to start a new Scottish Indyref thread?

[FannyFifer]

Round 2 folks, ding ding!

A Yes campaign team set up a stall today along from my DSs high school. I'm a bit about that (even though I'm a No, I would feel the same either way btw). Obv they are not allowed in school grounds so this seems a bit underhand, I don't like the idea of anyone approaching the kids in the street but handing out balloons and badges to the older looking teenagers smacked of flyness.

I've heard of people saying they're going to photograph their completed ballot paper, but don't understand what good that will do.

I suppose if there was a freak result one way or another it might be evidence. I have no idea if there are rules against taking photos in polling stations.

I have to say I am concerned at the suggestion that Wings over Scotland will be at the count. I see no reason for anyone apart from members of the official Better Together opposition and the Government team to be there.

I suppose the Orange Order and Wings might cancel each other out-they are equally vile.

irnbruthenoo no not for nostalgia purposes! though many, including me, will do that. There's a campaign my DH was telling me about with people being encouraged to photograph their ballot papers as some sort of evidence. I just don't understand how that would work.

I think all bodies that have registered as Campaigners (which you legally had to do if you were going to spend iirc >£15k) have a right to have observers at the count.

Sorry. Rogue exclamation mark.

so this seems a bit underhand, I don't like the idea of anyone approaching the kids in the street but handing out balloons and badges to the older looking teenagers smacked of flyness.

Why be surprised? Eck and Nicola told bare faced lies about their "legal opinion" on EU membership.

I'm sure I read a warning about taking selfies with your vote at the EU election, although not sure how they will stop that especially if polling stations are busy.

I seem to remember from counts that observers have very strict limits about what they can do, how close they can get to the ballot papers etc. I wonder if it will be the main campaigns that get consulted on the potential spoiled papers, or if all groups will get to.

They are extremely biased and aggressive organisation. They are not a political party why should they be allowed anywhere near the count?

Eh? They is actually "he" the bloke who runs the blog. Its the same paranoia that suggests that any one who is pro-yes and accesses the internet is part of some shadowy secret centrally organised "cyber-nat" organisation.

As for Yes outside a school - young people have historically been some of the least active politically. I think it is good that someone was there making sure they were signed up to vote and giving them information. I would feel exactly the same about BT doing it - sadly for them they don't have the grassroots support to be active in this way.

One of the things that really pisses me off is all the "grassroots" digs. Yes, I volunteer with the official BT campaign, apparently that doesn't count enough for some people. Am. I supposed to feel bad that with my job and children I haven't found time to set up my own campaign group? I had absolutely no experience with this kind of political campaigning up until a few months ago, but no, not grassroots enough. I'm so sorry I don't have time to stand outside schools because I'm at work. I'm so sorry that my genuine belief that a No vote is the right thing and the motivation it has given me to go out and speak to people (and that isn't something I find easy) isn't valid enough for you.

Wings is a really odd "creation". The chap that runs it does like to give the impression that he is legion. He doesn't live in Scotland and its become increasingly ranty and abusive. Its like an online depository for people's derogatory opinions of those who don't agree with them.

Cybernats do exist. Michelle Mone of Bra fame is in the news today for receiving abuse from them for saying she will move out of Scotland if there is independence. I've encountered one, he actually harassed me in the street, although it had nothing to do with the independence debate. I recognised him later from a newspaper article on the most well known cybernats and he turned out to be a retired engineer. He was very scruffy and looked a bit mad. Obviously he picked on the wrong person to shout at in the street, as I told him quite firmly that if he didn't leave me alone, I would report him to the police for harassment.

I'm sure most cybernats aren't typical of the typical independence supporter. He and the Wings guy strike me as pretty cranky and prone to attaching themselves obsessively to any cause that pushes their buttons in the right way.

The Wings site is just awful. I don't know why yes supporters here leap to its defence.

