Tell you what,longshanks wrote:
You need to withdraw and apologise for that nasty slur.
I'll apologise for accusing you of running the country down when you admit that Scotland does have more than its fair share of world class universities.
Moderator: Herby Dice
Tell you what,longshanks wrote:
You need to withdraw and apologise for that nasty slur.
What has that got to do with your personally insulting:NickB wrote: Tell you what,
I'll apologise for accusing you of running the country down when you admit that Scotland does have more than its fair share of world class universities.
I have never said anything about "fair share" or percapita figures. Why on earth have you brought that up in relation to my criticism of the YesScotland statement which is spinning ABSOLUTE numbers ?A second example in the Guarantees For The Future section is the comforting prase:
"...and some of the world's best universities"
A simple google for "100 best universties world" reveals the definitive list showing we have only one in the top 100, Edinburgh in 46th place.
I now worry that this leaflet is not giving us facts but unsubstantiated spin.
But we DO have some of the world's best universities. It was entirely your choice to pick the 'top 100' figure and use it to accuse the YES campaign of spin. Seems to me you are more spinning than spun against.longshanks wrote:
You threw a deeply insulting slur at me by implying I am determined to run down my country.
You need to withdraw it and apologise.
I am emphatically Not determined to run my country down.NickB wrote: Why so determined to run the country down, Longshanks?
Reverse ad hominem. Slightly different tactic, Longshanks, I suppose, but diversionary nonetheless.longshanks wrote:I am emphatically Not determined to run my country down.NickB wrote: Why so determined to run the country down, Longshanks?
What you have said is deeply insulting.
You clearly won't apologise in the place you posted this nasty slur.
So be it.
Well Jim, my avatar is intended to be humourous believe it or not, but if I have to explain the joke then it has patently failed. Oh well . . . I think I will just keep it anywayjimcee wrote:The thing that comes across in all these acrimonious exchanges, is a complete lack of humour in the participants . . . as an aside - why does Nick B have an avitar that looks like a South American terrorist? (or freedom fighter - depending on which side you are on ) - is this supposed to inspire confidence in his pronouncements?
. Yes, may be, if it was just the Scot's population that used them.Having a higher percentage of quality university places available to the population is a very valid quality indicator
There have never been so many English Universities before and as a result there have never been so many English students at university before. That's not a measure of the country's university quality (In fact I would suggest I might suggest there are far too many young people at university and they might have done better to go and get jobs instead).Since the reality is that there have never been so many Scots students in Scottish universities
This is getting a tad repetitive.MonaLott wrote: Nick was correct to defend them and you and Longshanks unfairly talked them down.
Pentlandpirate wrote: But that (as far as I understand it) is not the issue Longshanks is making. He is not running down Scotland. It sounds like he is a man of integrity and intelligence, who has made it clear he supports Independence for Scotland on numerous occasions, but if the reason for creating an independent Scotland is to create a fairer, more equal, open and honest society, be disapproves of those who make those qualities central to their arguments yet at the same time use spin (which is never the whole truth) to try to persuade supporters to their cause.
Pentlandpirate wrote:And many of the 'facts' supplied by all sides are simply not totally true. It's not always easy to recognise when someone is 'spinning', but the promoter of those statements always does it in the knowledge it is deceiptful. And that is what Longshanks is drawing attention to. Because he sounds like he really does want a fairer, more equal, more honest society, and is concerned that based on this evidence, the Yes Campaigners are no better than the rest.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests