Shetland Independent Newsletter

[Evil Inky]

And things like Nelson Smith's views might be offensive to some people but I think it's good to give a public forum for some of the more weird ideas circulating within society, on the whole.

If Nelson Smith's bigoted views concerned, say, Jews or Shetlanders, instead of homosexuals, his nonsense would never have made it into print.

[Jonners]

If Nelson Smith's bigoted views concerned, say, Jews or Shetlanders, instead of homosexuals, his nonsense would never have made it into print.

 

Good point, but I think it's pretty much fair enough to allow anything to be printed. The consequences lie with those that printed it. Where would we be without controversial points of view?!

 

I find lots of things that people write offensive, but people have different points of views on things for whatever reasons.

 

And essentially people printing what they want to say is just an extension of people saying what they want - freedom of speech.

 

I know there are arbitrary limits set by society in terms of what's allowable, and it's an interesting topic.

[Evil Inky]

If Nelson Smith's bigoted views concerned, say, Jews or Shetlanders, instead of homosexuals, his nonsense would never have made it into print.

 

Good point, but I think it's pretty much fair enough to allow anything to be printed. The consequences lie with those that printed it. Where would we be without controversial points of view?!

Don't get me wrong, Stuart and Nelson have an absolute right to publish whatever offensive reactionary twaddle they like.

 

Just as I have a right to point out that is twaddle.

[Fifi]

I see Stuart has a forum up now -

 

http://pub29.bravenet.com/forum/2458015112

[Siggar]

Hardly a good start - a horrible bit of design and unwanted paper fell through my letterbox today

[KOYAANISQATSI]

We didn't get this piece of literary and on seeing his webpage I'm almost sad. (joking)

I see the results are pouring in.

out of 21 here are snips of the 15 that weren't written by Stuart or his nazi chum.

i strongly dissagree and i am strongly offened by your article

I sincerely hope your advertisers withdraw their funding if this is the sort of drivel that is going to be published in the name of debate.

Just who the hell are you to decide that a law is immoral?

its important for people to express there opinions but is it acceptable to say these things if it hurts alot of people?

I'm not sure he (Mr Smith) is not in breach of said law.

this type of writing not only encourages bullying, but is in itself a form of bullying. I will not be writing an article for this publication and would discourage anybody else from doing so. The sooner it dies it's natural (and inevitable) death the better.

Stuart Hill, you completely missed (or ignored) my point, so I will say it again,

set up a facility that allows "quotes" or at least the ability to italicize or type in bold text, otherwise replying to your increasingly long posts is going to be very difficult, both for me to type out, and for other people to follow.

And your still not getting it.

I really hope you consider what you publish in your next newsletter.

Did the writer perhaps think a collection of historical 'facts' would lend the piece some gravitas? If so, he thought wrong.

so i think the editor should do his job and keep out these remarks from narrow minded people who live in the stone age.

Absolutey disgusting, and unless there is a response from either Nelson Smith apologising, or the Edior apologising for printing such dribble, I am quite happy to burn my copy of this newsletter without even contemplating reading it.

I also certainly agree that narrow minded comments like these should not be published and an apology from Mr Smith should be in your next issue.

If this is the kind of material you are consistently going to publish please do not shove your crap through my letterbox.

And there's more:

You know? When you write an article for publication, you can't just make up "facts" so that they fit your own agenda, that's not how it works.

I agree with the previous poster who remarked on the lack of ability to quote. It's a feature which is a necessity in a forum, and any forum which doesn't have such an absolutely basic feature is a bit of a mickey mouse one in my opinion.

 

Then there was Nelson:

The Governments Sexual Orientaion Regulations is unfair. If you live in Scotland and are a Christian printer and you refuse to print a leaflet for a Homosexual, then you can be charged.

 

But if you are a Homosexual and have a printing shop and refuse to print a leaflet for a Christian then

nothing happens

The law is unfair!

I didn't read said article, but I would have thought he would be glad for not getting charged by the cops, and well done to him for keeping them crazy Christians out of his gay printers shop.

 

Stuart Hill fills out the rest of the posts with deep and meaningful statements like,:

I have always believed that being offended is a matter of choice.

At least I will know it now if it comes, luckily I have a very large filing system for just this type of mail, council men come on tuesday with a large truck to take and sort it for me.

[JustMe]

I see Stuart has a forum up now -

 

http://pub29.bravenet.com/forum/2458015112

And I have paid my final visit to that forum until all the pop up adverts that got past my pop up stopper are no longer there.

 

Also inclined to think that the radio adverts for the "Muckle Poll" are misleading. Sounds like it is some sort of official thing.

