Wings Over Scotland

[DexterTCN]

em no...I was only pointing out that danny thought they were relevant...pointing out that he's promoting rise and telling people not to vote for sheridan.

I'm not voting or promoting either of them, nor putting either of them down.

I'm saying they're irrelevant.

Then I posted the wings thread about the nurse that danny started this thread about.

But...meltdown, fool, binary, faeces....carry on.

 

[DexterTCN]

Is everything OK, Dexter?

Yes, thanks.

 

[DexterTCN]

It's like watching an angry toddler throw faeces at their long-suffering parent, then smear it all over their own face. Incredible stuff.

Because Colin Fox (SSP) is involved with RISE and Dexter likes Tommy Sheridan. Mortal enemies innit.

Ah, OK got it. Thanks weepiper

All down to his love of Sheridan. Christ, I think even Sass might have more thought out politics than this fool.

Just to let you three know...your lack of apology when you're wrong paints a picture of you.

Now...I don't care about any of you one way or the other...I've no antipathy to your offence or offensiveness. Just letting you know I noticed. As most would.

 

[killer b]

What?

 

[DexterTCN]

What?

Do you have anything at all to say in the context of the thread?

Read any of the links to wings, kb? Anything to say about the fundraiser for the English girl? Did you read the thread on the nurse?

What are you doing here? Your only posts seem to be to incite argument. Do you have anything at all to contribute?

 

[butchersapron]

'the english girl'

 

[killer b]

What are you expecting me to apologise for? Where am I 'wrong'? I don't get it.

As with most people who post on urban, my engagement with threads is pretty variable - it depends on my mood, who else is posting in the thread, how much I care about the topic, allsorts of things. ATM my main interest in this particular thread is observing your laughable attack on Danny, and his plating up of your arse. I make no apology for that.

 

[DexterTCN]

meh that's cool, we've all been here a long time and have our own prejudices/likes/dislikes

Look into it though, if you get some spare time.

 

[DexterTCN]

The yearly fundraiser is on...if anyone has some spare change

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-great-leap-forward#/

 

[DexterTCN]

Ok...so let's recap what's happening with wings and the expanded universe of what's happening up here. (Because it's a bigger thing...I said that)

Last year wings did a crowdfunding and got over £100k. This year it asked for £40k and got it in less than a day I think...currently just over £60k. Still 3 weeks to go, I'd say probably 65-70 in total. People gave money after the asking amount was reached, 50% so far. People gave after the amount was reached.

People put £200k towards the carmichael cause to hold the lying unionist prick to account. Not worthy of a thread in the Scotland forum or even a mention. Never happened in the rest of the uk though, did it.

People...on a suggestion from wings...put £15k towards helping the english girl pay for her court costs (the rest to scottish food-banks was the agreement) for the insane tory rule that the poor should now pay for court proceedings. And why is she 'the english girl'? Because she's not related to the movement, her name isn't for use, it was charity, her name is her own business. You don't buy people, you have no right over them just because you put your hands in your pocket to help whatever your reason. That never happened in the rest of the uk either. I didn't notice any other crowdfunders for her or others in her position. Feel free to point out if you contributed to help her. butchers especially...butchers should really point out that he put his hand in his pocket.

And there's still no discussion on urban about it. Last year wings was the joint most popular news site in scotland along with the bbc, now it's the second most visited blog in the uk.

And the discussion here is basically the daily mail or sun level of shite.

And it's on the net...everyone can see what you say.

 

[danny la rouge]

People put £200k towards the carmichael cause to hold the lying unionist prick to account. Not worthy of a thread in the Scotland forum or even a mention. Never happened in the rest of the uk though, did it.

Yes, people did donate to that. Including me, and including other urbanites. In fact it was discussed on at least three other threads. I posted the fundraiser link several times myself. The threads were, if I recall correctly, Why the Lib Dems Are Shit, People In The Pub Favour Sturgeon, and (for the Michael White angle) the Guardian is Going Down the Pan.

But then you already knew that.

Here's a thing, though: you're a member here; if you thought it deserved a thread in a specific forum, you could have started one.

 

[weepiper]

Yes, people did donate to that. Including me, and including other urbanites. .

me too. Not because it had anything to do with Wings though, afaik it was started by four of his constituents and I first heard about it on Twitter and not via anybody retweeting Wings because I've got him blocked.

 

[danny la rouge]

me too. Not because it had anything to do with Wings though, afaik it was started by four of his constituents and I first heard about it on Twitter and not via anybody retweeting Wings because I've got him blocked.

I think I first heard of the fundraiser through either the Orkney Vole (one of the constituents) or Lallans Peat Worrier (both of whom I follow on Twitter). It was also in the National and various other places.

