Here is a copy of the thread from the www.veggieromance.com forum. Preserved here are many but not all of the names that people posted under. After this archived copy was made, almost all of the names were removed and changed to "Anon". The entire thread was later removed from the forum, so you won't find it there any more, unless perhaps you join the fight to have it reinstated.

Topic: i was fuming
Posted : 14/03/06 / Views : 2168 / Replies : 44


veggiewoman
Sex female
Age 30
Posts 515

I have only read a couple of the paragraphs so far and its already got me FUMMING lol , but just wondered what you all thought of it :

http://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/nikolas.lloyd/opinion/veggie.html

hope link works :)


Reply #1: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 04/01/06

loadsofun
Sex male
Age 49
Posts 47

Hi,
I too tried to read some of this article but found the reasoning extremely childish and ignorant, so I gave up. I think it's better and more productive to read positive stuff and less ignoramus trash.
J

Reply #2: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 04/01/06

martini
Sex male
Age 39
Posts 27

Well-done for spotting this one. Yes it's puerile and its sole intention is probably just to make us fuming. However I reckon it could also be deemed as offensive. The title for instance states 'force-feeding' vegetarians with a substance which would violate a core principle. I find this deeply offensive and certainly this language wouldn't be tolerated if it was applied to a person not eating animal products for religious reasons. Considering this guy probably works for Newcastle uni as the pages are hosted there:

http://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/

then they'll have to be careful with regards to content like this. In fact their site policy says as much. So I reckon we can send the webmaster a polite email asking them to remove the essay.

I've sent an edited version of this post as a starter. Reason is the best weapon here. I'll let you know how I get on.


Reply #3: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 04/01/06

martini
Sex male
Age 39
Posts 27

Here's the email I sent:

Hello

The following content hosted on your site has been brought to my attention:

http://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/nikolas.lloyd/opinion/veggie.html

There are a very large number of people in the vegetarian community who find this essay distasteful. The title for instance states 'force-feeding' vegetarians with a substance which would violate one of their core principles. This is deeply offensive and certainly language of this kind wouldn't be tolerated if it was applied to a person not eating animal products for religious reasons. It certainly seems to be way out of line with your university's acceptable use policy. I'm kindly requesting that you remove this content and that you also review this author's wider set of personal opinions held on your university servers at:

http://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/nikolas.lloyd/opinion/opinion.html

I trust that this material has not been hosted with your consent and that this oversight will be rectified forthwith.

Regards

Ian Martin


Reply #4: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 04/01/06


Demeter
Sex female
Age 19
Posts 147

That'll show him. A lot of it is pure rubbish represented as fact, so it really should be removed. Then he'll have even more reason to hate vegetarians! He probably needs to get more.


Reply #5: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 04/01/06
Demeter
Sex female
Age 19
Posts 147

I actually meant "He probably needs to get OUT more", but he probably does need to get more as well.


Reply #6: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 04/01/06

veggiewoman
Sex female
Age 30
Posts 515

great news, keep up the good work :) , let us know what response u get won't u :)


Reply #7: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 04/01/06

Crouching Panda
Sex male
Age 43
Posts 414

That's brilliant Ian, well done....maybe more of us should send emails in a similar vein?


Reply #8: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 04/01/06

martini
Sex male
Age 39
Posts 27

Their response and my reply below. I'll keep you posted.

***

Dear Mr Martin

Thank you for the information. I am looking into this matter and will give a formal response as soon as I can. In the meantime I would be grateful if you could provide some further details as requested below.

You say in your complaint that "[Nikolas Lloyds's opinions on vegetarianism] certainly seems to be way out of line with your university's acceptable use policy".

It would be helpful if you could cite the particular section of that policy with which you believe it is in breach?

Could you also please clarify whether the e-mail below is a personal complaint, but sent using your employing institution's e-mail facilities, or one submitted on behalf of your institution at their request or with their consent.

This clarification is needed for reporting purposes. It will _not_ effect how we investigate the matter nor alter the nature of possible actions that we might take.

****



Hi Quentin

Thanks for getting back to me so quickly. This is the section of your policy that's particularly relevant. The highlighting is mine.

G8
"University computing equipment may not be used for the creation, display, importation, referral, transmission, circulation or storage of material which is offensive, *intended to annoy*, defamatory, copyright, or which endangers the reputation of the University."

Your introduction to the staff pages has some relevant text too and again the highlighting is mine.

"The University of Newcastle upon Tyne exercises no editorial control but reserves the right to remove material which breaches copyright, is *offensive*, obscene, defamatory, *inaccurate*, or otherwise brings the University into disrepute. The University will take immediate action if problems of this nature are brought to its attention."

This is a personal complaint on behalf of a group of concerned individuals and in this case these opinions are not those of my institution.


Reply #9: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 04/01/06

martini
Sex male
Age 39
Posts 27

Their response and my reply below. I'll keep you posted.