Could well be the case Yes has more grassroots support to do this during the school day as they're not at work. Of the half dozen or so yes supporters I know only 2 have full time jobs, 2 are part-time in local government, one is a non-working house-wife and one is long-term unemployed due to alcoholism.

Low blow, Phaedra, low blow. Whatever you think of Stu Campbell, he does have massive grassroots support, as evidenced at least in part by the incredible crowdfunding for WoS, and more recently the WeeBlueBook. Many, many other Yes crowdfunded events/projects have been incredibly successful. Meanwhile, last time I looked (a couple of weeks ago, admittedly) Rory the Tory's Cairn of Destiny had raised £11k out of a £55k target, after he had to cancel his "Hands across the Border" event for, er, lack of support...

BT have had large sums of cash from millionaires. So have various Yes groups. Various Yes groups have successfully crowdfunded a lot of different projects, including the rather esoteric "Spirit of Scotland" ex-Green Goddess. They're not doing that out of the broo money.

I understand that if, like OOAOML, people are busy with their work, families etc, they can't also be out door-knocking or staffing street stalls. But if Yes can find the time, and the money, why is No having to bus paid teenagers up from Liverpool to tell Scots how to vote?

Not a low blow. I've no idea who "Stu Campbell " is but if he is behind Wings , it is a vile site, dripping in bile and vitriol.

And sorry but I do genuinely in real life know only 6 yes supporters.

Yes has of course had large sums of money from Brian Soutar.

Mr Soutar knows all about referenda. You may recall Mr Soutar spent a lot of his own money conducting a "referendum" aimed at stirring up public support to keep the Scottish equivalent of the infamous "Section 4"

It's a bit much to slag off an extremely informative, well-evidenced site without knowing even the first thing about it - that it's run by Stu Campbell. (Then you could also point out he lives in Bath, used to review computer games, and has been accused of transphobia, you're missing so many opportunities to have a go!)

Do you even read it? Do you follow the links, where you doubt his reasoning? He's not the sole contributor either.

Whatever your (uninformed) disdain, the WeeBlueBook is converting DKs to Yes every day. Where's the BT equivalent, with the same kind of reach and readership? People read Stu, and believe him, because he does the research, he produces the evidence, and he "tells you the facts the MSM don't". His work in this indyref is invaluable to the Yes side.

Where is that kind of fire and passion on the No side?

I find WOS genuinely nasty. It is of course online, and people are often nasty online (present company excepted), but it is consistent with my reoccurring experience with Yes-inclined Scots. Like a nineteenth-century revitalise preacher with an added touch of genuine malice.

"Revivalist".

I don't think that paints the Yes supporters in a very favourable light, if that awful abusive Wings stuff attracts such grassroots support. I have read some of the comments on there and I think its fair to say that if you aren't familiar with the type of abusive, insulting communication that seems to be accepted there, you might find it shocking. It certainly doesn't represent a country that I think most decent people would want to live in. It comes across more like a bunch of thugs.

OK, I admit I'm struggling to describe many of the responses on Wings without using the phrase semi-literate. Have I offended many by saying this?

Like Phaedra, I only know 6 Yes supporters in real life. The others I only see from the internet. And again like Phaedra, by far the most vitriolic is a woman who has never in her life had a full-time job - she lives off her boyfriend and parents, well into her thirties (no kids), so you will excuse me if I don't listen to her telling me how to live my life and how I should pay more tax. The others are not very successful men who seem to think independence would give them something they are unable to currently compete for in the workplace.

I'm sure there are perfectly sensible, well educated Yes supporters out there. My experience is obviously personal to me. Though I have noticed more and more aquaintancies, as opposed to close friends, wanting to talk about voting No in recent weeks. The Referendum result will be quite interesting I think.

OldLady People read Stu, and believe him, because he does the research, he produces the evidence, and he "tells you the facts the MSM don't". His work in this indyref is invaluable to the Yes side.

Why on earth would you credit someone like that when there are plenty of people out there who actually do proper paid jobs involving the type of information that is required? Its an insult to the many intelligent and hard working Scots who are unable to devote themselves to a media blogging campaign to suggest it.

