poster saying ‘Homeless. Please help’, they’d rather just carry-on and hope against hope that things will get better.
It always happens to ‘someone else’. In a few months it’ll be happening to those on the shitey end of this Bedroom Tax, but even then, most others will just thank all known gods it’s not happening to them, keep their fingers crossed, and soldier on. I don’t know what it takes to wake these people up, but we can only hope that those in Scotland do so before the rest, and grab the opportunity to free ourselves from this nexus of parasites.
ianbrotherhood
Vronsky,
Great find there! Very interesting read. I scanned it quickly but will take my time over it later tonight. Not had a chance to put down my own proposal yet but I am committed and really looking forward to perusing your own and others.
Once you start thinking about this properly it really does excite the old, long dormant and radical democrat in you, doesn’t it. How are your own mullings going?
Ian,
you are probably correct about the radical nature of this concept in the eyes of the general public (at the moment) but we are here to try and sort out a feasible set of concrete proposals tailored to Scots society, history, institutions, and our future democratic weal.
A Constitution is to be written for the first time in our history. Is that not just as radical ? We must be ready with ideas and answers when the time comes to start agitating post YES vote (please God!) otherwise we know who will write the thing and who’s interests it will serve.
Any way team, I am off to start some writing down (although it feels to me more something that needs to be drawn at this stage rather than written)
Braco
Probably the best way to achieve this will be the gradualist approach. i.e. start with local government – preferably at a much more local level than at present (which is another story), prove it works at that level and take it from there.
Albert Herring
Albert,
That would be nice but I just don’t think the ‘powers that be’ would’ A. allow it and B. allow it to succeed! I am also not sure that local Government would not be better run as in Swiss Cantons direct referenda, with the Sortition/jury System used to form national decision making and policy direction for the country as a whole.
The article that Vronsky found and it’s comments seems to move me further along the road of a mixed constitution, but with the guiding principle that decisions should be made as locally and directly as possible at every level of government. Modern technology being a very important factor in the blank page design of this.
Also, so much of this will depend on a well educated citizenry who understand their constitution and constitutional rights instinctively and are motivated (by the state) to crave participation.
I get very excited about this idea because I think of the way that generation after generation of Governmental jurors will return to their communities, having formed strong contacts with the permanent governmental and social institutions of the country.
They will remain points of access, wisdom and information. In effect, everyone will eventually end up knowing someone that has been involved in political decision making. Kind of binding the Country together as each political generation passes as opposed to the current system which seems to alienate the electorate more and more after each election.
Braco
Braco,
I hope I’m not coming across as po-faced, trying to dampen anything. This kind of discussion is important, even if it does nothing other than force us to express our thoughts in ways which wouldn’t be welcome in the majority of threads elsewhere on this site. My worry is that the people who should be most enthused by what’s happening are not, for the most part, equipped to get involved in the discussion.
I’ve never been through conventional teacher-training and have resisted the temptation to do so for many years. Given that my ‘specialist subject’ is creative writing, I regularly encounter adults who want to write stories, novels, movie-scripts, poetry etc, but most of them never get anything done because they can’t ‘think’ creatively – as far as I can tell, the reason they can’t do so is because the education system has stripped them of the ability to express themselves. It’s horrible to see intelligent people (often people who have excelled in their professions) really struggling to spark an original thought in their heads – they appear to be trapped in ways of thinking which are so restrictive, so hard-wired into self-censorship and peer-approval that anything they do produce is the sort of hack rubbish that no-one, themselves included, would ever want to read.
It’s perhaps too early to know if the Scottish Government’s faith in ‘Curriculum for Excellence’ is justified, but – and this is a big ‘if’ which really needs to be addressed by a practising teacher who’s at the sharp end of these reforms – IF the Primary and Secondary curricula are to be remodelled along lines which build upon advances in Early Years education, that would be very encouraging. I’m not suggesting that we’ll see wholesale Steinerisation, that all 16-yr olds will leave school able to knit and play the xylophone, but if the emphasis is shifting to a more holistic approach to education, concentrating on the formation of ‘happy, well-balanced’ adults rather than exam-passing automatons, we should welcome it.
Short of a reform along those lines, I don’t see how – given the mesmerised state most of us seem to be in – we can realistically anticipate any significant raising of the quality of debate in the short-term.
Thinking out of the box? Something ‘radical’? Here’s one:
I have worked with youngsters on factory assembly-lines. Girls who were only fifteen. They’d used relatives’ NI numbers, the employment agency didn’t bother doing the requisite checks, so they ended-up on 12-hour night shift work when they should’ve been at school the following day(s). They weren’t complaining – they had a wage to look forward to. They could save some money for a holiday, clothes, a night out at the weekend, some half-decent drugs – that’s what they talked about. I know they did, because I was there, and I heard them.
Those lassies (and their male peers) knew, even before they got to Secondary school, that the ‘system’ held nothing for them, and they wanted out. They’re the kids who cause chaos in classes, do anything required to get themselves suspended. They don’t want to be there. I’ve worked, via Education Services for my local Council, with S2, S3 girls who had all but dropped off the education system’s radar because there were no sanctions remaining. For some of those lassies, pregnancy becomes an attractive option – love, security and happy-ever-after don’t even come into it.
So – and this is radical – why not let them go?
Why not make it clear to all children, without any blame or rancour, from an early age, that when they’ve achieved the basics of literacy and numeracy, they’ve the option to leave, and are welcome to return as and when they feel they’ve found something they want to study further. ‘Lifelong learning’, then, isn’t just a slogan.
I’m just throwing this in as a thought, but it’s something I hope may attract the attention of a professional working inside the system. I’m heartily scunnered hearing the usual politico-windbags bleating about ‘every child reaching their potential’. It’s meaningless rhetoric and they all know it. Ask any teacher who hasn’t been utterly drained by years of crowd-control – they’re best qualified to explain it in all the gory detail.
Education is just one of the basics we have to look at in new ways, but it’s fraught with dangers – not least of which is the risk of being branded some ‘Daily Mail’ reactionary. I hope this contribution doesn’t make me sound like one of them.
Cheers all.
ianbrotherhood
Test. (Had two posts disappear).
Vronsky
“Test. (Had two posts disappear).”
There’s nothing in the spam filter under your name, can’t explain that. If you give me any distinctive words you remember being in the posts I can search for those.
Rev. Stuart Campbell
Would anyone here know how I can post a Jpg with my comment? It would be great if I could post a photo that I have as a diagram to simplify my written post. Any technical advice would be great. Many thanks in advance. (hopefulsmily)
Braco
Ian,
you pretty much describe two thirds of my old schools population, Braidhurst (and that included the teachers).
I don’t think your proposals are at all Daily Mail. The problem comes when your kind of proposal is simply put forward as a cost cutting tactic, when what it really needs for the policy to fulfill its higher aims and start changing society for the better, is in actual fact a shit load more money than was being spent on the original broken system.
‘Care’ in the community springs to mind. That was in fact a very humane and farsighted approach to mental illness, that was enacted by a bunch of savage ‘no such thing as society’ Tory cost cutters.
Result was a totally inhumane enactment under the cover of the original ideas progressiveness. The mental Hospitals, like Heartwood, were closed down and sold off with the long term institutionalised patients thrown into a world they could not cope with and that could not cope with them. Leaving both the patients and the communities they were to be cared ‘in’ without support or backup.
Private money made. State shrunk. Job done.
That’s the only reason that I would be wary of your Ideas. I have for a long time favoured turning all schools, both primary and secondary, into ‘Community Hubs’ where they could fulfill the much larger role of lifelong learning for the whole community.
They could also provide free meals in breakfast and lunch clubs for parents, kids, teachers, the old etc etc. They could also as institutions be the place where community action and rescources are accessed. This unfortunately would mean enormous investment in order to start to transform them into a sort of community college that caters for all ages.
instead we have the current Schools that (despite committed teachers) only seem intent on training kids on how to pass pre designed exam papers. Widget making for a machine that seems less and less in need of said widgets, hence the unemployment figures among the young.
Any way Ian, I can see I am going to have to watch you! You have completely diverted me from the Hardline Demarche Manifesto writing that I came out here, (in this fag end strewn cold doorway that is quarantine) to tackle.
Shame on You! Your Country will never forgive you (never mind Vronsky, Albert, Rabb and our cabinboy CameronB!)
Braco
From Demarchy UK. Scary stuff if true.
http://www.facebook.com/demarchyintheuk/posts/467379663333131
Albert Herring
@Albert Herring-
Hope you don’t mind, I just copied your latest post here over to ‘The No Future’ thread – deserves to be seen there too.
Cheers
ianbrotherhood
@ianbrotherhood
Nae bother mate.
Albert Herring
Albert,
That link was like a flashback to the big bad eighties and the type of shit that I used ‘Care in the community’ to personify. The list of companies being lined up for the profit taking, alone makes the skin crawl.
Plenty of motivation!
Braco
Got the flu or something. Meantime, some links.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oN5tdMSXWV8
http://www.scottishleftreview.org/article/the-missing-voices/
http://www.le-message.org/?lang=en
Vronsky
V-
Okay man. I am mainlining Lambrini au-moment, but I take it that the dude in the first link is, more-or-less, transcribed in the third link?
Anyway, if so, or not at all, no matter – splendid. Absolutely splendid gear.
Je suis remplis de Lambrini an aw that…
God bless ye monsieur, et bonne chance, bonne nuite…quelquechose…
I am taking this seriously.
Seriously.
ianbrotherhood
Fiddle with the YouTube options for English subtitles
vronsky
It is certainly clear that our democratic system has been captured by the interests of capital and associated concentrations of undemocratic power (corporations and banks). Amongst the effects this has had, has been the homogenisation of main stream political parties and a policy environment that is increasingly neoliberal. As such, it would appear desirable for an independent Scotland to do everything in its power to avoid repeating the mistakes of the British state.
Although the party political system appears to have failed us, I think political parties are a necessary evil. They are the ideal agents for voicing the policy alternatives the electorate choose between at elections, so can be seen as the engine of democracy. Some might see that as unwarranted praise, but rather than trying to destroy politics, we need to create a system that makes politicians work for us.
I do not have the experience serving in local government, to be able to outline how best to structure it and its integration with central government. However, I am sure that there are ample experts to perform this task. In developing a system tailored to Scottish needs, attention needs to be given to establish a political wing to support the party system. This would help integrate local and national policies, as well as ensure that government is publicly accessible at the local level. It would also provide an audit-able mechanism for funding political parties and election campaigns.
