Always fun to be misquoted. Oh well
Mufadal wrote:That's like saying the 1200+ people who attend the May Ball are 'friends of the society'.
a) Not to labour the point, but the idea that the people who take part in the parade are analogous to those who attend the Ball is absurd. The latter involves one buying a ticket and is an option freely available to all (they don't, so far as I'm aware, exercise any control as to who buys the tickets) whereas
Mufadal wrote:I categorically was not approached because I would give a negative soundbite; indeed, Lucy, the primary author of the piece, had no input or knowledge of what I would say since it was SHÂN ROSS who conducted my interview which led to the quotation in the article.
Curiouser and curiouser. Okay;
b) Why then were you approached? If you aren't in a position of student leadership or representation, if you aren't a friend of Lucy's and you aren't someone they targeted to get the reaction quote they wanted... who are you? I mean, I'm sure you're nice and all but do you think, staking a step back and looking at it objectively, it makes all that much sense to have quoted you in the article?
Mufadal wrote:...nor did the club have any influence whatsoever on my thoughts in the Scotsmen piece.
Okay. Not wanting to be a hypocrite, and impose on you higher standards than I impose on myself but... what did influence your thoughts on the piece. I mean, did you take part in the meetings of the University Court (or whoever) on the subject? Were you covering the move for the Saint? Have you been discussing the subject with Andrew Keenan or something? Would you consider yourself 'informed' and if so why? And if not... why did you think it was a good idea to give comment to a newspaper?