***

Dear Mr Martin

Thank you for the information. I am looking into this matter and will give a formal response as soon as I can. In the meantime I would be grateful if you could provide some further details as requested below.

You say in your complaint that "[Nikolas Lloyds's opinions on vegetarianism] certainly seems to be way out of line with your university's acceptable use policy".

It would be helpful if you could cite the particular section of that policy with which you believe it is in breach?

Could you also please clarify whether the e-mail below is a personal complaint, but sent using your employing institution's e-mail facilities, or one submitted on behalf of your institution at their request or with their consent.

This clarification is needed for reporting purposes. It will _not_ effect how we investigate the matter nor alter the nature of possible actions that we might take.

****

Hi Quentin

Thanks for getting back to me so quickly. This is the section of your policy that's particularly relevant. The highlighting is mine.

G8
"University computing equipment may not be used for the creation, display, importation, referral, transmission, circulation or storage of material which is offensive, *intended to annoy*, defamatory, copyright, or which endangers the reputation of the University."

Your introduction to the staff pages has some relevant text too and again the highlighting is mine.

"The University of Newcastle upon Tyne exercises no editorial control but reserves the right to remove material which breaches copyright, is *offensive*, obscene, defamatory, *inaccurate*, or otherwise brings the University into disrepute. The University will take immediate action if problems of this nature are brought to its attention."

This is a personal complaint on behalf of a group of concerned individuals and in this case these opinions are not those of my institution.


Reply #10: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 04/01/06

User anon

Nice one Ian!


Reply #11: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 04/01/06

veganonthenet
Sex female
Age 34
Posts 79

Excellent work Martini, well done.


Reply #12: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 04/01/06

veggiewoman
Sex female
Age 30
Posts 515



OMG I never expected this when I put up this post!!lol. Glad you have done what you have though but also hope u don't end up in any trouble too all becuase of me showing u this lol.

good luck and thank you for doing it x


Reply #13: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 05/01/06

filmloverbabe
Sex female
Age 32
Posts 19

Hello all,

Well, I don't usually post, or even get online to this site all that much, but I read this thread and thought I'd do my bit. So I wrote to the Uni myself as well. Here's a copy of our correspondences:

(Me): Dear Sir or Madam:

It has been brought to my attention that there is a very offensive 'opinion' posted on your site. http://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/nikolas.lloyd/opinion/veggie.html

I have been a vegetarian for 20 years, and I hold an environmental science degree and two other degrees. As a highly educated person I consider this posting to be extremely inaccurate, offensive and defamatory. Would you kindly therefore consider removing it.

Your policy states: "University computing equipment may not be used for the creation, display, importation, referral, transmission, circulation or storage of material which is offensive, intended to annoy, defamatory, copyright, or which endangers the reputation of the University."

This posting refers to force-feeding vegetarians lard, it is deliberately intended to annoy, and it certainly does seriously endanger the reputation of your university since you are hosting this content.

Please pass this message onto the relevant person.
****************************

Their reply:

I am looking into this matter and will give a full and formal response as soon as I can.

In deciding what action, if any, the University should take in this matter I am mindful of the obligation of the University, under section 43 of the Education (No 2) Act 1986, to protect the freedom of speech of its staff. The relevant part of this act says:

"43.-(1) Every individual and body of persons concerned in the government of any establishment to which this section applies shall take such steps as are reasonably practicable to ensure that freedom of speech within the law is secured for members, students and employees of the establishment and for visiting speakers".

You may not agree with the personal opinions that Nikolas Lloyd publishes on our staff web site here but as his views do not appear to break the law (*) of the UK the University cannot without proper cause prevent him from expressing them.

You should consider whether he deserves the publicity you and others are giving him by responding to his provocative views.

(*) I doubt if his views are defamatory (as you claim below) since in UK law he is not making libelous comments about the character of an individual.

Quentin Campbell (Postmaster)
---
PHONE: [removed by Lloyd] Information Systems and Services (ISS),University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne, FAX: [removed to protect the innocent] United Kingdom, NE1 7RU.

*******************************************

Me:

Dear Mr. Campbell

Thank you for your prompt reply. Whilst I support freedom of speech, there are different ways of expressing oneself. This posting *deliberately intends to annoy*. It also *deliberately intends to offend*, and has indeed offended numerous vegetarians. This is in direct contradiction to the University's OWN RULES!

Moreover, whilst it may not be defamatory on an individual level, it certainly portrays the vegetarian community in a very negative light.

It also adversely affects the way others view the University; again in contradiction to it's own rules. The University might therefore also wish to consider that Mr. Lloyd's postings could be defamatory against the University's own reputation.

Whilst your comments about giving Mr. Lloyd undue attention are well-taken, I and others feel that such offensive 'ranting' should not go unchallenged and should not be permitted.

*********************************

So there ya go; I really cannot be bothered to waste anymore time on this, thought I do think it's nice that we have the webmaster's phone number(hint hint!) if anyone felt like calling him :)

All I can say is ... what a bunch of muppets!