This may seem like the perfect way to create a centralised state, but that is where an upper house comes in. We do need one, don’t we? This is also where the demarchy come in, as Scotland’s new upper house could be selected by lottery for set terms. Tasked with scrutinising and passing, but not proposing policy. These policy alternatives would be fed to it from the political parties represented at local government level. As such, the upper house would be responsible for passing bills in to law and would have legal authority over local government. The upper house would also have legal authority over the civil service, both at national and local levels.
Apologies if my ideas are not fully developed and don’t contain anything that could be considered a constitutional policy. I think we need to get the shape of government sorted though, as well as its scope. I am also aware that there will most probably be gaping holes in my suggestions, which are far from comprehensive. I was also trying to resolve several structural issues in one go, so please be gentle.
Otherwise, coffee anyone?
CameronB
Vronsky,
Thanks for those links. They are very thought provoking. How are you feeling? Better I hope.
CameronB,
We are thinking along similar lines, although I will have no truck with political parties!
I have drawn out a wee flow diagram, following policy initiation through to final law/policy enactment. This shows all the different chambers of Government and their relationships.
I have also drawn a wee diagram showing the break down and structure of my Jury Chamber.
Hopefully I will find a way, with the help of Rev Stu, of posting these shortly (tomorrow?) along with a post describing each chamber of Government and it’s role. I think we can then start seeing where major disagreements might pop up. (Smily)
It’s funny how this process inevitably leads to thinking very seriously about local Government. It even seems more important in many respects if National Government is to truly represent the community.
This current disconnect between local and national Government is probably one of the main reasons our current system is so undemocratic. I think some research on how the Swiss Cantons and their micro referenda actually work. I don’t know much about it but what I do know I like.
That was very interesting CameronB, thanks. I think we may have to advertise for a new ‘Tea Boy’. I hope you didn’t spend too much on the uniform. (smilywink)
Braco
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2ywfsxl&s=6
Policy Formation Chamber
This is a NON Party Chamber
This will be made up of elected members who are in Politics to change the world. Old fashioned campaigners or single issue people. They will be elected on personal manifestos and will only be allowed to develop and pursue those policies that are within their manifesto.
Once they have worked up a solid proposal it will be put to the Jury Chamber for a YES/NO decision. As the Jury Chamber is made up of Lay people, this will encourage policy to be written and constructed in an easy to comprehend manner. Something that this system will encourage from the start of policy initiation right through to the enactment of the new law. All Law and Policy should be easily understood by the electorate and general population without the need to first consult a Lawyer/accountant/specialist of some sort.
Jury Chamber
This will be a virtual chamber of 1000 jurors per generation. They will serve for a period of 4 years in total. They will be selected by lot.
They will remain in their everyday environment but connected to Government and given information to be decided on, through secure electronic systems.
The first and last year of their decision making service will be used as statistical back up only, to the previous and future Generations two year period of actual ‘Hot Seat’ decision making.
This will allow time to bed themselves in to the work load and work/lifestyle balance, adjustment necessary for optimum decision making during their own two year ‘Hot Seat’ period.
Only during YES/NO questions concerning Constitutional Change will all Generations of The Jury Chamber be asked to decide.
See diagram
They will be asked to make YES/NO decisions at critical moments in the passage of legislation from the various Chambers of Parliament. ‘Hot Seaters’ will carry the decision. They will approve or reject proposals from the Policy Formation Chamber. If YES policy moves on to the…..
Governmental Secretariat and Civil Service
This Chamber will be Non Party Political.
This is a Chamber of 8 yearly elected political Bureaucrats and permanent civil servants who will form the Government. They will run the Country on a day to day basis but will have NO Policy initiation powers. They will be elected as individuals and will select among themselves the First Minister.
This Chamber is also responsible for developing the Policies approved by the Jury Chamber from the Policy Formation Chamber (along with the civil service) into concrete and practical proposals for new policy or law which will again be put to the Jury Chamber for a YES/NO decision. If NO then the proposal returns to the Secretariat for more work. If Yes then it moves on to the……
The Guardians
This is a Constitutional court that will be responsible to define the Legality, under the current constitution, of the proposals for new policy or Law. They are headed by the Elected Head of State who’s role is to give Democratic oversight of the Guardians. They will be elected over a 10 year cycle but with strict recall rules should they prove incompetent or corrupt.
Should a policy or Law be deemed in conflict with the constitution then it will be returned to the Jury Chamber with the accompanying analysis. The whole Generational Chamber will then decide YES/NO on the worth of the policy against the change in the Constitution. If No, it returns to the civil service for possible tweaking. If YES then the decision goes to the country through a
Constitutional Referendum
The Country Decides the merits of Constitutional Change. This will be done through an electronic system which will keep costs down and encourage the liberal use of Referenda as final arbiter. This system will also be the same as used for my proposals for local government by referenda a la Swiss Cantons.
If YES, Constitution is changed and new law or policy is enacted.
This system also has the advantage that the Constitution can stay fluid, with some campaigners quite possibly, only being elected to the Policy Formation Chamber in order to change or adapt the Constitution. This will also mitigate against the worship and deification of a historic Constitutional document (that through unwillingness to change) slowly becomes distant and irrelevant to the populace and their principles. Eventually ruling over the populace rather than protecting it’s principles in their modern context. America any one?
Any way that’s my stab at it.
Braco
@ Braco
Certainly a more developed effort than my own, though I do see the cross over. I’ll wait until there are a few more comments, before ripping in to it (only kidding). Cheers.
P.S. Liked your copyright.
CameronB
CameronB,
Thanks min. I have another diagram for where it says ‘see diagram’ (weaksmily), but I can’t seem to get it to work. I am hoping Rev Stu will be able to embed the first and then we can work on the second.
Are you not over optimistic that there will be more comments, to join in with the savaging? Get in there man!
That is my own red meat on the counter (nervousmilywink)
Braco
When reading the flow chart, you should start at The Policy Formation Chamber.
Sorry that really is not clear enough.
Braco
@braco
I’m horribly impressed – I’m still at the research stage. I was feeling better, then driving home from work someone rear-ended me full tilt when I was stationary at a roundabout. Just out of A&E, no great harm done.
You’ve lightened my task, though. I think I’ll focus on how we deliver some of this, probably beginning with a campaign to crowd-source the new Scottish constitution, an obvious initial focus, imo. We should do this whether or not we win the referendum.
Just a couple of random notes on a hasty read before I start work:
The proposed legislation from the policy formation chamber should be anonymised: people have a habit of judging sources rather than ideas.
There needs to be a provision for emergency legislation, although it may in detail be unconstitutional. I believe the Canadian constitution allows limited enactment of such legislation, giving it a very short sunset clause so that it will be automatically repealed if it cannot be passed through the normal constitutional channels.
Vronsky
Vronsky,
Sorry to hear about your accident. You need to take care of yourself better now that the future shape of the Nation is dependent (in part at least) on you! (smilywink)
Seriously though, I am glad to hear no real harm to your health has been done.
Oh and thanks for the compliment, it is much appreciated, cheers!
I think you are absolutely right about the anonymization of the Policy Formation Chamber. I had toyed with the idea that once elected, each Individual’s Manifesto Policy must be worked up by Ad hoc groups of like minded members.
In that way a policy idea gets tested and added to, as it is being developed for proposal to the Jury Chamber. Maybe that’s where the anonymity can be injected?
Very good point about emergency legislation. I had not considered it’s obvious need.
Perhaps the need for such legislation can be demanded by the Governmental Secretariat (along with a briefing on the ‘problem’ needing solved) and then delivered to the Policy Formation Chamber for proposals.
This then can follow the usual, but fast tracked, route through to enactment. It would, as you suggest, have a very short sunset clause to give the Guardians enough time to retrospectively assess it’s compatibility with the current Constitution.
I have a wee diagram showing the phased cycles of the Jury Chamber’s Generational system but I can’t seem to get it to work at the moment, so I will just try to explain it in words.
The Juror serves for 4 year period.
There are three Generations at work during a single 4 year Jury
Chamber Phase.
Each Generation Overlaps two years of the Next Generation.
This will allow for the first year of Jury service in which all their YES/NO decisions will be used as statistical back up only, to the previous Generations experienced 2nd year of ‘Hot Seat’ decision making.
This dry run first year gives the Juror time to adjust to the work load of decision making and also time to form a decent work/lifestyle balance prior to their actual two years of ‘Hot Seating’
A similar set up should exist for the last year, where experienced Jurors have a year to re adjust to their previous life. Again all Decisions from this year will be used as statistical back up only, to the less experienced 1st year of ‘Hot Seat’ Decision making by the previous Generation.
Only when YES/NO Decisions are called for on the need for Constitutional Change and Referendum will the entire intergenerational Jury Chamber be asked to ‘Hot Seat’.
I had proposed a salary of £25k + pension for the first and last years and £50k per year + pension for the two Years in the ‘Hot Seat’.
Not sure about these kind of figures but I feel it’s a balance between incentivising the public to really want the chance to serve, but then again, not be too much to actually change the Jurors everyman status and thinking. Tricky.
Braco
@ Braco
That is a lot to take in, especially if you are an amateur like myself. I’ll probably come back to you, bit by bit, if you don’t mind. But I’ll wait for Vronsky before cluttering the page with silly questions. I will ask one now though. Would this not perhaps be a little too radical to expect to come about as a viable form of government by 2016?
CameronB
CameronB,
Yes I do think it’s too radical to simply bring in as a new form of Government by ‘big bang’ in 2016.
I don’t think I can stress enough how important the education of the population in their civil rights and responsibilities, under their written Constitution, would be to the successful running of such a system of Government. The populace would have to instinctively understand their constitution and the different role that each chamber of Government performs.
I think the flow chart shows how simple the over all system is to understand though, when thought of as a pathway along which policy/law changes can be influenced and enacted by the general population.
It would also self regulate simplicity of understanding into it’s law making, policy formation and Constitutional changes. All such changes being written for and being passed (in YES/NO votes) by Laypeople in the form of the Jury Chamber and Constitutional Referenda.
This will again, through time, add to the easy understanding by the general population of the laws and policies of the land and so in turn create a reinforcing positive cycle. Easy to understand Government run by and for a population that well understands its government and Laws.
