Undemocratic Independance Debate on Seil

[jimcee]

While there are a couple of protagonists going at it, hammer and tongs, with contradictory statistics being bandied about like gospel, I would like to draw attention to the nailed item at the head of the leader board.
This has been installed there by our administrator and will probably remain in situ until our votes are cast.
Now this seems to me to be totally undemocratic and is clearly a case of power being used to forward a view without any option for dissention.
It would be a welcome return to fair play if our administrator were to nail a contrary view to the same hallowed spot.
I realise that these remarks may not find favour in certain quarters, but if they get past the censor and appear in print, I hope that it might open up this debate to a more level playing field.

[NickB]

. . . this seems to me to be totally undemocratic and is clearly a case of power being used to forward a view without any option for dissention.
It would be a welcome return to fair play . . .

This is not a democracy or a level playing field. My field, my ball, my bat, my rules.

No-one is under any obligation to participate, and anyone is free to go start their own forum.

'Stickies' are one of a forum operator's perks. Topics can be stickied for whatever reason the admin sees fit.

In this case I regard the videos in the 'stickied' post as essential viewing to counteract the (recently officially confirmed) bias in the mainstream media.

That post will stay where it is unless I decide to put something else in its place.

[jimcee]

Well, at least we know where we stand
It is apparent then, that this subject is Admin's private soap box - calling the shots and making the rules whenever it suits.
Two points to ponder -
A perusal of the replies to all the different entries in this subject will show that Admin is almost always the final entry. This would suggest that he thinks that by having the last word on the subject it carries more weight or conviction - this is manifestly not true.
Secondly, the considerable personal mud slinging that takes place in some of the other postings, (although it might make interesting reading purely from it's controversial nature), actually is detrimental to both the cause and the perpetrators.
It is also interesting to note that the other members sporting the YES logo, are keeping a low profile - is this because they think that Admin is doing a great job, or are they keeping their heads down in the hope that he will not do too much damage.
The expectation now is that Admin will come in with the final definitive reply.

[Innes Newton]

My field, my ball, my bat, my rules.

It's not much of a game if no one's prepared to join in. And I thought SeilChat was offered as a COMMUNITY website

[NickB]

I thought SeilChat was offered as a COMMUNITY website

It was.

A shame that people like you who don't live here decided to make it their mission to ruin it.

Now, why don't you just keep quiet for a while, before I get confused and accidentally delete your account.

[NickB]

It is apparent then, that this subject is Admin's private soap box

Aye, in the same way perhaps that the Telegraph (to take but one example) is the private soap box of the reclusive multi-millionaire Barclay Brothers, who run it from their private fiefdom on Brecqhou and use it to push their own particular distorted view of the debate?

Newspapers push the editorial line their proprietors want to be pushed. The mainstream media - including, disgracefully and illegally, our television channels, are demonstrably biased. It is an alarming truth that the whole referendum could hinge on the way Murdoch and the Sun eventually jump.

Only the online media can counter this situation. Until at least the BBC and STV are held to account and the playing field levelled Seil Chat will remain unashamedly biased towards a YES vote. This may include the use of 'stickies' as well as advertising or posters embedded in the site or links to pro-YES websites.

If you would prefer to engage in debate on an anti-independence website then you could look at ForArgyll, where the proprietor's politics may be more to your liking.

[jimcee]

So where can we get a true picture of the PRO's and CON's of this situation.
Both sides have their axe to grind, and will make use of any ammunition at their disposal to sway the argument.
The CON's will indulge in scaremongering (according to the PRO's) , and the PRO's will counter that "It will be all right on the night -just trust us".
The PRO's will make forecasts of a rosy future if they get their mandate and the CON's will counter this with doubts about the ability to live up to the utopian dream.
Thus we are bombarded with daily rhetoric on the subject from both sides of the equation, and for some peculiar reason, which has never been explained, this whole debate was given a 2+ year life to run, to make it a bonanza for the media (including this Forum) but what is fast becoming a "switch off" for those not directly involved.
It's almost enough to take up Coronation St, East Enders, or all the other mindless soaps to get some relief from the ear bashing.

[NickB]

So where can we get a true picture of the PRO's and CON's of this situation.

As with any major decision, sift the evidence for yourself with no preconceptions and make up your own mind.

Unless you are one of those people who likes being told what to think.