Deportation - Apparently A Debate Thread?? :?

[LizH]

well said peeriebryan

[AngusMecoatup]

I can't think of any kind of constructive reason why this subject has been dragged up.

 

Whether or not this is in the public domain is irrelevant, we're dealing with bereavements here. A bit of sensitivity is required. In essence, everyone's death is in the public domain as it is recorded in a public record, and usually published in the paper. I don't think that gives folk the right to pontificate on an Internet forum with moral indemnity.

 

We're going to lock this thread for a while if the 'debate' continues to degenerate.

 

 

Here Here.

[peeriesooky]

no bereavements have bin discussed. aabody is making a fuss ower nithing. da point wis excuses being made fir sumthing when dey wir irrelevant due tae happening efter da event. da only folk banging on aboot bereavements are those dat are missing da point. no matter whit it wis dat wis said, onything dat happened efter he committed his crime should no have bin used as an excuse fir his actions - whether intentional or no.

it jist seems tae be da case dat u canna say onything withoot folk taking offence fir da sake o taking offence.

da only mention i made o da bereavements were fae a quote by sakchai stating dat da events happened efter his "moment of madness". it wis aabody else dat kept going on aboot dem, missing da point entirely.

why make excuses when he had paid his dues, and why use events dat happened efter da incident, regardless o whit dey wir?

I never said whaa started mentioning it, or whaa put it aboot, simply dat it has been in a number of press articles etc when it shouldna hae been.

if folk could be less reactionary and simply read whit has bin written things widna get so oot o hand on here.

folk keep going on aboot how sakchai's jist a young lad dat made a mistake etc. well, fine, but he isna a protected species either.

stop taking offence jist coz somebody disna like sumthing or whitever and keep things simple.

Having experienced miscarriages, deaths etc, I wis disgusted by da use o dis sort o thing to excuse his actions. I ken dat sakchai wisna responsible fir dis, as he has made nae attempt tae excuse his actions (a commendable attitude), but da fact is dat somebody did, whaaever it wis, and dat leaves me cold at da callousness o it.

I am entitled tae feel dat way, and if u dinna agree and dinna want it discussed etc, den dinna respond. I wis making a point o how i felt aboot it, i didna want a big discussion aa aboot it.

 

But it is interesting tae note dat when i asked aboot how da appeal process works, naaboady could answer. Post this, and aabody comes oot o da woodwork again tae bang on aboot how bad it is tae hae a go at sakchai (which wis never done)

[Ghostrider]

no bereavements have bin discussed. aabody is making a fuss ower nithing. da point wis excuses being made fir sumthing when dey wir irrelevant due tae happening efter da event. da only folk banging on aboot bereavements are those dat are missing da point. no matter whit it wis dat wis said, onything dat happened efter he committed his crime should no have bin used as an excuse fir his actions - whether intentional or no.

it jist seems tae be da case dat u canna say onything withoot folk taking offence fir da sake o taking offence.

da only mention i made o da bereavements were fae a quote by sakchai stating dat da events happened efter his "moment of madness". it wis aabody else dat kept going on aboot dem, missing da point entirely.

why make excuses when he had paid his dues, and why use events dat happened efter da incident, regardless o whit dey wir?

I never said whaa started mentioning it, or whaa put it aboot, simply dat it has been in a number of press articles etc when it shouldna hae been.

if folk could be less reactionary and simply read whit has bin written things widna get so oot o hand on here.

folk keep going on aboot how sakchai's jist a young lad dat made a mistake etc. well, fine, but he isna a protected species either.

stop taking offence jist coz somebody disna like sumthing or whitever and keep things simple.

Having experienced miscarriages, deaths etc, I wis disgusted by da use o dis sort o thing to excuse his actions. I ken dat sakchai wisna responsible fir dis, as he has made nae attempt tae excuse his actions (a commendable attitude), but da fact is dat somebody did, whaaever it wis, and dat leaves me cold at da callousness o it.

I am entitled tae feel dat way, and if u dinna agree and dinna want it discussed etc, den dinna respond. I wis making a point o how i felt aboot it, i didna want a big discussion aa aboot it.

 

But it is interesting tae note dat when i asked aboot how da appeal process works, naaboady could answer. Post this, and aabody comes oot o da woodwork again tae bang on aboot how bad it is tae hae a go at sakchai (which wis never done)

 

Deja vu 8O

[peeriebryan]

Peeriesooky, please just drop it. You have made your point

[JAStewart]

I think that you can't just speak about Sakchai's crime freely without know just how much drink he had had. 10 Pints and 10 shots (can't remember what of)

[peeriesooky]

Peeriesooky, please just drop it. You have made your point

 

will do guv

[peeriebryan]

Cheers

[peeriesooky]

nae bother

[JustMe]

peeriesooky wrote

 

folk keep going on aboot how sakchai's jist a young lad dat made a mistake etc. well, fine, but he isna a protected species either.

 

The "protected species" bit made me smile. And it is good to find something to smile about.

[peeriesooky]

[Tomblands]

I think the point Peeriesooky was trying to make was lost in the last couple of pages.