As Vronsky pointed out earlier, I think ensuring that the New Constitution is written by crowd sourcing the general public is probably top priority. If something as important as The Constitution is entrusted to the population and kept out of the hands of the ‘specialists’ and political elites then the principle of developing Government by a similar method will automatically be legitimised further.
The problem at the minute is that Jury Duty in Scots Law, although still very powerful in the popular public imagination, is in actuality under constant attack and in dramatic decline. With decisions being taken by Judges.
This, in my opinion, will also have to be fought and reversed to try and regain the legitimacy of the ‘non specialist decision maker’ as key arbiter in society once again. Specialists advise but decisions must be taken by the lay population, rooted in our everyday society
P.S. We are all amateurs here CameronB. To me that’s the whole point. (smilywink)
Braco
@ Braco
You have to get the foundations correct, to build a stable house. Crowd sourcing is definitely an exciting and desirable mechanism for developing the constitution, with enormous creative potential. While opening up the process to the entire online world, it would only be delivered by the current political system. It will take a little time to evolve out of party politics. That might sound a bit utopian or totalitarian, but I mean evolution toward a system which is truly representative.
CameronB
@CameronB
I’m finding that too. I’ve mentioned the idea of a revising upper chamber appointed by ballot to quite a few people, and they unanimously think it’s a brilliant idea. However when I suggest extending the idea to government as a whole they say “Nah – too radical – wouldnae work”, etc.
I suppose people are so used to the current system, they have difficulty thinking outside the box.
Albert Herring
@ Albert Herring
I think education is the key. I’m not sure if the structure of our education system is designed to develop free thinking though. If anything, I think it is designed to suppress it. I hope that doesn’t sound too swivel-eyed.
CameronB
Albert,
Yes I think you are correct about peoples attitudes. That is why my proposal is essentially a form of that ‘revising chamber’ which give the Yes or No decision at set points in the processes of Government.
This simply ensures that the ‘Professional’ and ‘Specialist’ Political class that will inevitably grow around the wielding of Political power are forced to be earthed through a necessity to frame all their desires for change in language and social terms acceptable to a statistically representative sample of the current society.
Politics will always attract politicians. There is unfortunately no getting away from that. This system is, in its most basic form, just an attempt to keep them on a tight leash and well aware of who is sovereign.
Having just read After the watershed I can really feel the desperate need for a serious plan of how we protect ourselves in an Independent Scotland from the addiction of absolute power that our politicians (especially SLAB politicians) wriggle and squirm their way towards every second of their waking hours.
All flows from the Constitution, but how to write a constitution that can stay fluid and relevant while still producing the safeguards necessary? That’s what my stab is about.
If we can solve the system of writing the Constitution with these types of tools then I feel the population may become more and more familiar with the concept and so more and more open to it’s expansion of use.
Such an optomist! (sadweaksmily)
Braco
Policy Formation ChamberThis is a NON Party Chamber
This will be made up of elected members who are in Politics to change the world. Old fashioned campaigners or single issue people. They will be elected on personal manifestos and will only be allowed to develop and pursue those policies that are within their manifesto.
Is this not perhaps a bit restrictive? What if a member of the public has a brilliant idea, but doesn’t want to stand for election to the Policy formation chamber? Could there not be a mechanism whereby he/she could submit the idea for consideration?
Apparently Iceland has a ‘Ministry of Ideas’. I’ve no idea how it works, but it does sound like an nice idea. (gone a bit mad with the ideas there.
Albert Herring
Albert,
you are exactly right! I think the system, to be truly ‘democratic’ must be interconnected down and down and down, into micro local level. I really like the Swiss canton system with it’s micro referenda system that really does actually change things without the continual requirement of explicit permission from central government.
The only criticism I come across of this local governmental system is that it produces what, to our eyes, looks like right wing policies. To me they just seem like suited policies to the local will.
Who’s to say what our ‘wing’ will be. ‘Left’, ‘Center’ or ‘Right’ I really am not that bothered, as long as we have a system in play that can in some way effectively reflect the true political forest currently growing and not rely on a Chinese whisper to create an idea first thought of for a society 100 years ago (if you are lucky with Britain’s past record!)
Public, easy access, to a system of referenda locally which feeds and if necessary, even dominates and over rides the Policy Formation Chamber’s elected representatives raison d’etre, might well be the way forward.
DEFO!
I think this should be an amendment put to the full Quadrangle and acting Cabin Boy (until such times as his former position is filled and the uniform taken in, or let out, to the satisfaction of its new bearer).
Braco
Now calling to the FORMAL VOTE,
Vronsky,
Rab,
Albert Herring,
Braco (myself)
and
CameronB (full voting member and acting cabin boy)
Braco
Also welcoming all associate members, including
Man in the Jar,
Nikostratos,
and all others.
OK, Ok, seeings as you are here already,
ianbrotherhood. (wink)
Braco
Eh….what? Oh…it has to be Yes! Isn’t it? What are we voting on?
CameronB
Too late CameronB,
that’s one YES!
welcome to democracy, Quintangle style! (strictcontrolingwink)
Braco
After a rather petty observation by one of our (junior) members, the following clarification has been released.
Easy public access should be designed into the system. Local referenda should feed and if necessary, dominate and over ride the Policy Formation Chamber’s elected representatives raison d’etre manifesto commitments.
YES/NO
Braco
Now hold on a minute there. Who said this is a democracy?
I have no objection in principle, to ensuring easy public access and the promotion of local authority (horrible word but I hope you know what I mean). Sorry if I am holding the bus up, but I was looking for Vronsky’s thoughts before commenting further. I still need to read through all of your ideas, but I’ve had to take care of the real world. I hope to get down to it this weekend.
ABSTAIN!
CameronB
Real World, CameronB?
Can’t stay!
Won’t stay!
(defiantbutobviouslydrunkweesmily)
Braco
Well I’m definitely for YES (what was the question again?) I reckon we’re really getting somewhere with this. The missing bit of the jigsaw, of course, is the position of we of the glorious Quintumverate as guardians of the nation, with statues, special documentaries on BBC4, stores of Islay malt etc, etc.
Albert Herring
Albert,
The Guardian Chamber is, quite simply, to be Islay.
Then we of the Quintumverate will have direct access to an adequate selection of malts to lean upon during our reign/deliberations.
Not sure that amendment requires an official vote though, as we are obviously not, after all, pedants.
Braco
@Norsewarrior
Which is why the SNP and other parties are rightly presenting their independence policies, and the Yes Campaign is promoting them.
Not actually what is happening at all, the ‘Yes’ campaign has outlined that as we are in Europe now, under the Union, then this will continue. As we use Stirling as currency, this would continue. As we are currently a monarchy, then this would continue. These are simple facts as we are not voting on anything else other than having our own Parliament, made up on elected representation deciding all aspects of how a normal country runs itself.
Unfortunately, the fact that the Yes Campaign are only promoting SNP policies means that those voters who don’t like the SNP or one or more of their policies could be put off from voting yes.
Again this is incorrect – Yes Scotland are not providing any policies from any political party, they are giving information as to the set up of Scotland after Independence.
Policies from all parties in Scotland will make up the 2016 election campaigns from all parties. The electorate gets to choose – and that would/ could mean policies put forward to change the Scotland’s relationship with the monarchy, education, house building programs, Scottish NHS funding/improvements.
You are not wrong about a partys position on certain policies causing them problems getting people to vote in the Referendum. Labour and the Lib Dems are having problems over the ‘bedroom tax’ – many have changed sides here or have stepped back from a ‘No’ vote because of it.
Adrian B
@Norsewarrior,
…….. obviously those of us who already support independence are more than convinced by the ‘blank canvas’ prospect of independence alone, and the chance for Scotland to make its own decisions. But clearly that isn’t enough for undecided voters.
The undecided voters don’t need to have this policy and that policy rammed down their throats for the next 18 months from either, the ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ side. They will not pay much attention until the last few weeks, so eighteen months out from the Referendum is not the time to start.
People have their own worries to deal with right now, if they want to get engaged with the issues now, then they can although it’s mainly happening online – as much as Brewer thinks he has much to do with setting the agenda, he only has 20 minutes a night and he dosn’t cover much ground in that time slot.
Adrian B
He’s not coming, you know. He’s nothing to gain by trolling Quarantine.
Jiggsbro
@ Jiggsbro
I don’t know what you mean jiggsbro. Quarantine is the proper place for OT threads of discussion. Wee smily thing.
Adrian B
Adrian B,
Norsewarrior is one person with a point of view. By placing your entirely sensible posts in quarantine you have robbed, yes robbed! the other 49,998 readers who might have seen them. It is worth remembering that you too have an audience on the main forums. Massively more people read this forum than reply to it. Hardly anyone knows about quarantine
douglas clark
I thought I’d nick out for a quick drag seeing as how it’s gone nice and quiet again, but it’s still fucking freezing so I’m away back in.
ianbrotherhood
You guys love beating yourselves up buying that crap newspaper. I told you to stop buying it last week because as soon as Garham came back, he would resort to miserable, peurile comic book rubbish again.
The sooner you stop buying & reading this paper, the sooner it will disappear from the shelves forever. It serves no useful purpose whatsoever since it is full of lies, propaganda & schoolboy errors. Thus it cannot be relied upon for anything except to mop up cat vomit.
G H Graham
Eh Duncan ,you managed to throw in a nice negative there on Iceland and Ireland eh?
I do admire though how you temper your langage here in comparison to Scotsman threads.
The Rev might be tolerant of you ,but it is not only Hen Broon that rumbled you.
Rod Mac
“Eh Duncan ,you managed to throw in a nice negative there on Iceland and Ireland eh?”
I’ve no idea who Duncan is or why on earth you’re calling me that name, but I can assure you it isn’t my name. And, for the second time, how exactly is pointing out that neither Iceland or Ireland are good comparisons for an independent Scotland a ‘negative’ against independence, when I’ve quite clearly suggested a better comparison instead?!
“The Rev might be tolerant of you ,but it is not only Hen Broon that rumbled you.”
I’d imagine the Rev may not be so tolerant of you, given the fact that he has consistently asked people to stop making up unsubstantiated accusations against others on here and that he said yesterday that his patience with the likes of you had reached its breaking point. Careful.
Norsewarrior
“Events/news is what matters and most people discovering WoS will read Rev’s articles and that’s it. Job done. Very few will trawl though the comments and even fewer will post”
You’re right of course, the comments on here are very unlikely to sway anyone one way or the other, as you say its the events and news, including the excellent articles on this site, that can do that.