[Spinner72]

And I have paid my final visit to that forum until all the pop up adverts that got past my pop up stopper are no longer there.

 

Ditto. An weel done tae KOYAANISQATSI fur being able tae stand dem lang enough tae pit yun tageddir.

 

Also inclined to think that the radio adverts for the "Muckle Poll" are misleading. Sounds like it is some sort of official thing.

 

Apert fae da clearly, weel, speechless renderin NS article (dir is a distinct line atween freedom o speech and irresponsibility - an i winder if Mr Smith will implode whin someane tells him dir ir Christians wha ir also Gay?), da muckle poll really is amazin me.

 

Da wireless, and idder articles like da Shetland News ane, all seem tae imply dis is cooncil endorsed.

 

Is naebody tried phonin tae ask a question? You just get telt tae "hang up and try again".

 

Sure rings a bell given aa da recent phoneline activity in da news!

 

Should da cooncil no be encouragin wis tae avoid phone-ins etc?

 

Da concept o da magazine is excellent, but da execution fatally flawed.

[pilotcan]

Why are people so up in arms about some bloke making a newsletter and a forum? Have you seen some of the other stuff out there online?It seems to me reading some of the stuff on here, that theres some folks who have nothing better to do than put the boot in. Let Mr Hill and others get on with it, hey, its probably not perfect, and it maybe is wide of the mark, but so what. Its probably more diverse than the Shetland Times!

Cheers

[Roachmill]

Why are people so up in arms about some bloke making a newsletter and a forum? Have you seen some of the other stuff out there online?It seems to me reading some of the stuff on here, that theres some folks who have nothing better to do than put the boot in. Let Mr Hill and others get on with it, hey, its probably not perfect, and it maybe is wide of the mark, but so what. Its probably more diverse than the Shetland Times!

Cheers

 

^^ Out out damn troll

[pilotcan]

^^ Out out damn troll

 

lol, eh?!

[Roachmill]

^^ Out out damn troll

 

lol, eh?!

It's pretty evident why folk are up in arms. Just read some of this thread and you can see exactly why.

 

The "other stuff out there online" is certainly there but you have to go looking for it and it doesn't get dropped through your letterbox without permission.

 

Letting them "get on with it" is fine but, when you print and then distribute something that people strongly disagree with, don't expect those same folk to sit on there hands.

 

Have you even read the thing? Me thinks not.

[2lb_saucermeat]

I agree, if you don't know what everybody is annoyed about, you obviously haven't read the article....Try reading it and come back to us....

[KOYAANISQATSI]

Shetland independent newsletter proven facts.

 

1. Shetland independent newsletter cannot swim.

2. Shetland independent newsletter was banned from Finland because of not wearing pants.

3. If you chew gum while peeling Shetland independent newsletter then it will stop you from crying.

4. The opposite sides of stuart hill always add up to seven!

5. If you put a drop of liquor on stuart hill, he will go mad and sting himself to death.

6. Devoid of his cells and proteins, stuart hill has the same chemical makeup as sea water!

7. US gold coins used to say 'In nelson smith we trust'.

8. The water in oceans is four times less salty than the water in nelson smith.

9. It's bad luck to put nelson smith on a bed.

10. It takes forty minutes to hard-boil nelson smith!

11. Koalas sleep for 22 hours a day, two hours more than nelson smith.

12. Julius Caesar wore a laurel wreath to cover up nelson smith!

[pilotcan]

I've had a look - I've already looked before to those of you who claim I had'nt, maybe not jump to conclusions eh? Are people not allowed to have differing views?

The general tone of peoples comments on this newsletter have been derogatory towards this newsletter in general. I have no connection, interest or even vauge sympathy with the newsletter or its authors. This is just my observation.

 

Main points:

1) its a bit sloppy in presentation

2) its not at all PC

3) could do with more balanced articles , although being so new, I dont think it will get many.

4) the people who are contributing maybe feel this is a voice for them, albeit naively?

5) bad idea to start with such a community-splitting article (n.smith) - editorial responisbility should have been taken

 

All in all, its flawed, but I'm not sure it merits villification on this scale. I dont agree with all that is in it, Nelson Smith was probably ill-advised to make his thoughts public via this means, but apart from that, isnt it just the meanderings of someone(s.hill) who is trying to find some kind of place in Shetland society? or acceptance? Goodnees knows, but ultimatley, it probably wont see a 3 even 4th issue, because presumably it will take some sort of cash to keep it going, or effort, and by the thoughts on this forum, he's up against it.