 

I was under the impression from the media reports that the death of his father happened before his arrest. And it was suggested that this caused him to go "off the rails"...which is understandable.

 

The Times now seems to have put this in a different order. Although it wouldn't have changed my view on the situation, some people might have a different view on the situation if this is the case.

[peeriesooky]

exactly my point tomblands, thank you

 

It widn't hae changed my view either, as da main issue wis dat he had done his time, so da way it had originally been reported in da press wis unneccessary. Sakchai wisna making excuses fir his actions so why wir dey?

 

As you say, dis may hae resulted in a negative reaction fae sum folk so why tak da risk, tho it could jist hae bin a case o da info being relayed or taken wrang

 

As i have mentioned previously (as have mony ithers) da acceptance o his "moment of madness" by sakchai is to be commended, making nae excuses, and surely it is dis attitude dat has won folk ower

[DavieG]

Can I just say, again from a purely personal point of view, that I, like a number of you, deplore (once again) the route some of these discussions have taken.

 

They sail very near to the moral wind as far as many of Sakchai's personal issues are concerned and this is disappointing from a personal point of view if nothing else. To have issues such as thyese debated in this way is, at the very least, uncaring towards those directly concerned.

 

I like everyone respect the need for open debate on many issues and freedom of speech etc but the ability for people to hide behind aliases etc when discussing sensitive issues some times does the debate and the aims of this site no favours.

 

As a matter of interest I will be making a sizeable personal donation to Shetlink for their terrific assistance throughout the 'crises', but a larger one from the fund would not be appropriate as they have quite rightly recognised.

 

They have performed an amazing service for us so can I thank them again for everything. Without them we would certainly have struggled, especially at the outset of the whole thing.

 

I think the Sakcahi issue has most certainly shown the value of sites such as this, but also potentially highlighted a number of downsides. Again it's only my opinion but I'm still not convinced that being able to hide behind alises necessarily makes for the best, most constructive or 'honest' discussions / debate - but also appreciate that, if used correctly, this approach does also have it's benefits re open speaking. Again just a personal opinion and observation.

 

Finally let me clarify one of the more bizarre views re the press that appeared in this thread - namely the fact that someone (presumably me) should have had more control of the press and what they printed.

 

Let me just state that at no time did the Shetland for Sakchai team use any of the detailed 'excuses' for Sakchai's behaviour that were highlighted in the thread. Our stance was always simply that he was under personal pressure and was POSSIBLY affected by personal issues at the time of the 'incident' and indeed the press, somewhat surprisingly, never asked for further details of this, from me at least.

 

Also it was totally impossible for me to control who the press spoke to, either in or outside Shetland, what anyone said to them or what they ultimately printed - to suggest anything else is patently ridiculous.

 

If someone provided them with information which was not totally accurate (especially in terms of the accurate facts but the inaccurate timings highlighted in this thread) then we could ultimately do nothing re that, unless the reporters concerned chose to check this out with us in the first instance. This only happened on one occasion that I can recall and we were able to set the record straight in that particular instance and the story was subsequently printed accurately.

 

To keep trying to make some kind of 'debate capital' of this is once again unfair to the campaign team, or Sakchai's family, who attempted to provide the media with accurate information at all times and make no excuses for Sakchai at any time throughout the campaign. Had we been providing the press with a plethory of excuses, especially inaccurate one's, they would soon have publicly exposed this and it would have proved highly counterproductive to us and detrimental to the campaign in general - so why on earth would we have resorted to this kind of tactic?

 

Hope this sets the record straight.

[trout]

Thank you for your post Davie and also your kind words.

 

To be absolutely honest and open with everyone - this thread has been the bane of Shetlink! It has made every one of us cringe as much as it's made many others cringe I am sure ... with some of the completely unnessesary turns of what people apparently consider “debate”!

 

We here at Shetlink are in an impossible position where we unfortunately need to be impartial and allow views from all sides of “debate” and have struggled terribly in a moral sense in allowing some of these turns to remain on the forum!

 

As has become quite evident the very nature of anonymity on the Internet also has a very dark side to it! and in a case such as this thread, yes, I completely agree that being able to hide behind one or several pseudonyms has done no-one any favours – including Shetlink! (he says posting as someone called Trout )

 

Anonymity can assist in the debate process by permitting individuals the right of making a point without fear of reprisal … but as you point out, this too allows the morally inept to write whatever pleases them on a whim!

 

I do hope that this particular thread hasn’t tainted too many peoples opinions on Shetlink as a useful resource – and I do hope that many more people do as you have and use their real name to join up (something to which you should be commended – and something that quite a few other people have done and should also be commended for!)

 

In retrospect its been pointed out that over the last few months many have for the very first time ventured onto a forum to use it as a medium for communication, not least throughout the Sakchai affair ... and it has been a very steep learning curve for many to understand the subtle nuances of writing / posting on a forum board to allow oneself to be understood in a civil manner. The very thin veil that is "netiquette" is one that many are only coming to grips with ... at the very least I hope that some good can come of this thread - that everyone can move on and up from it and use this time as a educational tool, albeit a "barbed" one! and for reflection!