Seil Chat

So, nobody has added anything to this cosy little group of YES campaigners - of which this forum seems to be almost entirely composed of. This is a great pity as it gives a distorted view of the residents hereabouts.
But maybe this is a deliberate attempt by the Yes campaign to so overload the media with support that any poor undecided, or even a dedicated NO adherent, thinks that all the odds are stacked against them, which quite clearly they are not .
It is still very early days in this referendum caper ( that word will be anathema to the dedicated) and I would hope that we are not going to be bombarded by YES rhetoric for the next 9 months.
There was at one time, even those with a short memory will remember, when one, Pentland Pirate spoke out with aplomb, about the advantages of NO, but for some reason which has never been explained, his voice has been silenced.
In the interests of debate, and democracy, it would be a shame if opposing views to this issue were somehow silenced

Just as David Cameron refuses to take on Alex Salmond in open public debate, the folks here have given no public support for the No campaign. I think that this is because there is almost no good reason for opposing a return to normal status, i.e. as neighbouring countries having their own parliaments within the same "kingdom". There really isn't a logical reason for Scotland having its affairs decided by a non-representative and badly performing elite in another country. Is there, Jim?

jimcee wrote:So, nobody has added anything to this cosy little group of YES campaigners - of which this forum seems to be almost entirely composed of. This is a great pity as it gives a distorted view of the residents hereabouts.
But maybe this is a deliberate attempt by the Yes campaign to so overload the media with support that any poor undecided, or even a dedicated NO adherent, thinks that all the odds are stacked against them, which quite clearly they are not .
It is still very early days in this referendum caper ( that word will be anathema to the dedicated) and I would hope that we are not going to be bombarded by YES rhetoric for the next 9 months.
There was at one time, even those with a short memory will remember, when one, Pentland Pirate spoke out with aplomb, about the advantages of NO, but for some reason which has never been explained, his voice has been silenced.
In the interests of debate, and democracy, it would be a shame if opposing views to this issue were somehow silenced

Jim,
I hardly think 3 people posting on Seil Chat counts as overloading the media - indeed I think you will find that much of the (mainstream at least) online media tends more towards the No position. Unfortunately, however, you are indeed going to be bombarded with Yes rhetoric over the next several months. You will also, of course, be bombarded with No rhetoric. Like it of not, this is an important matter for Scotland and we are faced with many months of vociferous campaigning on both sides. I sincerely hope we see both sides fairly represented here, and that both sides respect the rights of the other to hold contrary views. Your job as a voter is to form your own opinion based on what you learn. My job, btw, as moderator of this forum is to try and ensure that everyone plays by the rules, and that nobody who follows the rules is silenced, and trust me I will do my best.
My major concern is that my views are not represented. I am firmly in the undecided camp, and who speaks for the Don't Knows? Where is the Maybe campaign?

I shall get extremely frustrated with this website, if my replies finish up in cyberspace.
I spent over an hour this afternoon replying to the two responders to my previous posting, taking a deliberate attempt to keep my response within the parameters allowed for acceptance, which took some considerable time, only to find that when I hit the SUBMIT button, all disappeared into cyberspace and was completely lost. In the hope that the same result willl not befall a further attempt to reply to these two postings, I shall send this out as 3 seperate postings, in the hope that they will not be excluded for one reason or another.
Here goes - I will now click the submit button in the hope that it works.

jimcee wrote:I shall get extremely frustrated with this website, if my replies finish up in cyberspace.

It is more likely to be something on your computer causing this rather than anything on the website.

If you are experiencing problems of this sort then take a copy of your post at regular intervals so you can paste it back in if it suddenly vanishes.

I presume you are familiar with ctrl-C for copy and ctrl-V for paste?

Please refer to my posting above - you will note that I tried to send this in 3 seperate entities to get round the fact that an earlier attempt which included the whole caboodle had disappeared as soon as I hit the submit button.
So I carefully crafted a reply to Mona Lot taking my time to get a coherent and, I hoped, responsible reply to the points raised in her postings.
However, I found that on pressing the submit button that instead of finding my attempt appearing on the website, I got Nick B's suggestion that I should brush up on crtv or something similar, and found that my own submission had disappeared yet again.
So Mona Lot, if you are out there somewhere, I have tried to reply to your points, but for some reason have been unsuccessful, and Herby Dice - I have tried once with the same result.
Whether this is a problem with the amount of time one is allowed to compose a posting or whether it is an attempt to censor input I know not, but to a one finger typist it is frustrating to say the least

jimcee wrote: . . . whether it is an attempt to censor input I know not

Jim, you are beginning to sound paranoid.

This (comments going missing, not paranoia) is a common problem when posting comments on websites. It tends to come and go. Usually no specific cause is found. All I can say is that the forum is working OK for me using IE10 and Windows 7. Your mileage may vary.

The answer is in my post above - copy what you have written to the clipboard on your computer BEFORE hitting the 'submit' button. That way, if your carefully crafted post disappears you only have to paste it using ctrl-v into a new reply - and of course you can do this as many times as it takes to beat the gremlin into submission.

Anyway - Bliadhna Mhath Ùr Jim.

One can surely be allowed tendencies to paranoia when after an hour on the keyboard all one's efforts disappear into cyberspace and all that is left with is a blank screen.
Anyway - another day - another attempt to keep this thread alive and kicking.

Mona Lot - Your supposition that D.Cameron is chickening out of a confrontation with A. Salmond because he does not have a leg to stand on, seems to suggest that we should all decide the outcome of this forthcoming referendum on the basis of a confrontation on a television channel between two politicians (dirty word) who happen to be the principal spokesmen at this point in time and in your opinion A. Salmond would win , hands down.
This is a regrettable result of trying to follow the doubtable policies of our US cousins in making a media extraveganza out of a contentious issue - I well remember the aftermath of the last US debacle where the media were more concerned, about which contestant had been the winner, than in the future direction of their country.
So maybe, we are stuck with the outpourings from our prime/first ministers, and their cohorts, and their persuasion, in this battle for our vote.
Hopefully, I am not going to run out of time here and hopefully I will not appear in court for slander, but, and this is a personal view, D.Cameron is an eletist party hack, A Salmond has a sense of humour, but has gone all smarmy since he piled on the pounds, and his sidekick Nicola is a terrier of the first order. Personally, and I stand to be corrected here, The only politicians whom I regard with any great respect are Vince Cable, and John Swinney.
Well, there you are, that is just one point out of Mona Lot's submission which I will try to put into SAVE and if successful you will all have the doubtful pleasure of reading these meanderings

Well said, Jim. Sorry you had trouble replying. I agree with much of your assessment, though I don't see what Salmond's (decreasing!) weight has to do with anything much and my point about Cameron was the lack of him having much of 'a leg to stand on', plus the fact that he's an 'elitist hack' and really can't think on his feet. I agree about the stupidity of thinking that the referendum is about personalities rather than about whether Scotland should have a democratic government in Edinburgh. Scotland will remain in the United Kingdom but will simply return to the normal national state of having its own government/parliament. Not such a big deal and one day we'll some day wonder about how anyone could ever have thought otherwise.

Happy New Year! Now we're all in it together, but perhaps only temporarily in my case before I am banned and my ISP blocked permanently, etc, etc, without any justification under the forum rules and cut off from any recourse to the moderator Herby Dice....etc, etc

Never mind, I can take it, and what happened is history and I don't bear grudges. But having been forced to watch from the sidelines has been interesting. I note the independence question has never been far below the surface, the "Independence Forum" totally unused in a little corner of Seil Chat that does not often see the day of light. Scottish Independence is a topic people want to talk about and they want to talk about it out in the open. Alex Salmond actively encourages it. He also wants a fairer, more equal society and in the interests of fairness, and balanced discussion, I would like to be included in Seil Chat again.

Jimcee and I have been far from agreed on everything in the past, but I do see there is a weight of opinion against him on SeilChat. Whenever the weight of opinion goes too much in one direction it does deter some from joining in on the minority side of the argument. It's important SeilChat maintains a balance to prevent a decline in participation. Will you have me back?

Well, there's some common ground there from one of the YES persuasion. At least I was not shot down in flames for my character assassinations.
I am glad to hear that Mr. Salmond is doing something about his girth. although it is not immediately evident in his public appearances. It is one of these things about politicians (speaking personally) that the fatter they are the less credible they are, and it is one thing that I admired about him, and J. Swinney that they never lost their cool and had a touch of humour in their utterances. It is a great pity that his deputy does not share these traits.
Again, a personal viewpoint, I lose all respect for anyone who cannot listen to opposing points in a debate, without interrupting and continuing to speak on top of the original speaker, in the hope that they will drown them out, and hold the fort. In a case such as this it earns them no brownie points and even to the listener it is a lot of gabble without either side being clearly heard. Ms Sturgeon is not the only one guilty of this lack of courtesy unfortunately - she is part of a large band of politicians who practice this unfortunate tendency.
It looks as though I might get this on to the website without a wipe out, so maybe I will get a chance to comment on some of the other utterances anon.

.
Hmmmmm . . .

It seems that Herby must have approved PP's request for re-admission.

I won't argue with his decision, but I will say that any arguing with the decisions made by either myself or Herby regarding the running of this forum will be treated as a breach of the rules, in which case the Pirate's return will be short-lived.

And my first decision is to split this 'Happy New Year' thread and put most of it in the Independence forum where it belongs.

Poor first decision, Nick. Seil Chat is dwindling as it is, without you hiding active threads away. Poor Jimcee, spent hours typing and then losing his work into the ether, then you come along and hide his repeated text in a different and obscure sub-forum. Are you trying to discourage Jim and others who may not be computer whizkids? And, as for the return of PP, much though I've disagreed with him in the past, he should definitely be allowed back. He is a great proponent of the emotive illogical No argument. We need a laugh. No, seriously, he's a main man and we need his stimulation. Come back, Longshanks too!

MonaLott wrote:Poor first decision, Nick.

Mona, which part of

any arguing with the decisions made by either myself or Herby regarding the running of this forum will be treated as a breach of the rules

do you not understand?

It is unlikely that Seil Chat will be around much longer.

C'mon Nick, it's not that serious. And I wasn't arguing, just commenting. Isn't that what Seil Chat is for? Can't anyone disagree with you without upsetting you? And this thread all started with Happy New Year...........................January blues came soon................we appreciate your efforts in runnng this site. Please stay positive.

MonaLott wrote:C'mon Nick, it's not that serious. And I wasn't arguing, just commenting. Isn't that what Seil Chat is for? Can't anyone disagree with you without upsetting you? And this thread all started with Happy New Year...........................January blues came soon................we appreciate your efforts in runnng this site. Please stay positive.

OK, I'll try.

And to tell you the truth you were probably right this time, I should just have left the thread but asked people to make sure that future discussions on independence took place in this forum.

There is a reason for keeping the independence debate in its own forum, a reason that Jim has been keen to point out. People don't want to see this purely as a political forum, and not everyone wants to discuss politics. I want to see a variety of interesting local topics in the main forum, like the feral goats thread we had at the back end of last year.

EDIT - I've moved the independence forum nearer the top as you seemed to thing it was a bit obscure. I'll maybe start a couple of threads to see if anyone responds.

Well, I was going to come up with some of the issues raised above, but Mona Lot has succeeded admirably in getting some reasonableness into the whole affair.
Two points - The very first posting By Elaine Rodger, after a heading in Gaelic which not many people would understand, stated "Well, here's to being a nation again". Now I may be reading between the lines, but I would suggest that this was a reference to Independance and was a categoric expression of approval for the idea. So i felt that I could post a reply on that theme. However, for some peculiar reason this was to be considered "off Topic" and the whole caboodle was shuffled down to the bottom of the Leader board. Evidently it has been promoted back up nearer the top. which is only fair if this is the "most momentous decision in our lifetime" (not my phrase).
Secondly, It does seem a trifle authoritarian if either or both Administrator or Moderator can summarily confine anyone to outer darkness, without giving either the miscreant or the other contributors, a reason for the decision. I hope that this opinion will not be construed as a misdemeanour and find myself excommunicated.
Finally, as this independance debate will, no doubt, continue for a good part of this year, surely a debate, by it's very nature, is a discussion between opposing points of view, and if only one side is voiced then it becomes purely propoganda. I have no strong views either way, but have merely entered into the fray to see a bit of balance restored.

Fair points, Jim. Unfortunately, this debate was then further sidetracked and splintered by Longshanks starting 3 separate new threads on the very same topic. This was, in my humble opinion, totally unnecessary and unhelpful. Can't we keep the discussion to a single continuous thread? At least some NO arguments are now being heard. But to me they are unconvincing. A YES partnership of equal nations united within the same Kingdom and currency but with separate parliaments reflecting their different priorities and ambitions is surely an attractive and grown-up proposition? Not a huge big deal, not 'separatism', not 'splitting up the UK', just a return to the normal arrangement for neighbouring countries with different histories, needs and outlooks.

MonaLott wrote:Unfortunately, this debate was then further sidetracked and splintered by Longshanks starting 3 separate new threads on the very same topic.

A bit rich Mona.

Separatists continually greet that the unity side never put up the positive case for the UK. Now I start to do it in a series of threads illustrating why it is in our best interests to remain in the United Kingdom you object !

Worried that a few people here might have their eyes opened to the truth now after months of SNP scaremongering about and vilification of the most successful political, economic and social union the world has ever seen are you ?