But let’s imagine you’re an undecided voter who isn’t sure about voting yes because you don’t particularly like the SNP. You go to a site such as this to get a better idea about independence and happen to glance through the comments and notice non-SNP supporters such as myself getting attacked, abused and discredited with revolting accusations such as being a ‘holocaust denier’ by others.
Even if there’s only a very slight chance that such comments will sway that person towards voting no, we should do everything we can to dissuade and stand up to the people making them. This referendum is likely to be very close, I don’t want to risk losing even one vote by ignoring such comments and allowing them to stand unchallenged.
Norsewarrior
Are you honestly still attempting to argue that the phrase ‘too poor, too wee’ in relation to Scotland doesn’t refer to independence?!
No. I’m pointing out the simple fact that it doesn’t necessarily refer to independence, as you’d probably know if you had any genuine interest. It is, and has been, used to refer to all manner of things that Scotland isn’t supposed to be capable of. But you assumed independence, assumed that you were being attacked, assumed it was because you’re not an SNP fanatic…you seem so determined to be upset at being hounded by those dastardly SNP fanatics that you’ve resorted to taking offence at your own assumptions. Perhaps if you actually engaged with the issues, rather than responding to dog whistles, you’d be a little more convincing.
Jiggsbro
“I’m pointing out the simple fact that it doesn’t necessarily refer to independence…But you assumed independence, assumed that you were being attacked, assumed it was because you’re not an SNP fanatic”
In the context of the comment we are discussing it most certainly did refer to independence, as it does virtually every time it is used. Enter “too poor, too wee, too stupid” on Google and virtually every result will be in reference to independence, including even in a Scottish Affairs Committee Parliamentary report!
And, as the poster who made that comment, ‘Morag’, has previously attempted to discredit me as a ‘troll’ and ‘unionist’ on several occasions purely because I don’t support the SNP, it was a natural assumption to make that she was attempting to do so again.
Norsewarrior
Norsewarrior
As you will be hopefully aware by double checking my comment, it was not addressed to you or any other comment here specifically but rather addresses the most prevalent view expressed by the media in general on the financial crisis with respect to independence. I am merely sharing what ammunition I have.
pmcrek
@ Rev Stu;I found Morag’s little quip ”Too big, too poor, too stupid” quite witty, and that would have been the end of it among reasonable people. Norsewarrior however seized upon her quip as a means to divert the exchange of views of an excellent subject, as presented by you, on employment and economic growth. He has similarly responded to comments from other readers here.
In summary, for me he has ruined the potential of a good discussion on this subject matter and potential exchanges of useful information by readers with his faux indignation.
My gut reaction to this behaviour from him/her is that i will read and enjoy your articles, but at the first sight of a Norsewarrior comment i’ll know to switch to some other read.
If you have the means to park Norsewarrior and his debaters to some parallel file where they can “ding dong” to their heart’s content I’d much appreciate as that would allow worthwhile and the useful exchange of knowledge here to resume.
This does read a bit sniffy but he does come across as a spoiler.
velofello
“Again, it’s your assumption that it’s because you don’t support the SNP”
Why else would an SNP supporter attack, abuse and attempt to discredit an independence supporter such as myself? The fact that such attacks invariably come after I’ve expressed disagreement or criticism of the SNP on a particular point make blatantly clear that the only reason I’m being attacked is because I’m not following the SNP’s party line on independence.
“In fact, stop pretending that disagreeing with you is attacking you”
I’ve never made any such claim, that is a lie. For example, I haven’t suggested that you are ‘attacking’ me for disagreeing with me on the ‘too poor’ comment have I?
Attacking me is calling me a ‘troll’ and a ‘unionist’ and a ‘holocaust denier’ with no evidence whatsoever to back up any of those claims, nowhere have I ever suggested that anyone who disagrees with me is ‘attacking’ me.
You really aren’t having a good day with your attempted arguments and points. I’ll refrain from engaging in debate with you for the rest of the day and leave you to reflect on that.
Norsewarrior
“I found Morag’s little quip ”Too big, too poor, too stupid” quite witty, and that would have been the end of it among reasonable people. Norsewarrior however seized upon her quip as a means to divert the exchange of views”
Actually, I’d suggest that anyone who views my response to Morag’s post at 1.26pm will see it as a perfectly reasonable and fair response.
You’ll find that it was actually ‘jiggsbro’ who seized upon my response and then spent the next few hours pointlessly attempting to argue that ‘too poor, too wee, too stupid’ doesn’t refer to independence who has ruined the discussion.
Direct your criticism at him.
Norsewarrior
@NorseWarrior
Yawn! Christ, man/woman, geez peace! Almost every time you post here you cause animosity. What’s the matter with you? When you’ve made a point about something you don’t have to repeat it ad nauseum … which is annoying, to say the least.
When you go into all kinds of semantics and pedantry, it appears that you want to be deliberately argumentative. Give it a rest. Acknowledge differences. Say what you have to say…and then try saying something else!
Dal Riata
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=concern+troll
Just saying, a propos of nothing in particular.
Morag
The problem I have is that regardless of the subject of the thread, Norsewarrior almost always diverts it to same subject. He/she is always attacking the SNP. Why is that? Why would someone who genuinely supports independence attack the SNP so much, while ignoring the No campaign, and the parties in it? It just does not make any sense to me. I would estimate that 90% of his/her posts attack the SNP. Why if you really wanted a Yes vote, would you spend all that time attacking the largest party in the Yes campaign, and also the one whose success ensured a referendum in the first place? Nobody says you have to support the SNP, but why do you have to be so negative about them all the time?
muttley79
It is fair to say that Norsewarriors posts could never be confused with a ray of sunshine, at the very least
Erchie
Have to admit Norse does a fine job here. It has found a wee niche. A site where there are actually several people willing to give it the benefit of the doubt, and unfortunately that includes the Rev.
Cannot believe how niaive some of you are. The evidence of what Norse is can be easily found by googling a few newspaper forums for its numerous usernames.
I did post several warnings when it first appeared. I tend to now just skip the comments altogether as soon as it appears, which is a shame, but I cannot be bothered separating the wheat fom the repeated ad nauseum chaffe.
On this particular forum I’m amazed to have to award it a reasonably high score of 7 on the trollometer.
Rev, can I have my donation back? I refuse to fund this idiots soapbox. I actually thought you were a bit more aware of the common trolls which seek to inhabit independence forums.
norse, don’t bother replying.
McHaggis
Aren’t we very lucky to have NW on our side?
I have never known such devotion to a cause.
Seasick Dave
other’s replies seriously leads me to believe that they have problems with social interactions and poor social skills
If that’s aimed at me, you might want to consider the wisdom of attempting diagnosis on the internet. I have no problems with social interactions. I just sometimes can’t resist the temptation to poke the troll with a pointy stick. A bad habit, but it usually serves – as it did here – to confirm that they are, indeed, a troll (cf. his ‘nothing to do with me’, “You’ll find that it was actually ‘jiggsbro’” nonsense; classic troll behaviour).
Feel free to skip comments you’re not interested in. I do. And by skipping them, you’re less likely to be tempted to try labelling posters who just might be better qualified than you to assign such labels. I consider the labelling of people on the basis of minimal evidence, particularly on the internet, to be an example of poor social skills. You may disagree.
Jiggsbro
Not annoyed at all.
but like I said after a long time reading its pish on Scotsman comments, I defo dont want to actually fund a forum for it to spout more pish.
the only thing I am actually is gobsmacked that the Rev has threatened to ban folks like me for pointing this out. NW gets 5 bonus points on the trollometer for that alone.
McHaggis
ALL RIGHT.
ENOUGH.
I’ve just spent the last 25 minutes tediously and painstakingly going through pages of comments moving them all in here. Do you feel that’s a valuable use of my time, folks? Do you think it moves the independence debate on any? Do you think it gets us any closer to our goal? Do you think it’s the most constructive thing I could have been doing this afternoon? Do you think it motivates me to write more posts that’ll then descend immediately into this sort of hair-tearing, soul-destroying playground shit?
If so, please keep doing it.
I don’t know how many more times I have to say this. If you think someone is trolling, RESPONDING TO THEM IS WHAT THEY WANT. Ignore a troll and they’ll go away. Rise to their bait and they’ll plague you forever.
I banned Grahamski today because I decided FOR MYSELF that he’d had enough chances to show he was debating genuinely. I had a pre-formed opinion of him from elsewhere, but I gave him yards and yards of rope just to be sure, because kneejerk censorship of all dissent is the other side’s cowardly way, not ours.
If Norsewarrior’s intent is to disrupt, then by God you’ve all played into his hands. But I’ve seen remarkably little evidence of that. If making the point that the SNP != the entire independence movement is what he’s trying to do, then good, because the SNP is NOT the entire independence movement and we’ve spent much of the last six months trying to tell people that.
There’s a reason people like Grahamski say “YeSNP”, a reason why John Mann ranted on all day yesterday about “SNP smear campaigns” and “SNP trolls” – it’s because they want people to see Yes Scotland as an SNP front, because popular as the SNP is, it doesn’t have enough support to win the referendum by itself if we let it become a party-political vote.
Surrounding someone with a howling mob when they deviate from the SNP line is doing Grahamski and John Mann’s work for them far more effectively than they can.
Since I’ve said all this stuff half-a-dozen times before to apparently deaf ears, let me be crystal-clear: the next person who moans about Norsewarrior being a troll, or indeed jumps on any other poster saying “Oh, they’re really Commenter X from Site Y” without some damn good evidence as to why gets banned, no more warnings. And the next ten after them probably do as well, because I AM SICK OF IT.
If you really must discuss it, and for the love of Tiny Wee Baby Jesus I wish you wouldn’t, discuss it in this thread. If I see it anywhere else, you’re toast. No arguing, no negotiation, no refunds. My pub, my rules.
I haven’t been able to face writing anything else today because every time I look at the comments I want to shut the whole site down and slit my wrists. Great work, everyone. Pats on the back all round.
But I’d rather give up entirely than turn this into another Newsnet Scotland-style heavily-censored pain in the arse where I have to spend all damn day pre-moderating comments instead of writing stuff. If I’d wanted to be a forum administrator I’d have set up a forum.
I thought we were adults here. I thought that after the first four or five times people might listen. I seem to have been wrong. But really, truly, seriously, everyone and anyone: don’t make me fucking well say this again.