Wings even had to self-publish his own book, because no mainstream publisher was interested. There are of course proper books and other proper sources to read, but if theres a self-appointed egotist like the Wings chap, then some people will always be looking for the next messiah. It reminds me a bit of Tommy Sheridan, for some bizarre reason, there are people out there who have some kind of crush on that man and will never hear any wrong about him.

www.electoralcommission.org.uk/find-information-by-subject/elections-and-referendums/upcoming-elections-and-referendums/scottish-referendum/register-of-campaigners-at-the-scottish-independence-referendum

I'm not mad-keen on Mr Soutar, who gave £100k to a Christians for Indy group, and something similar to the official Yes campaign.

I'm even less keen on Ian Taylor, who gave £500k to No, having earned the money by selling arms to war-criminal Arkan.

I'm not so fond of Holocaust-denier Ian McConnachie, another BT supporter, or of the Orange Lodge, or the BNP-offshoot Britannica.

Please look at the link, and google the groups/individuals involved. There's a lot worse out there than Soutar, or even Stu Campbell; and they all have the right to have observers at the count.

As for Wings self-publishing, the timescale was too tight to get "mainstream" publishers involved. He achieved over a quarter of a million downloads in a couple of days, and is currently printing and distributing a further 280,000 hardcopies, with crowdfunding paying for it (over 200% of target).

Now tell me, where is the grassroots No campaign?

Is it right that the bookmakers are predicting a rather sizeable win for No?

I do get the feeling that a lot No voters are keeping quiet.

However, even though Quebec only voted no by 1%, judging by recently elections which wiped out the Parti Quebecois, it seems that independence is not so popular there anymore.

Could well be the case Yes has more grassroots support to do this during the school day as they're not at work. Of the half dozen or so yes supporters I know only 2 have full time jobs, 2 are part-time in local government, one is a non-working house-wife and one is long-term unemployed due to alcoholism.

I think you must move in very limited circles. I'm a grassroots Yes campaigner who runs her own business and who is taking precious time out (at personal expense) to campaign because I believe this is such an important issue. Many of my fellow campaigners also work. I personally think that the views of part-time workers, "non-working housewives" (incidentally try using that term elsewhere on this site and see how far you get) and the long-term unemployed are equally valid in a democracy but I somehow suspect you don't .

I'm sure there are perfectly sensible, well educated Yes supporters out there.

I don't think that you are sure of that at all, actually, but let me assure you that they are out there - and in droves. I know, because I am meeting plenty of them at meetings, when out canvassing, and when speaking to my friends, family and neighbours. The grassroots Yes campaign is invigorating and exciting because people are thinking through issues carefully, formulating and articulating sensible arguments, and, most importantly, daring to envisage a better and more socially just future for themselves, their families and their country. Whatever the outcome of the referendum, I believe that things have changed in the Scottish political landscape and there are now lots of people out there who are motivated and empowered enough to influence how their country and communities are run in the future. Whether or not you think they are sensible and well educated enough ... .

Why on earth would you credit someone like that when there are plenty of people out there who actually do proper paid jobs involving the type of information that is required? Its an insult to the many intelligent and hard working Scots who are unable to devote themselves to a media blogging campaign to suggest it.

Because being paid to do something doesn't necessarily mean that you know more about it than a well-informed amateur. And because, depending on who pays you, you may be working to a particular agenda... More fundamentally, since when was being published by a mainstream publisher a definitive mark of credibility?

I'm not questioning your decision to vote No because I respect that but I must say I have IMHO never read so many condescending, elitist and blinkered opinions expressed in one place. Small wonder that there so many people who want to see an exciting new independent Scotland where people are not written off because of their perceived lack of status or worth, or because they dare to question the status quo and the establishment.

The Orange Order's website isn't the go-to resource for Unionists. Comparing then to WOS is inapt.