 

[danny la rouge]

me too. Not because it had anything to do with Wings though, afaik it was started by four of his constituents and I first heard about it on Twitter and not via anybody retweeting Wings because I've got him blocked.

Here's your link to the Fundraiser: Why the lib-dems are shit

Here's one of my posts linking to the fundraiser: Why the lib-dems are shit

Here's my post linking to the feed that was available of the hearing: Why the lib-dems are shit

There are many more such posts, and plenty of discussion. All of it supporting the petitioners.

 

[Celyn]

I think I first heard of the fundraiser through either the Orkney Vole (one of the constituents) or Lallans Peat Worrier (both of whom I follow on Twitter). It was also in the National and various other places.

I got a nice mug from the Orkney people, and as soon as I took it out of its packaging, I dropped it and broke it. Oh well.

 

[Celyn]

DexterTCN , Actually, regarding the young woman with the court costs, IIRC someone on here on Urban actually started a fundraiser for her, and then, hearing of the Wings one, sent the money to the Wings one.

In general, though, I don't quite understand the apparent hatred of Wings on Urban, but I can hardly expect everyone to agree with me about everything, so that's no big deal.

Edited to add: It was J Ed who started a fundraiser here for her. Hungry Kidderminster woman stole Mars bars after benefit sanctions left her with no money for food

 

[DexterTCN]

DexterTCN , Actually, regarding the young woman with the court costs, IIRC someone one here on Urban actually started a fundraiser for her, and then, hearing of the Wings one, sent the money to the Wings one.

In general, though, I don't quite understand the apparent hatred of Wings on Urban, but I can hardly expect everyone to agree with me about everything, so that's no big deal.

You're correct, I'd forgotten about that (and kudos to them). Sorry about your mug.

 

[Celyn]

Poor mug. But I can try to glue it some time. Anyway, acquiring a coffee mug wasn't exactly the reason for sending them money, obviously. I also have a wee vole from them, which I have not managed to break, it being fabric stuffed toy sort of thing. Bugger! I shouldn't have said/typed that out loud - no doubt soon I'll find a way to break the poor vole. Hubris.

 

[danny la rouge]

In general, though, I don't quite understand the apparent hatred of Wings on Urban, but I can hardly expect everyone to agree with me about everything, so that's no big deal.

Well, those of us who have outlined our disagreements with him have been quite clear, I think.

I disagree with the transphobic tirade of his that I linked to. I disagree with the way he homes in on individuals on leaflets (as explained in my OP): who cares if the woman in question is a nurse and an actor? Why shouldn't nurses publicly support political parties, even ones we disagree with? (And that question stands whoever the person in question was - when he questioned the political involvement of nurses [see his tweet in OP] he damaged working class self-expression, so I'm very much against that). I also strongly disagree with his Hillsborough article, not least because I think he has fundamentally misunderstood some basic social physchology there, but also because of the way he expressed his views in that article: it was crass, insensitive and unnecessarily confrontational. So I have quite major disagreements with his attitudes, his tone and style, and his tactics. And to be fair to him, he'd say I was entitled to disagree with him (though he'd disagree that his semantic tirade on gender pronouns was transphobic. But then so would Germaine Greer). But he is one person, writing one blog; he is not a movement. Blind loyalty to him (or to anyone else for that matter) is not required.

Furthermore, and this is not particularly aimed at Stuart Campbell but at the wider "45", I strongly dislike the tendency to close down any questioning of the SNP, whether that is to question failings of individuals (even individuals suspended by the party), or policies. It's a disturbing trend.

 

[Celyn]

I can reply to this later, but not right now. Sorry.

 

[killer b]

I'm not sure anyone on this thread has denied that Wing Over Scotland is a popular website, has supported some worthy causes or is able to raise substantial sums of money, DexterTCN. Mainly because none of those things have any bearing on the criticisms or reservations that are being expressed.

 

[danny la rouge]

I'm not sure anyone on this thread has denied that Wing Over Scotland is a popular website, has supported some worthy causes or is able to raise substantial sums of money, DexterTCN. Mainly because none of those things have any bearing on the criticisms or reservations that are being expressed.

Precisely.

 

[flyingcolumn]

People are donating cash in the hundreds of thousands to someone who runs a glorified blog and Twitter account. Idiots.

I notice Wings has that very uniquely Scottish anti-Irish sentiment also.

 

[danny la rouge]

People are donating cash in the hundreds of thousands to someone who runs a glorified blog and Twitter account. Idiots.

I notice Wings has that very uniquely Scottish anti-Irish sentiment also.

They can donate to whatever they like. Lots of ventures are "crowd funded" these days.

