Lerwick Up Helly Aa

[smileyface]

...

I am sorry, but this is rubbish, most people dont know they are on the bill until UHA morning. Whit makes him so special? Why are you making an issue of this? Surely **** would be wanting this whole mess to die down? After all its down to him that its been brought up again! As another ex-jarl stated in the paper, if **** had kept his head down and laughed it off then it would all be forgotten about. Its his OWN actions that have caused a stir.

Indeed. I also wonder what smileyface is hoping to achieve with their postings. It just seems to be throwing about more negativity. Worse, the facts of the matter are being twisted in a most lamentable manner. My advice to smileyface would be to, at the very least, check on the veracity of matters they believe to be facts before posting.

 

I would think that would work both ways, an Organisation such as the Up Helly Aa Committee would check on the veracity of matters they believe to be facts before putting it on the Bill, or do we just start adding speculation and unfounded rumours to the Bill. Should we not keep strictly to actual facts rather than gossip.

 

 

For example:

A member of the Up Helly Aa Committee contacted Big **** at an unreasonable hour on the Monday evening to inform him of the Article on the Bill, this was in itself totally unacceptable.

This completely misrepresents what happened and gives the impression that the committee member was doing something nasty. My understanding is that they were both having a friendly yarn and dram at the time. The bill had, as usual, already been unveiled many hours earlier at the signing. Were I the committee member, I would be unimpressed by the negative spin smileyface has presented.[/quo

[unlinkedstudent]

You know, smileyface & a couple of others, you're drawing more attention to this than need be. What you know what others don't then? Is it a case of:

 

ALLEGEDLY in front of a load of these:-

 

1. Boat sinks.

 

2. Insurance claim made.

 

3. Insurance company coughs up.

 

4. Not only had said boat sank but was then recovered and sold without telling insurers.

 

5. Said boat sank, was recovered, sold and insurers told.

 

I don't give a flying toss. Whatever the circumstances, a certain someone allegedly threatened to lob a load of paint and de-face the Bill. Horrors upon horrors, even a soothmoother like me knows that is a big no no - and if he did indeed threaten to de-face the Bill, he should have been banned for LIFE!

[Stevo]

@Smileyface

 

All you are doing is keeping this in the public eye and all you are doing is encouraging others to speak about it. **** is getting slagged off more now than ever... Well Done!!

 

You have some very funny idea's, when it comes to UHA, I suggest you get your facts right before coming on here and try to prove a point.

 

[Infiltrator]

smileyface and bigfoot seem to have a remarkable interest in this particular issue. They've also only just signed up, and have only posted on this thread

 

 

I think you’re a bit of a ‘Pink Panther’ i.e. a bumbling detective?

 

Merely stating the facts, the core of good detective work.

 

This whole issue had largely 'sunk without a trace' off Shetlink until smileyface 'salvaged' it and 'launched' it back into the public awareness.

[Biglad]

Same people, some new, still speakin utter bolloc*s

[NewBigFoot]

You know, smileyface & a couple of others, you're drawing more attention to this than need be. What you know what others don't then? Is it a case of:

 

ALLEGEDLY in front of a load of these:-

 

1. Boat sinks.

 

2. Insurance claim made.

 

3. Insurance company coughs up.

 

4. Not only had said boat sank but was then recovered and sold without telling insurers.

 

5. Said boat sank, was recovered, sold and insurers told.

 

I don't give a flying toss. Whatever the circumstances, a certain someone allegedly threatened to lob a load of paint and de-face the Bill. Horrors upon horrors, even a soothmoother like me knows that is a big no no - and if he did indeed threaten to de-face the Bill, he should have been banned for LIFE!

 

 

In my opinion you seem to be trying to hurt with above i.e. this isn’t our business so why publish it like this

[unlinkedstudent]

@NewBigFoot - ^

 

Well, if you go around inviting people to comment and post on this thread that people should apologise, you're gonna get comments whether you like them or not. So I'll ask you the same as I said to SmileyFace - what do you know that others don't?

 

If you say that the committee should have good liability insurance then does that apply to all of us?

 

Oh, you didn't want people to comment on what you posted? Tis simple then - don't post!

[NewBigFoot]

Same people, some new, still speakin utter bolloc*s

 

 

In your opinion...BigLad

 

Thankfully some speak some sense...this has boiled to surface again after being published in the Times. ‘No comment’...is often the guilty trying to avoid telling the facts...leading on to the truth.