Rev. Stuart Campbell
Where do i get my money back?
you are blind to the many, many long term independence contributors to a clutch of other forums who know this twat. I am one of that group.
i warned on its first appearance its whole raison detre was to disrupt through subtelty.
it knows, as you should too, that it will always get someone to rise to its bait. There are too many kind hearted folks or those who just dont know it. T suggest everyone just ignore it displays a depth of niaivity i never thought id see in you. I said at the outset every thread it invades would run to many more comments than others… Is that true?
I aint looking for proof for you Rev, theres plenty glaring all over other forums, and lets face it, the ruination of every thread it has infested here. And sorry, but dont you DARE blame folks like me for feeding it etc… Thats just bullshit. NW is the problem, not the dozens of others who call it a troll.
i also couldnt care less for your anger… You’ve been well and truly suckered mate.
troll,
dont feed the troll,
maybe its not a troll,
repeat forever until thread is wrecked.
or
troll,
delete troll
thread continues as normal
McHaggis
“i also couldnt care less for your anger… You’ve been well and truly suckered mate.”
As the great Ivor Cutler once put it to a heckler: I don’t see any chains holding you down.
I delete trolls as and when I, not you, decide that they’re a troll. If you don’t like it, feel free to go and start your own website.
Rev. Stuart Campbell
I don’t want my money back (it’s doing good work) and I’d like to avoid being banned. So I’ll try to resist the temptation to “moan about Norsewarrior being a troll”. But he walks, looks and quacks like a troll and a troll would love your response. Just saying, like.
Jiggsbro
Say what you like, as long as you keep it in this thread. To reiterate: I’ve banned several people I thought were trolling. I will absolutely NOT be nagged and bullied into letting a howling lynch-mob make that decision for me, especially when I’ve said exactly that several times already.
Rev. Stuart Campbell
Oh, and by the way, I’ve added a link to this page in the blogroll, in the Zany Comedy Relief section, so there’s no excuse for people not going straight here because they can’t find it.
Rev. Stuart Campbell
I don’t think they’re a troll I think they have poor social skills, they obsess over detail and semantics, don’t realise they could give offence but take offence and imagine slights. I think they should be cut some slack, people with ASD and other conditions which result in poor social skills still deserve a place in the debate, they’re still part of Scottish society. They might just need a quiet word in private. And the troll/not troll debate is boring, will stop people reading the comments and so will make them miss out on important supplementary information and new links.
Caroline Corfield
You banned Grahamski?
hes not even a troll, hes just a unionist dicksplash whose actual beliefs are so incredulous to make him a laughing stock.
trolling is a much finer art form than grahamskis 2 brain cells could ever conceive of being.
strolling into a caravan forum and announcing that all caravans should be banned from the road is the equivalent of what Grahamski does, and it is miles away from any form of trolling i have seen defined. NW creeps in, with his views that caravanning is great, but accompanied eventually with a subtle subtext to generate first debate, then hostility while it sits back and laughs as the regulars begin to argue amongst themselves.
of course its your house, far be it from me to suggest otherwise, but you’ve atually started threaening to ban your honest contributors on the back of NW? Jeezo, I have to hand it to you in terms of shitting in your own nest.
also, you havent answered how I get my money back. I will not fund a forum for NW to be tacitly encouraged to contribute.
McHaggis
Caroline, dear Caroline…
I do despair that you are trying to rationalise his actions. He does it for shitz n gigglez.
McHaggis
It seems all the best people hang out in Quarantine these days! (wee smiley thing)
Adrian B
“but you’ve atually started threaening to ban your honest contributors on the back of NW?”
Yes, because right now you’re annoying me a hell of a lot more than he is.
“also, you havent answered how I get my money back”
You don’t. You contributed to the running of a website. The website is still running and you’re still free to read it, and to post to it if you obey the same rules as everyone else. No contract has been breached.
Rev. Stuart Campbell
“And the troll/not troll debate is boring, will stop people reading the comments and so will make them miss out on important supplementary information and new links.”
Precisely. Nobody – not one single human being on Earth – wants to read screeds and screeds of “He said/she said” whingeing between a couple of internet pseudonyms. Nobody cares.
Rev. Stuart Campbell
Jiggsboro
Go on yourself Jiggsboro, you are doing a grand job. While Norsie, as he’s known in many locations elsewhere, is distracted by you he cannot write his usual drivel.
a supporter
Norsewarrior does remind me rather of AM/AM2, and the two interchangeable and relentless posters on the Herald forums. In my view these are paid agents, or more likely one agent, nothing more, nothing less.
I don’t respond to his comments, and I don’t (apart from here say Troll). Well not much.
But that is what I think. AM2 actually referred to his actions a ‘psyops’ when pretending to flounce off.
And I don’t think it’s lack of social skills
This website, and blogs/social media generally, are the one area that the Unionist establishment can’t control. Do you really think they would just ignore that, and say ‘on you go boys’. I think not
Derick
Rev Stu
I made a comment on the other site re Norsie before I read your threat so please don’t ban me for that. But McHaggis is right and you are wrong. You by supporting the troll’s right to ‘free’ speech are driving away genuine supporters of the YES campaign. Can’t you see that that is what Norsewarrior wants? There are more ways than one of closing down a web site.
Norse warrior’s writing style is so obvious that the minute he appears on a site either under that name or one of the many others he uses people immediately know it is him; I am surprised that you can’t see it too. Maybe you should get out to other sites more often. Anyway the moment he appeared on Wings many of us knew immediately it was the troll and warned you. And maybe you should have listened to us instead of getting on your high horse about who decides what on this web site. We know it is yours, and a very good one too, but sometimes you can be a bit over sensitive about criticism.
a supporter
“Norsewarrior says:
18 April, 2013 at 4:50 pm
Anyway this argument is pointless ”
Thats about the ONLY sensible thing Norsewarrior has said on this thread so far!!
I’m totally fed up of the bickering between Norsewarrior and anyone who will engage with him. Just scrolling down this thread, I reckon quite a few people have been so fed up because of this that they have left the site! Very disappointing.
Heather McLean
“You by supporting the troll’s right to ‘free’ speech are driving away genuine supporters of the YES campaign.”
I’m not driving anyone away. I made it ABUNDANTLY plain what was and wasn’t acceptable, and if people who’ve been repeatedly told the rules choose to arrogantly and rudely flout them, they should expect to be admonished.
Rev. Stuart Campbell
Norsewarrior will troll. It’s in his nature. And people will respond, because it’s the internet and that’s it’s nature. People don’t always respond well to provocation and the nature of the internet tends to lead them to respond less well than they would in real life. People will argue about things that seem irrelevant to those not involved, because that’s the nature of anonymous, asynchronous, remote communication. None of those things should happen, it would be lovely if they didn’t happen, but there is no functioning internet forum where they don’t happen. It’s human nature combined with internet nature. I’ve contributed to many forums over many years. I’ve set up and run a few. And they all had these problems to a greater or lesser extent.
Some trolls, like grahamski, are obvious. Some are not. Some are subtle and insidious. Long and bitter experience tells me that the best way to identify the subtle and insidious troll is to trust the wisdom of the crowd. We don’t tell you that norsewarrior is a troll because we’re trying to usurp your authority or make decisions that are rightly yours. We tell you because we know, because some of us have spent nearly two decades getting to know them and their tactics, and because we want you to make decisions that protect and preserve this site. At the moment, from our point of view, you’re hitting out at the people who are trying to alert you to a problem, while rewarding the cause of the problem with just the sort of reaction he enjoys.
I apologise if any of that appears patronising; it certainly isn’t intended to be. But I don’t think I’m alone in being astonished that you do not recognise norsewarrior for what he is. Yes, he would cause less aggravation if no one responded to him. But he’d cause none at all if he weren’t here. And aggravation is why he’s here.
Jiggsbro
Rev
I think that you have handled this very badly.
Seasick Dave
Can we please just ignore the trolls that we all know disrupt the threads on all the pro indy sites? All of us who follow the debate on other sites recognise them and it must give them great joy to see us arguing among ourselves. Stay positive and ignore the trolls.
Marion
Don’t actually think Grahamski is a troll. A fanatical tribal labourite, but genuine with it.
West Midlands/OBE/Norsewarrior/AM/Yeah etc etc purely is tho
Derick
Rev,
have you ever considered how I knew – in its very first contribution – that NW was a troll? Do you think i just sprang out with this on a whim? Do you think I just decided at random to pick on some innocent contributor and singled them out? Was I alone when I did this?
Do I or have I asked or noted that ANY other contributor to your forums is a troll?
Did I ever ask in its recent outings for it to be deleted?
Tonight i did because I was simply tired of seeing it destroy the thread – again.
Read back to its very first thread and tell me the warnings I posted there about how it acts and what it does are not now completely true?
You see, I know NW is a troll because it has trolled more forums than I care to remember. It is not a nonSNP supporting fan of independence, thats just the veneer, and the hook. I could make up a NW post right now and you would not be able to tell us apart, its posting strategy is so obvious. That is why we all KNOW its former names.
If you found a small flat billed bird that loved to swim on water and made quacking noises, and then were told by two dozen people what it was, would you REALLY need to wait until it announces its a fucking duck?
Your back is up on this and from experience, I know you wont now accept the contrary view.
Keep the cash but there wont be any more coming from me while NW is given support to post.
Electing to give ‘free speech’ to a widely known troll is probably the second daftest thing you’ve ever done on these forums. You don’t seem to be eliciting a great deal of support for your position and I am pretty sure NW is sitting back with spittle running down its chin thinking… “my work here is only just beginning”.
McHaggis
“have you ever considered how I knew – in its very first contribution – that NW was a troll? Do you think i just sprang out with this on a whim? Do you think I just decided at random to pick on some innocent contributor and singled them out? Was I alone when I did this?”
I don’t give a shit. I judge people on what they post here, not anywhere else. I’m getting extremely tired of the implication that I’m a halfwit.
Rev. Stuart Campbell
‘Electing to give ‘free speech’ to a widely known troll is probably the second daftest thing you’ve ever done on these forums.’
So we should not give NW an opportunity to ‘hang himself’ You and others don’t like him. Fine but if he’s not broken the sites rules just his style is irritating as hell just ignore him. If you think he’s a troll why the fuss. Just ignore him. If he was in the pub you’d ignore him. So deep breath and exhale……….. everyone.
sneddon
“If you found a small flat billed bird that loved to swim on water and made quacking noises, and then were told by two dozen people what it was, would you REALLY need to wait until it announces its a fucking duck?”