However on the substantive point, can you help us with two questions: Can you define for us, please, this "very uniquely Scottish anti-Irish sentiment" in general? And can you point to any instances of Wings displaying it? (I can't say I've noticed, but then I'm not an avid reader).

 

[DexterTCN]

I'm not sure anyone on this thread has denied that Wing Over Scotland is a popular website, has supported some worthy causes or is able to raise substantial sums of money, DexterTCN. Mainly because none of those things have any bearing on the criticisms or reservations that are being expressed.

There's not much reserved criticism that I've seen. And the thread is called wings over scotland...not stuart campbell so it has a direct bearing because it's a search result.

The site does not support worthy causes...its supporters do, the site suggests them...but one main one. Scottish independence.

That is the purpose of wings. Scottish independence. It's the purpose of many sites now but wings is the best. I'm sure danny la rouge could post a graph or some stats...if he were of a mind to.

If someone came to urban to look for points of view, variety, discussion they'd see this....base, tabloid shit.

danny said "I strongly dislike the tendency to close down any questioning of the SNP" but isn't that what this thread is? kool-aid, cult, domestic violence, blind loyalty, hillsborough, CUNT?

This isn't questioning, is it? Is it discussion? No....you know what it is...you just appear to like it. (up here...people would wonder if you were a yoon)

danny is deliberately equating his opinion of campbell with wings and its 'followers' with the snp with supporters of independence in his egregious OP and further posts.

I've replied to all of it and supplied links. Read, don't read it doesn't matter.

We're changing things. State and media control is being broken up here.

So by all means argue about Wings Over Scotland...but put some meat on the bones...post a thread from the site, dissect it, criticize it, consider it and chew it over. Cross-reference, indulge.

Start with the one about the nurse.

Toys found some distance from pram

3. Absolutely nobody objected to the expression of opinions. They pointed out, quite correctly, that public-sector employees are not supposed to appear in uniform on political literature, because it implies that the organisation supports a particular party. Forth Valley Royal Hospital confirmed the rule in an official statement.

 

[killer b]

what is a 'yoon'?

 

[danny la rouge]

danny is deliberately equating his opinion of campbell with wings and its 'followers' with the snp with supporters of independence in his egregious OP and further posts.

This is why I said that your world view was binary (and yes, that's an ad hominem, but not all ad hominem arguments are fallacious). I campaigned for a Yes vote, I voted Yes, I still support independence. I even voted SNP in May, you plum.

Start with the one about the nurse.

Toys found some distance from pram

My problem is in his taking up this point at all: "public-sector employees are not supposed to appear in uniform on political literature, because it implies that the organisation supports a particular party.". This makes him, to put it bluntly, a grass. Using these sorts of petty points against nurses or any other worker is just handing legitimacy to anti-trade union regulations. I'm not interested in whether it says it in policy and procedure not. Giving even a millimetre of legitimacy to that shit will mean it being used against you at some point, and you'll have been complicit in allowing it. What if you forget to take your badge off before going into a trade union meeting and your photo ends up in the public domain? Is it OK if I zoom in on your badge and tell your employers? Post it on Twitter? No, of course it isn't. That shit is crossing the line. If you can't see that, then you really do have a problem.

But then me saying this stuff makes me a "yoon", doesn't it? Because anyone who disagrees is a yoon.

 

[danny la rouge]

what is a 'yoon'?

Recent coinage I've started seening on Twitter. I assume it's a contraction of "Unionist", designed as an answer to "nat", the derogatory epithet used against pro-independence folks. Not sure where it originated.

 

[killer b]

My problem is in his taking up this point at all: "public-sector employees are not supposed to appear in uniform on political literature, because it implies that the organisation supports a particular party.". This makes him, to put it bluntly, a grass. Using these sorts of petty points against nurses or any other worker is just handing legitimacy to anti-trade union regulations. I'm not interested in whether it says it in policy and procedure not. Giving even a millimetre of legitimacy to that shit will mean it being used against you at some point, and you'll have been complicit in allowing it. What if you forget to take your badge off before going into a trade union meeting and your photo ends up in the public domain? Is it OK if I zoom in on your badge and tell your employers? Post it on Twitter? No, of course it isn't. That shit is crossing the line. If you can't see that, then you really do have a problem.

Yeah, it's scab behaviour. That rule enforced could be used to punish striking workers attending a picket line in uniform, should they choose. Odd that dexter would choose that particular argument as some kind of killer blow when you explicitly deal with it on the very first post in the thread - it's the reason why you posted the thread in the first place. It's almost as if he hasn't read your posts.

 

[killer b]

Hey dexter, you should comb through this photo and report them all to their NHS trusts. Can't have people in uniform expressing a political view, nope.