H_B Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Wings Over Scotland is the work of a very strange and twisted individual. I think that's one of the main problems with it. He's good at what he does (getting mugs to pay for his hobby) though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 I think you need to understand the difference between "comments" and "claims". You made a numerical claim about the number of people driven to depression and suicide by ATOS. You have failed utterly to justify it. Is it justified to say "The SNP have driven millions of people to depression and suicide" Yes or No? If I'd have said 431,324 people have been driven to suicide by ATOS, that right there is a numerical claim. The phrase I actually used, which I'm sure you're more than familiar with by now, is not a numerical claim. Strike two. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 If I'd have said 431,324 people have been driven to suicide by ATOS, that right there is a numerical claim. The phrase I actually used, which I'm sure you're more than familiar with by now, is not a numerical claim. Strike two. And the fail keeps coming So, just to be clear here, "hundreds of thousands" isn't a numerical claim? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 And the fail keeps coming So, just to be clear here, "hundreds of thousands" isn't a numerical claim? Correct. I can tell you that millions of pounds have been won on the national lottery. The specific figure, I couldn't tell you, but I'm more than confident in saying it. Strike three. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardyBamboo Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Wings Over Scotland is the work of a very strange and twisted individual. Some of its output is interesting and gives an alternative perspective on things, but it certainly can't be considered a credible source given the amount of absolute shite that comes out of it. Play the ball not the man, can you give me some examples of absolute shite please? BTW I am not saying there isn't any shite at all on the site just that I find the vast majority of it credible, (an awful lot more credible than the MSM generally). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardyBamboo Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 I have proof that it is not a credible source of information. Its parsing of the "Tarff Advertiser" is particularly fucked up. ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Correct. I can tell you that millions of pounds have been won on the national lottery. The specific figure, I couldn't tell you, but I'm more than confident in saying it. Strike three. I really didn't think this could get any worse for you. And yet, here we are. Can I just check, is 1,000,000 a number? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 I really didn't think this could get any worse for you. And yet, here we are. Can I just check, is 1,000,000 a number? I've noticed this habit of yours. Asking questions you very well know the answer to. I've also noticed another habit of yours. Avoiding questions you're asked to focus on something else in the hope it gets brushed over. Your "evidence" re WoS is, like you, a joke. You've had your three strikes. I have more than covered my Atos comments. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 I've noticed this habit of yours. Asking questions you very well know the answer to. I've also noticed another habit of yours. Avoiding questions you're asked to focus on something else in the hope it gets brushed over. Your "evidence" re WoS is, like you, a joke. You've had your three strikes. I have more than covered my Atos comments. So is it a number or not? I mean we know that "hundreds of thousands" isn't numeric. What is it out of interest? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeTillEhDeh Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Wings Over Scotland is the work of a very strange and twisted individual. Some of its output is interesting and gives an alternative perspective on things, but it certainly can't be considered a credible source given the amount of absolute shite that comes out of it. That's why I :lol:'d when I saw the original sarcastic response - WoS is as impartial as BT. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bairn Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 The only remotely impartial source I've come across at this stage is STV and even that is only because a couple of their on screen commentators have worked hard to mask any establishment bias. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 WoS is as impartial as BT. And as prone to error with breathless insider knowledge. As proven by Campbell's Ladbrokes/Danny Alexander fail. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Wings Over Scotland is the work of a very strange and twisted individual. Some of its output is interesting and gives an alternative perspective on things, but it certainly can't be considered a credible source given the amount of absolute shite that comes out of it. How would that affect a poll conducted by Panelbase? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 And as prone to error with breathless insider knowledge. As proven by Campbell's Ladbrokes/Danny Alexander fail. Thousands of posts, H_B comes up with three that might be considered incorrect as evidence that the site is riddled with inaccuracy. What a stupid twat. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardyBamboo Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 That's why I :lol:'d when I saw the original sarcastic response - WoS is as impartial as BT. It doesn't claim to be impartial, quite the opposite in fact. That doesn't necessarily make it less credible though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 That doesn't necessarily make it less credible though. What does make it credible though? Which "I have a VERY good source" rumours of Campbell's have turned out to be true? We've seen evidenced on here his utter fail over the Ladborkes/Alexander "It's not going to happen!!!!" entry. Where are the examples of rumours he has goven prior notice of on the blog that have turned out to be true. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renton Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Wings Over Scotland is the work of a very strange and twisted individual. Some of its output is interesting and gives an alternative perspective on things, but it certainly can't be considered a credible source given the amount of absolute shite that comes out of it. When treated as a series of opinion columns it's fine, and in that respect is no different from any editorial, or a site like CiF on the Guardian site. It is largely opinion though, albeit sometimes with some analytical analysis attached, the veracity of which can be argued. I dn't think it's necessarily any less a credible source than the comment/editorial articles you get in every national/local paper. Ultimately it's the output of one person or one group's opinion. Having said that, the PB poll conducted for WoS cannot be claimed to be any less credible than the Times commisioned polls by the same company. Same pre-amble, same weighting. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Having said that, the PB poll conducted for WoS cannot be claimed to be any less credible than the Times commisioned polls by the same company. Same pre-amble, same weighting. It's not the credibility of the actual poll results that are being challenged. It's the credibility of Campbell's "I've got a very good source" rumours concerning a poll his site didn't commission. To be completely fair, the OP of this rumour did add suitable caveats to its posting on here. What we can say for sure is that Campbell has previous for being utterly wrong when giving his insider info on the currency union. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 It's not the credibility of the actual poll results that are being challenged. It's the credibility of Campbell's "I've got a very good source" rumours concerning a poll his site didn't commission. To be completely fair, the OP of this rumour did add suitable caveats to its posting on here. What we can say for sure is that Campbell has previous for being utterly wrong when giving his insider info on the currency union. Does HB stand for "Half Brick"? I'm curious. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 And also, regardless of whether you like his blog or not, his status as an odious individual is pretty much uncontestable. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.