Try to get this through your skull: I’ve read his posts and I see no bill and hear no quacking. When I do, I’ll act accordingly. Until then, I need no advice on how to do my job, thanks.
Rev. Stuart Campbell
I think NW is a troll as well. I told him i wouldn’t comment on any of his posts again, and i haven’t. Easy peasy.
Juteman
I reckon that the Rev Stu is right in this. It does not look good to a new visitor to this site if they see someone being slagged off as a troll over what the aforesaid new visitor will see as a reasonable comment.
Comments should be responded to on the basis of what they say, and not on the basis of reading between the lines on the assumption that the author is a troll and that there must be some hidden meaning; otherwise they should be ignored.
Personally, I was getting tired of all the accusations of trolldom; equally I am glad to see Grahamski get the boot as he was rather tedious.
Scaraben
“I’m getting extremely tired of the implication that I’m a halfwit.”
come on Rev, put the dummy back in…
You are stubborn, and on some occasions over-defensive but nowhere is there any implication of your levels of intelligence.
Juteman, I too have never responded to NW since I told him the same thing ages ago… but you see, I came here earlier to read Rev’s usual high quality pieces and to read the equally high quality debate. What did I find? A thread of ‘he said, it said’ with the starring role of NW – again.
Rev can be as pissed off at me and others as he likes… it does not take away from the fact that NW is a troll and his method of attack is subtle disruption. The fact Rev can’t see the quacking isn’t my fault though – its not what NW says its the very fact we know he’s taking the piss. The Scotsman used to (dunno if it still has) a 1000 comment limit. Guess what happened when good old NW came online?
Hey, I’m done here. Flogging dead horses is not my thing.
Last word though Rev is, don’t say I didn’t try to warn you.
McHaggis
Frustrating though it is, I honestly think it’s best all-round not to engage with them. We’re lucky on this site that we really don’t get all that much disruption, if we’re honest. But I suspect it’s something we’ll always have to deal with and therefore need to find a way of doing so that keeps our collective blood pressure at a healthy level.
Jeannie
It’s disheartening to read the above, but we’d best take whatever lessons we can from it all ‘cos it’s gonny get a lot hairier down the line. Ups and downs an’ aw that…the day the appeal target was reached was a high point…today’s a low…tomorrow we’re back on the up.
So it goes.
It’s truly horrible to see folk arguing like this, especially when we were all drawn here for similar reasons, and most share a common aim. Only consolation I take from it is that this site is attracting attention (be it legal threats, experienced ‘T’s or whatever else) because it’s hurting those who would deny us this chance to control our own lives.
‘T’s are inherently dishonest and if we know nothing else, we know this – liars, even the very clever ones, are always found out. Eventually.
ianbrotherhood
Someone earlier gave NW 7/10 for trolling. I think he deserves a lot more than that. This was finestkind stuff. If he really has managed to convince RevStu that he’s for real, that’s worth 10/10 in my book.
I knew who he was immediately too, although I hadn’t met the Norsewarrior moniker before. I don’t mean all the speculation about it possibly being this or that real-life person, I have no idea about that and care less, I mean the troll persona, whatever it calls itself. The use of language and the passive-aggressive posting style is absolutely distinctive. I’ve seen it on the Hootsmon stirring up trouble more often than I care to remember.
It’s RevStu’s site and he’s in charge. But sometimes a thousand lemmings aren’t all wrong, and the eyepopping number of people here who had Norsewarrior’s number the minute he showed up aren’t wrong.
It would be lovely if everyone would simply ignore him. But it ain’t gonna happen. And even if it did, he’d probably just keep on posting his plaintive, spiteful little posts again and again anyway. This is going to keep happening, and if RevStu is going to keep protecting him until he gives himself away, it’ll go on forever, because this guy is good.
If it comes down to a choice between losing a couple of dozen regular, honest posters and losing a notorious, widely-recognised disruptive troll, I know which I’d choose.
Morag
Christ, bloody grow up all of you.
G H Graham
“Someone earlier gave NW 7/10 for trolling. I think he deserves a lot more than that. This was finestkind stuff. If he really has managed to convince RevStu that he’s for real, that’s worth 10/10 in my book.”
I haven’t said I’m convinced. I’ve asked, with increasing exasperation and decreasing patience, that people shut the fuck up from screaming “TROLL! TROLL!” and leave me to judge it, rather than clogging up a dozen threads with a kneejerk witch-hunt which I’ve made it SPECTACULARLY PLAIN I’m not going to participate in. All people have achieved is to obscure whatever the truth is by rendering entire threads too fucking tedious to actually read.
Rev. Stuart Campbell
I know you’ve asked that, but it may be that you’re asking the impossible. This style of trolling is subtle, and tends to generate runaway responses. It’s particularly effective in that some people usually take it at face value and become engaged with the passive-aggressive posts in good faith. That in itself is a victory for the troll, because even without anyone wittingly feeding it, it gets a very good meal, and the thread is effectively taken over anyway.
But then others, who know very well who this guy is and how he operates, and who have been obeying the instruction not to respond, can’t hold back any longer when they see the morass the innocent responders are being drawn into. They try to explain what’s going on, and warn the unwary, and there you have an explosive situation.
Someone has certainly achieved a result of “rendering entire threads too fucking tedious to actually read.” Now, would that be the person whose objective was to achieve exactly that? I rather think so.
Damn, he’s good. I have to hand it to him. I just hope he won’t succeed in destroying Wings, after we all pulled together to get the funding.
Morag
All people have achieved is to obscure whatever the truth is by rendering entire threads too fucking tedious to actually read.
Actually, that bears repeating. That effect isn’t “obscuring the truth”. That is the truth. That is what he sets out to do, and he is achieving it, in spades. The proof of the nature of the beast is in the responses he attracts, because the entire point of the exercise is to attract these responses.
Any attempt to isolate Norsewarrior’s posts and look for signs of trollishness is spectacularly missing the point. The posts don’t exist in isolation. The posts in themselves are almost irrelevant. The objective of the posts is to generate the reaction that has been generated. The fact that he has succeeded is the proof in itself.
It’s pissing into the wind to say, don’t react. This guy isn’t Grahamski. This is professional stuff, and it’s being done with great skill. Blaming people for responding, rather than blaming the one who is expertly fishing for the response, is akin to blaming the victims of the con artist rather than the con artist himself.
Morag
If there was a ‘like’ button available for Morag’s last two comment I would have used it. Best description yet in my mind.
I try to avoid commenting on anything that NW says , but sometimes after others have tried reason and got nowhere. I have jumped in with a polite actually this is how it is post in response. It works for a short time, then we are right back at square one about the SNP isn’t doing this or must do that remarks in the second half of NW’s comment.
NW has a tendency to post three comments in quick succession, often late afternoon. That tactic has divisive affect on the thread that lasts for a couple of hours at least.
NW avoids posting comments in quarantine, better to be on the second or third story – its a trolls favourite starting point, but NW will often stay there, venturing perhaps onto the front page towards the end of the thread.
I will leave it there – only commented to put my thoughts on the record. Keep up the good work.
Adrian B
“This is professional stuff, and it’s being done with great skill.”
exactly.
Derick
Got to be brutally honest here Stu, I too suspect NW is a troll flying under a false flag.
Cavey
Captain Caveman
It really saddens me to see people on this site fighting like rats in a sack .
People need to remember that it is Stu,s site and we have to play by his rules even though I dont always agree with what he decides .
What I have seen over the last couple of days is straight out of the School playground ‘ I should know I monitor the 5 & 6 year olds every playtime & lunchtime .’ it is a question of he said , she said .
Most of us here have drifted over to Wings due to Newsnet imposing draconian measures in monitoring their site . We should all ask ourselves ‘ do we really want the Rev going down the same road .
We are within sight of the greatest prize in Scotland,s history since 1314 ‘ let us not lose sight of this .
What I have seen & read over the last few day’s makes me wonder if we are ready to build a new vibrant ‘ dynamic ‘ inclusive Scotland .
The NO Scotland campaign is in disarray over Taylorgate ‘ lets not give them succor by falling out amongst ourselves .
Silverytay
The trouble is, Stu is expecting the victims of a master manipulator simply to stop being manipulated. Including the ones who have no idea they are interacting with a professional shit-stirrer. I don’t think it’s achievable. Even if 80% of the regular posters do as Stu wants, Norsewarrior will achieve his aims with the remaining 20% – and in so doing, rile up a proportion of the 80% to join in too.
I thought Stu was just waiting for it to be obvious who and what Norsewarrior is. Because he’s right, this method of trolling is such that innocent newbies can become victims. A newbie whose first few posts resemble the posts of the concern troll can be subject to unwarranted attack and be banned unjustly. I’ve seen it happen on homoeopathy forums. After we’ve been on there a few times, an innocent newbie coming in with “how can I tell if my homoeopathic pharmacy is reliable?” is likely to be banned on sight! Concern trolls see such bannings as major victories. So it makes sense to let it run for a bit to be sure.
However, this has gone on long enough for everyone who knows what this guy is up to to be under no illusions. I don’t want to call Stu naive because he’s a big boy and he can look after himself. However, we all have different experiences, and if you haven’t met this one before it can blindside you. I’m concerned that he’s mad and frustrated and even talking about shutting down the site, and he’s blaming the people who responded to the troll.
This has been and is the work of a consummate professional, and he is currently right on course to achieve his aim, because he has managed to hoodwink Stu into blaming his catspaws.
Morag
“The trouble is, Stu is expecting the victims of a master manipulator simply to stop being manipulated. Including the ones who have no idea they are interacting with a professional shit-stirrer. I don’t think it’s achievable.”
Trust me – one way or another it’s achievable, and it WILL be achieved.
Rev. Stuart Campbell
NW has avoided Taylorgate entirely – he knows it’s utterly toxic to the online persona he’s created here. He took a wee holiday as soon as the subject arose, and only came back when a dodgy-donation-free discussion was underway.
It’s simply not credible that anyone with an interest in the referendum campaign – on either side or none – can fail to be concerned about what’s happening vis-a-vis BT funding. This morning’s (potentially) watershed GMS underlines how important these developments are.
NW’s constant refrain has been about ‘the undecided’, how they have to be reached outwith the SNP’s agenda. Well, BT is reaching them right now, via the BBC, on prime-time radio – hapless Lamont is now entangled in a possible cover-up on the eve of her party conference. If this doesn’t bolster NW’s purported ambition for the independence debate he wants to see, what could?
