@RoryAlsop Honestly, even if I lived in Scotland for a few years I wouldn't vote. It's sounds very ridiculous that I have a saying in something that big and historic
@Adnan I think it's ridiculous that this vote is going to be used to determine the country's future, and yet about 50% of the folks disagree with the other 50%. Unlike Norway which had over 95% when they voted for independence.
@ManishEarth independence is extremely risky but potentially provides a structure for a government which more closely represents scottish political beliefs... whether people should vote for it or not depends on whether they think the risks are worth the potential outcome..
@TerryChia pretty much unlikely to be good. The westminster gov are promising additional powers in the event of a "no" vote but they're risking annoying the rest of the UK there who could quite legitimately ask why Scotland are getting preferential treatment...
A score that has been beaten only once in a major referendum -- In 2003 in Iraq, when a whooping 100% of registered electors did vote, and all of them (down to the last) voted to maintain Saddam Hussein in his seat.
@RоryMcCune Also, the "vote no to get better" argument, when last tried in Scotland, turned out to be "vote no and then get Thatcher", which was somewhat less appreciated.
In much more recent times, in 2011, South Sudan voted for independence with a 98.83% score.
Usually, in functioning democracies, scores beyond about 65% are viewed with suspicion: an issue in which people so overwhelmingly agree should have been dealt with long ago.
Such a score indicates that something went wrong; either the democracy is not exactly functioning, or the vote was rigged.
@RoryAlsop Apparently, the Norway/Sweden union was not completely a democracy, not on the union issue. It was under political control of the King.
The issue had been boiling for some time, and ended up with a constitutional crisis.
Also, Norway and Sweden already had their own separate military, and were building up their forces. Risk of war was non-negligible.
Sir Sean Connery notwithstanding, things are not at that level between England and Scotland, and would probably not turn that way in the foreseeable future, whatever the referendum result will be.
that makes sense - we have been discussing it a lot in Orkney (mostly because Orkney only recently became part of Scotland). Many in Orkney want independence from Scotland if the vote goes to a Yes - they want to rejoin Norway
@RoryAlsop Scotland would be morally obliged to comply to Orkney independence, if they get theirs. Norway, on the other hand, would be under no obligation to welcome the Orkney.
Though control of more fishing areas and oil wells would probably be a powerful argument.
After all these are the reasons why Norway rejected entry in the EU.
(Moral obligation is not as binding for countries as it is for people. In fact it rarely works.)
As a French, I am historically compelled to welcome Scottish independence, because it will open a new potential front on the rear of the English. Strategically, they would be surrounded.
If Scotland obtains independence, then this may give some hopes to the Québec independentists, which would in turn call for reaction from the Canadian federal government, including speeding up citizenship application processing (because newly-made citizens tend to be federalists).
At least that's how it went in 1995.
@LucasKauffman Flanders independent from Wallonia, or Wallonia independent from Flanders ? Or Bruxelles independent from both ?
Sometimes it is hard to see who is leaving and who is staying.
@Rory: in case of Scottish independence, what would be the capital ? Edinburgh ? Glasgow ? Scone ?
We need some advice on best practices. E.g. when someone comes to ask about good security questions, we should say something like: A) don't manage user passwords, use openid and recommend that they use an openid provider with good 2-factor authn B) if you must use passwords and security questions, you need a good practice behind them like [insert 1,2,3....]
@AviD yeah, I had a situation in trade chat in WoW the other day where someone was trying to call other users idiots, but he did it all without punctuation so that I went through and added some commas
@Adnan You do have every right to have opinions on them. Just because you have the right to be condescending and qockish doesn't mean we don't also have the right to call you out on it.
I still fail to see the point of the whole argument.
If you're complaining about the volume of the close queue - well, tough break. Get the site cleaned up, then there won't be the opportunity for that in the first place.
@Adnan I see two instances of foul language. One called out as such. The second, universally considered stronger than the other, also called out as such.
