It is still 60/40 Yes - he should be suspended.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Poll for harty in worthing herald
- Thread starter steward 433
- Start date
It is still 60/40 Yes - he should be suspended.
Why? Because I happen to be thinking rationaly?
TSB
Captain Hindsight
Got it. 59% to 41!
chez
Johnny Byrne-The Greatest
For rising up against Harty!
We should be supporting him, he's a proper fan.
Harty
For rising up against Harty!
We should be supporting him, he's a proper fan.
Harty
He isn't 'rising up' against anyone, is he? He's simply exercising his right to an opinion.
mr sheen
Well-known member
- Jan 17, 2008
- 1,559
Sounds about right. Give yourself up now.
That's true inasmuch as 'we' don't have an elected spokesperson, a single corporate identity or collective responsibility. But surely if the majority of posters think something, (I dunno, that Norman Baker is a tosser), then the statement that "NSC thinks Norman Baker is a tosser" is an accurate reflection of the views of the people who post on this messageboard.
That being true I think that IF the majority of posters on here DO want him re-instated then it's fair enough for the Argus or SCR or other posters to say that "NSC wants Harty re-instated."
IF..
That is buzzer's point in a nutshell. Nobody should presume to speak for all of NSC.
That is buzzer's point in a nutshell. Nobody should presume to speak for all of NSC.
Man of Harveys
Well-known member
No way: that's almost as daft as when newpapers claim that entire countries are doing something (I doubt they ever check when all its inhabitants are in agreement with its government, say).
This isn't just pedantry, because I reckon it's crazy to assume that, maybe because of some dodgy straw polls held on here, that an entity comprising of hundreds of different people like NSC has one, trade union block vote-like opinion, especially on a massively divisive topic like this one.
Some people who are rather dismissive of NSC for whatever reason (certainly not you OFAB) are often prone to saying stuff like "NSC is always too harsh on Gatting, NSC has spoken" that kind of thing. And it's always, always crap.
I don't think anybody does. I've never heard anybody say something like "Speaking on behalf of NSC I think that Harty should be re-instated." However I think we've all used expressions like "Typical NSC, everyone's a whinger/club-licker" (delete as appropriate).
Interesting point and I suppose it depends partly on where you draw the line with assumptions (or lazy journalism). However I really do think it's fair to say things like "NSC is in favor of the stadium at Falmer" which is something we've all wanted and worked for. Not ALL of us admittedly, but enough of a thumping majority for us to ignore the windowlickers who are opposed.
Man of Harveys
Well-known member
I'm happy to announce that NSC supports Germany in the world cup.
I'm happy to announce that NSC prefers Maria Kirilenko to Allsion Stokke.
Ha ha ha very funny. I meant the totems we would take as axiomatic could be preceeded with "NSC thinks", not just any little pet foible. However it looks like I'm in a minority (of 2 to 1 if we go on the three of us posting here) so can I say that "NSC thinks it doesn't have an opinion" ?