His silence on this matter is as damning as his perpetual sidetracking of everything else.
Rev has made it pretty clear that this space can be used. So let’s use it to clear this mess up once and for all -
NW, you’re reading this. You are cordially invited to visit Quarantine and give us your thoughts on Taylorgate.
I’m not ‘demanding’ anything. I’m not asking any questions. I’m simply requesting that, as a frequent contributor to this site, and one who is clearly abreast of unfolding news, you state your position on Ian Taylor’s donation, BT’s handling of it, and Lamont’s performance this morning.
I’m sure many of us are keen to hear your take on this stuff. So, can you please have a go at it sometime today?
RSVP
ianbrotherhood
Morag
I visit many different English and Scottish newspaper and blog sites concerning Independence and when I do I invariably find Norsewarrior or one of its alternates beavering away on at least one of them. And I do mean beavering because it produces long winded post after post after post in quick succession for hours on end which suggests to me it is not one person but a group working in shifts, using the same computer and sets of prepared scripts which they copy and tailor to the immediate thread in hand. (And remember … “Just because I’m paranoid doesn’t mean there isn’t someone stalking me”)
It isn’t the mastermind you think it is because it has little effect on sites like the Telegraph, Guardian, Scotsman et al. its posts are so transparent that everyone knows who it is and newcomers who engage are warned immediately about it. The general reaction to it is … ignore it, do not engage in debate with it, if you do post to it make it derogatory, laugh at it, and insult it. And the moderators on those sites don’t seem to care much about people doing that.
It has had a large effect on this site simply because there are a fair number of naive people who come to this site who have engaged with it because they are part of a group who want Independence but claim they are not Nationalists, nor even nationalists, and think we should be ‘nice’ about how we go about gaining it, forgetting that the people we are up against are activists who have been in the muddy trenches of political warfare for donkeys years and will use every dirty trick in the book to gain an advantage and to preserve their position. Remember that most of them are fighting for their ambitions and future job prospects.
And Ian Brotherhood, it will be interesting to see if it takes up your challenge about Taylorgate.
a supporter
Well, 3.5 hours later…’no answer’ came the reply, and I haven’t seen him crop up on any other threads.
He won’t come here. He daren’t.
ianbrotherhood
Have to go out for a while, and am very much looking forward to seeing NW’s comments on Taylorgate later this evening.
In the meantime, if he crops up on any other thread, would y’all do me a big one by referring him here before he gets bogged down in other exchanges? (Y’know, just in case he hasn’t been following things closely and isn’t aware of what’s what.)
Ta ever so much comrades…
ianbrotherhood
Thought I’d share this nugget with the ‘howf drinkers.
Like many, I’ve been a bit gobsmacked by the BBC’s interviews with Johannie and Anas. Imagine my surprise therefore when I got home tonight to find this email from the Editorial Complaints Unit in my inbox.
“Thank you for your email. I’m sorry you’re dissatisfied with the BBC’s responses to your complaint thus far. As you may know, the remit of the Editorial Complaints Unit is to investigate cases where there may have been a serious breach of the standards expressed in the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines (http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines ). We’ll now begin an investigation into the concerns you have raised, which will include a review of the correspondence so far, conversations with the programme-makers and any other enquiries that might be appropriate.
I will aim to let you know the outcome of our investigation by 22 May. When we have completed our investigation we will send you our provisional conclusions. If you disagree with them, you will have ten working days in which to let us have your comments, and our finding will not be finalised until those comments have been taken into account.
Yours sincerely
Richard Hutt
Complaints Director”
Coincidence?
DMW42
DMW42 @ 19 Apr 7:30pm
” Thought I’d share this nugget with the ‘howf drinkers. ”
I’ve a thirst to share. The ‘howf in which city and when usually there in case I can join in when back home from tomorrow until next Friday?
Indion
Indion, I was being a bit colloquial and referring to Quarantine as the ‘howf’ as there’s a bunch of ‘regulars’ post here and I really enjoy reading the threads.
But, now that you mention it, I’d be up for a few sherries (Lambrinis Ian) with similar minded folks sometime. We should definitely have a think about it.
DMW42
Trolls can be fun sometimes.
Just don’t respond to them unless you feel a bit of baiting would kill some time.
scottish_skier
@ DMW42, whaaaat ? this is amazing and needs to be shared on every independence forum.
If the BBC becomes unbiased…we win!
Patrick Roden
DMW42.
Tory Lord Patten?
Just thinkin like.
scottish_skier
Rev Stu,
Please say your going to do another Rangers article now that Chuck has left the building ?
There is one prediction he got right, when he visited the N.Ireland supporters last year and told them that ‘ as long as he was in charge at Rangers, they would never again play in the SPL’
Although, in balance, he did fail when he promised that the next away strip would be orange.
tartanfever
‘howfers
Re response to my previous from DWM42 @ 9:09pm
OK, my bad. But let’s not think about doing it, let’s do it!
All being well, I should be back in Scotland and on Tayside from early pm tomorrow Sat 20 Apr until midday next Friday.
So, THE HOWF – or any other PUB in central Dundee would be good for me to meet up with the likeminded there or thereabouts who are also to be found here on WoS.
Hey, we might be able to combine a meet-up with a YES event in the neighbourhood, if any are taking place?
Anyone up for it?
Indion
@DMW42-
Always up for a swally, but I don’t know anywhere that has Lambrini on draught (that’s an opening for some budding entrepreneur…)
The Sarry Heid in Glasgow used to have Buckfast on tap. So did Nice and Sleazy’s on Sauchie, although I never partook – never been able to touch the stuff since Helen Lidl associated herself with it, albeit disapprovingly. I also avoid drinks with overt associations to monks because jokes involving my surname inevitably arise. (One of my great great uncles was a very well known priest in Clydebank – Father Brotherhood. If he’d chosen to be a monk he would’ve been Brother Brotherhood. Shades of Boutros Boutros Boutros Boutros Ghali…)
Someone once told me that the Sarry Heid used to serve milk with a dash of gas, but I don’t know if that’s true.
Anyway, if things keep going as they are then I’m sure we’ll all meet at some point or other. I don’t know what your handle means, but it always reminds me of WD40, which implies that you’d be a handy camper to have around when things need smoothing.
In any event, it’s good to see the howff busy after so long – just a pity Norsey didn’t fancy joining us. I was so looking forward to his analysis of Taylorgate. Oh well, I guess we’ll never know.
ianbrotherhood
@DMW42-
Completely forgot to ask – what was your original complaint about?
Apologies if you’ve already explained but I never manage to read all of every thread.
Very curious to know how you managed to elicit such a response.
ianbrotherhood
IanBrotherhood – loved the post mate, had me laughing like a torn pocket.
I started complaining when there was the stooshie with the foreign ministers being misrepresented and, every time the BBC responded, I stuck it to them some more, and added more examples (links / screenshots) of biased. And, every time I sent a response, I copied in ODIHR (but see my previous posts on ODIHR who won’t intervene unless requested by the Member State.
Anyway, last week NS posted a copy of a letter from representative of the Luxenbourg Foreign Secretary and I though, feck it, this backs up my original complaint so get it in to ECU. I also suggested they might want to get some investigative journalists onto Taylorgate as the BBC used to be good at that sort of thing and the social media were all over it.
And here we are, Coincidence or not, at the time the BBC start doing some proper interviewing, Labour wheels fall off.
I’ll look out for you the next time I’m down visiting my mother in Irvine, every three or four weeks or so, and we’ll have a wee half shandy.
DMW42
By the way guys, I don’t do the facetwat thing (not in public anyway), but do feel free to share.
DMW42
@DMW42-
Sounds like your tenacity has paid off, so here’s to ye…
gulp…gulp…gulp…
That’s it nearly done now, so,
BEEEEELCH!
Sorry man, it came back on me there a wee bit.
Anyway, it could come to pass that we will meet sooner than anyone thought. The Yes campaign is having a stall in Irvine tomorrow? Not sure about times etc, but if it’s in the Bridgegate there can’t be many spaces available what with all the works going on. The SSP stall is every other week, and we always end up using the same space, so I guess the guid Yes folk will end up in the same spot, or thereabouts.
We wouldn’t want to give the security services any assistance, so…(I’m whispering now)...if I’m there it’ll be between 1 and 2, and I’ll be disguised as Brian Donohue.
PS. The code is Norsewarrior.
PPS. If required, the double-check is ‘Yes, of course my hair is real.’
ianbrotherhood
I was one of the ones who had a real go at Norsewarrior from the time he/she first appeared on WoS. I kept at him/her that much that Stu was threatening me with a yellow card! I don’t regret it, though, that person is a troll, and a good one, too.
What right do I have to be so sure of that accusation? Well, having had my own website with comments enabled, been a moderator on a fairly well-known social website, and dealt with customers’ and dealers’ complaints on a product site over the last four years you develop an instinct, or ‘feel’ for who is genuine and who is ‘at it’ – and Norsewarrior is definitely at it.
The signs were all there (and still are): straight in with ‘an attitude’, passive-aggressive posting style, making accusations, accusing others of ganging up on him, ad nauseum repeating of minor points in commentary, ad nauseum pedantry, ‘bombing’ a thread with comment after comment with no attempt made to resolve any issues, riling up other posters, taking over a thread with their views stirring up contention amongst other posters, posters ‘taking sides’, ‘flaming’ threads, etc.
Of course, Norsewarrior has only just got going, but we have already seen an advancement into the next devious stage, where the ‘real’ trolling starts: the piece de resistance – getting the owner of the site/moderator to be on their side, a huge ‘win’ Eg: get the owner/moderator ‘onside’ as quick as possible by: using their name as often as possible when disputes occur, quoting the ‘rules’ of the owner’s website, pretend to have something in common with the owner (support the same football team, perhaps)…basically, any devious manoeuvre is used to get the owner/moderator on their side.
From then on, the troll is winning! He/She has free reign on the site and they can continue to work their evil spell on all, members, and visitors alike.
Result: the owner/moderator starts to ban people for accusations of trolling, one or two at the beginning, then more and more. This causes lots of ill feeling and consternation among regular contributors. Fewer comments get left BTL. Finally, the site destroys itself, falling into a black hole of rancour and animosity.
Meanwhile the troll is ROFL, ROFL, ROFL …It has won!
