Seil Chat

.
Richard Wesley has apparenlty chosen to attack this forum publicly via the Oban Times this week. The headline is ludicrously sensational:
'Windfarm protest groups boycott meetings following anonymous threats'.
- although Wesley says in the article " . . . it was rather more intimidation than threats".

As far as I can see the worst 'threat' that was made on here was that one poster 'threatened' to go along to the meeting and ask one of the speakers some questions about wind power.

Wesley is quoted in the article as saying: "Two local websites are acting as a forum for 'nasty comments'" and this has "split the island of Seil". While Seil Chat is not mentioned by name I think we can safely assume that the two websites in question are Seil Chat and For Argyll.

Mr. Wesley seems to be on a one man crusade to damage this forum or shut it down. I have received an intimidating e-mail from him saying I was lucky he had not 'doorstepped' me - whatever that is - and threatening to go to his solicitors (kept on file). He has posted both under his own name and under a pseudonym on here attacking the site, he has attacked it in public on ForArgyll and now he is the apparently the instigator of a frankly incredible headline in the local paper. He has also tried to get the Community Council to 'do something' about this site on more than one occasion - something which is of course not in their power.

If you want to support freedom of speech on Seil then I suggest you write to the Oban Times. E-mail contributions are accepted - send them to editor@obantimes.co.uk .

If you choose to comment on here please keep it non-libellous - and of course non-threatening. Making threats via an internet forum is a criminal offence, which is why I am so astounded that the Oban Times should have chosen this particular headline. It seems to me that they have strayed onto dangerous territory with their choice of words.

The moderator and I will be watching this thread closely for obvious reasons.

Oh dear.

Seems a shame that he feels and has acted that way. I only vaguely recall him taking part briefly in a thread and being what seemed to me unsuited to exchanging ideas on a normal internet forum in a calm, respectful and pleasant manner. Pity. And the whole Oban Times headline and story indeed seem to be a travesty. Poor show all round.

Haven't read the OT yet. If this is one of the forums (fora?) implicated it's a pity they didn't ask you for your own point of view before printing what they have. Hope you've been in contact with them by now?

smallpaws wrote:Haven't read the OT yet. If this is one of the forums (fora?) implicated it's a pity they didn't ask you for your own point of view before printing what they have. Hope you've been in contact with them by now?

The Oban Times obtaining a balanced view before rushing to print? You must be confusing them with some other newspaper

I've not been in contact yet - a bit late after the paper is on sale. I'll send a letter for consideration for inclusion next week, but it would be good if others did as well. It's everybody's site, not mine.

Despite being famous for my fantastic deeds, I feel there's a strong argument for letting all this pass. Why flatter the unreasonable nonsense written in the OT by honouring it with a reasoned reply, thereby just perpetuating the acrimony and bad feeling? The truth is that this is a non-story, imagined by a few and exaggerated and published unprofessionally. They're not worth the effort, in my view.

spiderman wrote: They're not worth the effort, in my view.

Yes, I guess you are right. A sad indictment of our local paper though.

Tell me about it!! The Oban Times seemed keen to promote the views and antics of Eilean Eisdeal in a positive way, often without contacting those with a different view. However responding letters were published to set the record straight. It is indeed very frustrating. We found the Press and Journal to have a more balanced approach.

Since Louise Glenn-Lee changed role perhaps it is obvious why the OT were pro Eilean Eisdeal?

If he is a doorsteper, I would be worried.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... Doorsteper

I Have`not seen article but i'm not surprised.

Yes it doesn't reflect well on OT, sensationalising a 'non-story' as others have already said. It's just a reminder of the dangers of the written word, where it is very difficult to ensure the intended tone of the writer is understood by the reader. It is a downside to any 'forum' such as this, where misunderstandings are often made because of this. A bit of non-violent door-stepping, face to face, where someone can hear a tone of voice and see a facial expression is a much better way of putting a message across if geography and timing allow. But an internet forum is like a gun. You can't un-invent it, so it is just a matter of making sure it is used properly. If that includes naming and shaming individuals who have been witnessed to drop litter, so be it, but writers make libellous statements at their own risk, as in any other means of communication. Personally I hope some individuals, and papers, will reflect on this and realise they probably over-reacted. If we value a balanced world, with free speech, a website like this must be respected, helping to ensure everyone has an opportunity to give their opinion, whatever it may be.