Bagpipes Under Threat in London

[neloon]

"Not really sure I'd call it political"
Have you read the comments?!!!
Alan

[Jock Scot]

I can't help but agree with Boris that a set of pipes played close to, can be rather trying. On the other hand, pipes played from a range of three hundred yards or so, is just fine for my ears. Hyde Park would be perfect! Military pipe bands, combined with wind instruments are fine at any range.

[John_Carrick]

Much as I like an occasional dose of the pipes, if some eejit was playing them outside my office window for a prolonged period I would probably become rather annoyed and would want some legal rights at my disposal.
These things are seen as political in the UK 10 days out from the general election, but I can't see that this bureaucratic measure by the London administration was intended to be an intervention in the campaign.
Brickbats are being flung in all directions in any case!

[WillowEstate]

"Not really sure I'd call it political"
Have you read the comments?!!!
Alan

Indeed I have and taken them into consideration, Alan but I based mine on the original article and not the secondhand opinions of others. I also recall, when I had the misfortune to have to visit London regularly, that previous mayors, of all persuasions, have almost universally attempted to reduce or eliminate buskers from public places in London.

Your assessment differs from mine and we are fortunate to live (or used to live, in my case) in a country where our democracy encourages such discourse.

[cessna152towser]

Have Father Bill and myself missed something?
I can't see this as political. The proposed new code of conduct for London is not an anti-Scottish initiative against the bagpipe, indeed the restriction would also apply to electric guitars and to drums of all nationalities and cultures.
True, further down the page the article does quote Alistair Campbell who is a political personality, but even then there doesn't seem to be anything political apart from a light hearted political dig at the other main party in the last paragraph of the quote.
The link posted was to the original article and I have not seen any comments which may have been added below it.

[neloon]

But it's the comments that matter! How about
"I wholeheartedly support the proposition that Boris Johnson might be the next Tory Prime Minister. His clowning glory might be Scotland going its own way because of his thoroughly rabid English diatribes. Stuff you, Boris and let's get on with the business of taking over our own country and running it for its own and sole advantage. Westminster no more! SW1 no more. London no more. HSBC no more. Any more for no more?" ?
Alan

[Father Bill]

I cannot agree with the suggestion that the comments matter or that as such I will have made an error in commenting on this news item.

Most of us will have noticed that most comments on the Internet are not as polite as those made here on XMarks. In "the wild," it's almost impossible to post any polite item on the 'net without having rude, political, sexual, or other inappropriate comments made almost immediately.

Were we to censor our interests based on the unmoderated trash that comes from the general trolling public, we'd have nothing by XMarks itself left to host polite discussion. For those reasons, I do not think that the comments of immoderate and un-moderated responders can be considered when we select those news items on which to comment.

So, therefore I'm quite willing to respond to an article whether it be in the USA or elsewhere (that seemed to me a wee bit sarcastic and more than a little harsh) and am forced to take little or no notice of the comments of the riff-raff following various articles. XMarkers are not such riff-raff which is why I enjoy participating here.

...and pipers are still welcome on my front lawn during daylight hours.

[Damion]

Wheesht, the only comments that matter are the ones on this board!

I take it no survey on what the public feel on the matter has taken place. Or if there has then it would be appropriate to have mentioned it in the article.
It seems to me that banning pipers from busking in areas where they are most like to get money from passersby is tantamount to banning pipes from the streets. There is the provision for 'moving regularly' but what does that actually mean - every 30 seconds, two minutes...? More details are needed.

[CDNSushi]

Indeed, the moderators do not concern themselves with comments made on other sites. The article itself and the link to it are not in violation of any rule that I can tell. Although, I ought to point out, that directly QUOTING any political or otherwise inappropriate comments that appear elsewhere and putting them HERE, are liable to be sanctioned. That could be seen as provocation and trying to cause an argument here, where there was none before.

Please consider this a warning shot. A Rule #2 flag may be at hand.

We believe in fostering polite discussion. Posts which provoke quarrels, escalate contention, or are hostile or insulting, are subject to removal.

[Kiltedjohn]

Certainly some of the comments at the bottom of the article are hostile and insulting, mostly to BJ. I was most amused by some of them - really brightened up my morning! (Not being political, just amused.)