 

People start to wonder why the silly child like silence.

 

The way they are behaving you’d think they were Free Mason’s.

[owre-weel]

‘No comment’...is often the guilty trying to avoid telling the facts...leading on to the truth.

 

People start to wonder why the silly child like silence.

 

The way they are behaving you’d think they were Free Mason’s.

 

In my experience "no comment" ensures that what ever you may have said cant be taken out of context or twisted to suit the opposite sides argument. It also avoids being dragged in further to a discussion.

 

As for the free mason's, I wouldn't be surprised if they were it's a "club" that I cant see the point of in today's age and never understood the attraction.

[Ghostrider]

I’m hearing you; however a lot depends on the constitution that Lerwick Up Helly Aa has in place regarding all i.e. if not properly constituted (and legal) ‘the committee’ (and individual committee members) could find themselves in very hot water if challenged.

 

Undoubtedly, however if anyone should be well aware of what is and isn't "constitutional" as far as UHA is concerned, surely **** himself must be a prime candidate. Having been in the "inner sanctum" for over 20 years if he's not aware of how it all trundles along, few are.

 

I'm not sure I'd describe any irregularities of a "club" (unless they of course also involve criminal charges) capable of ending up in what could be reasonably described as "very hot water" though. About the only avenue open to anyone would be a civil case against the Committee, which would be "interesting" if nothing else.

 

...this has boiled to surface again after being published in the Times. ‘No comment’...is often the guilty trying to avoid telling the facts...leading on to the truth.

 

People start to wonder why the silly child like silence.

 

The way they are behaving you’d think they were Free Mason’s.

 

"No comment" could mean many things and often does, including in this case that the whole issue really is nobody's business unless the guizers who participated in this years performance, who have integral systems to make their feelings known to and get answers from the Committee. So why make it everyone else's business too by broadcasting the finer murky details in the local press.

[admin]

This thread is being locked for a 'cooling off' period.

 

The recent subject's name will be removed from recent posts due to the amount of unsubstantiated claims being made. Putting 'allegedly' before a statement just doesn't cut it when posting about a member of the local community.

 

If the recent tone of this thread continues when unlocked, more content will be removed.

[EM]

... however a lot depends on the constitution that Lerwick Up Helly Aa has in place ...

The organisation has no constitution as such. Certainly nothing resembling the multi-page constitutions most start-up clubs currently adopt. This is because it does not need a constitution. Nowadays clubs usually opt to have complex constitutions because, without them they are unable to apply for public money or achieve charitable status. The Lerwick UHA is financially self-sufficient and thereby is in the enviable position of having significantly greater independence, and need not be burdoned by a constitution. The organisation defining paperwork which does exist is minimal, and merely sufficient to enable the committee to have bank accounts etc. Perfectly legal and, to my mind, a remarkably interesting and effective lesson in how to run such a group.

 

 

If a banned guizer decides to turn-up in costume at the Hillhead on Up Helly Aa night who acting within the Law can actually stop him. Would the marshal’s try to pull him from the ranks? What could our constabulary actually do, besides keeping order? The Hillhead is a public place isn’t it, and a banned guizer could march at the end of the procession, couldn’t he?

This is completely incorrect. Events such as UHA have to be authorised and licensed. Part of the deal is that the organisers agree to cooperate with the police in marshalling the guizers and spectators. As such, it is a requirement that any public order incidents arising, are dealt with by the marshals and police as a team. In other words, what the public are permitted to do in the area of a licensed event differs from what they may do at other times. Common sense of course, and standard practice throughout the world. Even in Canada I expect.

 

****, if you are reading this, don’t get to down, have a year off and just quietly turn-up in 2015 with your squad and enjoy your night.

Dream on. There is no doubt whatsoever as to what that would achieve. The whole squad would be suspended for the following year. Simple.

[Ironwithin]

I see more people getting banned in the Shetland Times today.

[midget1965]

I see more people getting banned in the Shetland Times today.

 

 

Looks like a personal Vendetta is going on here.

[Wheelsup]

I think it would be better for you to drop this subject . If your UHA means so much to you I suggest writing an apology to the committee and keeping stumm about behaving for a couple of years - then they might let you back in.