Now, having said all that, I very much doubt that WoS will end up in that final apocalyptic state! Hopefully, Norsewarrior, or any other malicious troll who wanders on here will be shown the exit door and then the site can go on as before, pest-free.
Rev Stu, I’m not having a go at you here. I’m well aware it’s your site and you set the rules. What I said above is based on the experience I’ve had dealing with trolls and flamers, and there have been many! With all the shit I’ve had to deal with over the years from that lot, you’ll understand that I have a visceral hatred for them!
For all it’s worth, Rev Stu, please reconsider your getting angry and threatening to ban members on your site who are hacked off with this particular individual. Sometimes people get so pissed off that they voice their opinion rather than keeping schtum.
More than a few members here are more than aware of what Norsewarrior is up to: some have noted the same name employing similar tactics on other sites as those used on WoS.
Yes, I know that circumstancial evidence is not enough and ‘events’ have to occur on your own site for proof bearing out a reason for expulsion, and that’s as it should be (although sometimes, pre-emptiveness is gooid!). But please don’t fall for this dude’s ‘charms’…’The force is strong in this one’. This guy’s good, but not so good that he hasn’t been sussed out already!
I think I can speak for many, Stu, when I say WoS is on my to-visit list every day. Your articles are excellent and ‘take it to the man’ every time. The posters leave lots of extra information on or off topic, and the ‘atmosphere’ on site is good natured. I just don’t want to see trolls or flamers causing consternation and strife, which would take away all that is good about WoS. Keep up the good work… and beware of the troll!
Dal Riata
IanBrotherhood “I’ll be disguised as Brian Donohoe”, I’m guessing you’ll be covered in bandages as that’s the only way you’ll see that invisible man.
Won’t make it this weekend mate but, no doubt will run into you before too long.
DMW42
@DMW42-
Indeed. It’ll happen one day.
I might pop along later, but have decided to change my disguise in case anyone stops me with problems relating to potholes and dog-fouling.
Hoots mon!
ianbrotherhood
Catch you later then Ian, mind where you step.
Indion, I don’t get through to Dundee that often but will give you a shout, as and when. If you’re ever going to be down Stirling way, let me know and we’ll share a few.
DMW42
Seeing as how the howff’s quite busy, and some of us are still kicking our heels waiting for NW to return with his Taylorgate musings, thought I’d lob the following in on the offchance that anyone hasn’t seen it.
The Calton Hill Declaration, 2004.
This is from the Wikipedia entry, and I assume it’s accurate. No doubt some of you were there that day. As a blueprint for the Constitution I suppose it’s as solid a start as any. Curious for any thoughts on it – perhaps all those inclined to sign it could form the ‘pool’ for the demarchy as discussed nearer the top of the thread.
We the undersigned call for an independent Scottish republic built on the principles of liberty, equality, diversity and solidarity.
These principles can never be put into practice while Scotland remains subordinate to the hierarchical and anti-democratic institutions of the British State.
We believe these principles can be brought about by a freely elected Scottish Government with full control of Scotland’s revenues.
We believe that the right to self determination is an inherent right, and not a boon or a favour to be granted to us whether by the Crown or the British State.
We believe that sovereignty rests in the people and vow to fight for the right to govern ourselves for the benefit of all those living in Scotland today, tomorrow and in future times. The Government of a country is servant to the people, not master of the people.
We believe that a written Constitution will guarantee, under law, everyone’s right to freely vote, speak and assemble; and will guarantee the people’s right to privacy and protection, and access to information on all its Government’s doings.
We vow to fight for the power to refuse to send our sons and daughters to kill and die in unjust wars in foreign lands.
We vow to fight for the power to banish nuclear weapons of mass destruction from our land.
We vow to fight for the power to acquire and restrict the use of property or lands controlled by individuals, corporations or governments from beyond Scotland’s borders.
We vow to fight for the power to turn our depopulated land into a haven for those fleeing famine and persecution.
We vow to fight for the power to build a more equal society, free of poverty, through the redistribution of our vast wealth.
We vow to fight for the power to protect our soil, seas and rivers for our children and for the generations to come.
We swear to oppose all forms of national chauvinism, imperialism and racism. We swear to oppose all forms of discrimination on the grounds of gender, ethnic origin, religion, place of birth, age, disability, sexuality or language.
We aim for an independent Scottish Republic in which people may live with dignity and with self respect, free from exploitation, assuming the responsibilities of free women and men.
An independent Scottish republic will negotiate freely and as an equal with governments of other lands.
Our aim is not to erect walls of separation, but to build an outward-looking, Scotland that will extend the hand of friendship to all the peoples of the world.
We vow to continue the struggle for a free, democratic Scottish republic for as long as it may take.
The fight is for freedom.
Sincerely, …………… The Undersigned
ianbrotherhood
Superb! I’ll sign that.
Albert Herring
Oh, no! It’s back again…….
Dal Riata
to North Brit comment on 25/4/13 and Dal Riata
Fee, fi, fo, fum, I smell something fishy ho hum.
a supporter
DMW42 @ 11:31am on 20 Apr in part said:
” Indion, I don’t get through to Dundee that often but will give you a shout, as and when. If you’re ever going to be down Stirling way, let me know and we’ll share a few. ”
OK, but be advised I don’t get to Dundee or Stirling that often (on now back from a flying visit to the former) myself, so we’ll both have to shout early if we are to meet up.
That said, I’m bound to be down your way in 2014 at the latest. After all, Stirling is really where our parliament should be!
Indion
@Indian
Jeez you are the first person that I have heard with the same view as me regarding Stirling. I have even picked the spot. Right where those insurance offices are at the third “crag”. Wi a big windae lookin` out at the Wallace Monument.
The Man in the Jar
indion Sorry ‘ Perth is where our parliament should be ‘ after all it is where our kings & queens were crowned .
Silverytay
@Silvertay
My vote would still be Stirling for practical reasons. Ever tried to park anywhere near Holyrood? Plenty of space around Stirling. That and it is roughly equidistant from Edinburgh, Glasgow and Perth so very easy to upgrade transport links. There again as a central belter I would say that.
The Man in the Jar
I acknowledge Perth’s claim to past fame, but would prefer our personal and plural sovereignty endow our parliament somewhere more central to our being as a whole for principled and practical reasons.
On those grounds, Stirling stands out.
Let’s not confuse capitol with capital as London did and does!
Indion
Actually in a new and vibrant Scotland we should have the new parliament north of Perth so that we don’t make the same mistakes as London .
I accept that we would have to build new infrastructure to cope but we are going to have to rebuild our infrastructure anyway to make up for 300 years of neglect .
Silverytay
@Silvertay
Sorry got to disagree again. Ease of access to the new and vibrant parliament for as many as posible would be my top priority. Hence my argument for Stirling. I hear what you are saying regarding London but I would argue that Edinburgh financial capital, Glasgow industrial capital and Stirling political capital would spread things about.
Anyway lets face it. It ain’t going to happen. Imagine the stooshie after the last fiasco.
The Man in the Jar
Indion, MITJ, Silvertay,
I’m maybe a bit biased as I live in the area (the Ochils) but, if there were to be a choice it would be Stirling for me. Not only for the reasons stated by MITJ and Indion but, it just ‘feels’ right. Difficult for me to explain as its more of a ‘gut’ thing but it’s one of the reasons I moved here from Ayrshire.
DMW42
Well I just received the following text from bitter together.
Hi Alex, what do you think about leaving the UK? Do you agree that we are stronger when we work together? There will be a referendum on Scottish independence. Please tell us your views via http://bettr.to/aCpaol or text UKOK to 64446 [std rates apply]. Text BTSTOP to 64446 to opt out.
two questions how do they know my name, a where did they find my mobile number .
Alex mci
Alex,
Just did a quick google ‘text 64446 complaints’ and came up with this:
http://www.aql.com/sms/shortcode/
Adrian B
Ok Adrian I had a look at that, so if I text them back it will cost them money? I might do that and play at being a unionist. See what pish they send to me.
Alex mci
FAO Vronsky, Braco, Cameron B, Albert Herring -
Hope youse haven’t abandoned this place.
If there’s consensus that the BBC is not fit for purpose and will, post-Yes, be expected to GTF out of Pacific Quay, we’ll have to replace it with something.
Wondering if you’ve already heard of the following, and if so, how it could maybe be combined with the Demarchy idea etc:
https://immi.is/
ianbrotherhood
Adrian B
Second time lucky in posting an image?
Edit – perhaps not – will try later.
Adrian B
Disregard. I’m parking here for 5 mins, just in case.
Indion
@Alex mci
Your URL in the SMS from the Noes leads to a question which anyone can answer for you. Additionally I believe the majority of your full phone number may also be in the URL (the m=….. part). I recommend you ask Stu to remove it.
ScotFree1320
Urghhhh, sorry so many comments i couldn’t read them all amazing and fantastic!!….but I spotted one comment about artists and writers and as I am an artist. Nature is art for sure, and ok I make prints so not likely to paint pretty flowers, though I do really like flowers… however, artists are only worth their salt if they dig a bit deeper, and on all levels, shallow on-the-surface art is just not saying anything to us is it…
iI you look into the eyes and face of Rembrandt in his portrait at the National gallery here in Edinburgh, ( back room ground floor, darkly lit, and usually quiet) he has painted each and everyone of us, most people just do not see that, and they swish by…I find it fascinating, the painting I mean…
Hetty
@Hetty-
You’ve wandered into a strange – largely silent – space.
Rembrandt? There’s a belter of his in the Hunterian Gallery, up at Glasgow Uni, ‘The Entombment‘, a wee toty painting, oil on board. Stunning. Viewed from three, four feet away, you can see every line of the ‘dead’ Christ’s face – shift in, focus as hard as you can, a foot further…turns out it’s just a wiry blob of old paint.
Anyway, here’s a documentary which has just blown my socks off, but doesn’t fit anywhere:
Cheers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmlX3fLQrEc
ianbrotherhood
I saw that Irn-Bru TV advert last night, the one where a staunch, proud Scotman’s daughter walks in with some wideboy ‘Mockney’ English boyfriend, replete with Bulldog named ‘Winston’, wearing a Union Jack coat – which promptly trumps on his (rather excellent I thought) Saltire rug
Classic!
Captain Caveman
Here’s that Rembrandt sketch – don’t know if it’s on permanent display, but the Hunterian’s always worth a visit anyway:
http://www.codart.nl/news/860/
ianbrotherhood