Have a nice day XX


Reply #14: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 05/01/06

Cactus
Sex male
Age 43
Posts 51

Hummm. Yes it's mostly crap nonsense, but it's so bad it's really quite funny. Do lighten up people. Have you looked at some of the other rants/articles in the same section? A Woman's Place. Why Banning Hunting is Evil. Hollywood Versus Britain. Imperfect Isn't Bad. There's lots there. I have to say one or two I have a tendency to agree with....


Reply #15: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 05/01/06

Cactus
Sex male
Age 43
Posts 51



I was going to write a bit more but the Vegan Police have just turned up at my door. I may be gone sometime….


Reply #16: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 06/01/06

tofuman
Sex male
Age 42
Posts 1

Hi all

Ian is right in arguing that while we might expect this sort of pooh all over the www it shouldn't be sitting on a University Website. I've also emailed the webmaster who seems to be defending the proposal of forcefeeding veggies lard with freedom of speech. I'll send his reply to the list if I get any further

all best

Peter

see email thread below

Quentin

thanks for your email. I fully support freedom of speech but think that a University should be very careful if this extends to avocation of violence against a group of people. As you may guess from my email address I work in the education sector and know that in education freedom of speech comes a responsibility not to attack groups of people in a prejudice or offensive way or suggest violent behaviour towards a group of people. I have no problem at all with the majority of your colleagues webpage. I think it is ill argued and deeply prejudice but that's his prerogative and does not concern me. The issue I have is with his title which states

Why vegetarians should be force fed with lard

clearly this is not something that any vegetarian would volunteer to do so I guess it would have to be done with some considerable degree of force or violence.

from my perspective even if tongue in cheek this is advocating violence and extremely offensive.

Would you support the freedom of speech of a colleague who advocated force feeding Jews or Muslims with Pork for example. I'm sure you wouldn't also support the freedom of speech for someone using your website for advocating racist, sexist, homophobic views etc.

I think you might also want to look at your JANET agreement. Please find below a copy of part of the Unacceptable use of your JANET connection.

I assume that your webpages are connected to the internet via a JANET connection. Please let me know if I am wrong here.

Unacceptable Use

9. JANET may not be used for any of the following:

9.2. the creation or transmission of material which is designed or likely to cause annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety;

9.3. the creation or transmission of defamatory material;

I think advocating the force-feeding of a group of people arguably violated these.

I look forward to your response

regards

Peter

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Quentin Campbell [mailto:Q.G.Campbell@newcastle.ac.uk]
Sent: Fri 06/01/2006 4:06 PM
To: Kilcoyne, Peter
Cc: Helpline
Subject: RE: very offensive webpage

Dear Mr Kilcoyne

I am looking into this matter and will give a full and formal response as soon as I can.

In deciding what action, if any, the University should take in this matter I am mindful of the obligation of the University, under section 43 of the Education (No 2) Act 1986, to protect the freedom of speech of its staff. The relevant part of this Act says:

"43.-(1) Every individual and body of persons concerned in the government of any establishment to which this section applies shall take such steps as are reasonably practicable to ensure that freedom of speech within the law is secured for members, students and employees of the establishment and for visiting speakers".

You may not agree with the personal opinions that Nikolas Lloyd publishes on our staff web site here but as his views do not appear to break the law of the UK the University cannot without proper cause prevent him from expressing them.

You should consider whether he deserves the publicity you and others are giving him by responding to his provocative views.

Quentin Campbell (Postmaster)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any opinion expressed above is mine. The University can get its own.

-----Original Message-----

From: p.kilcoyne@wlv.ac.uk [mailto:p.kilcoyne@wlv.ac.uk]
Sent: 05 January 2006 22:11
To: webmaster@ncl.ac.uk
Subject: very offensive webpage

Name: Peter Kilcoyne
Email: p.kilcoyne@wlv.ac.uk
Subject: very offensive webpage
URL: http://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/nikolas.lloyd/opinion/veggie.html

Comments:

I was very shocked when I came across this. I have nothing against people writing stupid and ignorant things on the Internet. Thats partly what its for but the title of this is in my opinion overstepping the mark in its violent message and I'm surprised it is allowed on a University website. If your university is typical I would expect that about 10% of your students and prospective students would be veggie or vegan. I'm not sure if they would be comfortable knowing that a member of staff had such violent wishes about what should happen to them. Do you have any policy about use of the website for violent of offensive material? I would be interested to know what steps will be taken about this.


Reply #17: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 06/01/06


birdynumnum
Sex male
Age 49
Posts 25

Well folks, i wouldn't get too concerned with these rantings. He is of course entitled to freedom of speech, but most of his 'speech' is absolute rubbish. Someone (sorry i forgot who) said it's childish, i agree. Let the sad little $%^&^££ get this off of his chest, he sounds like he has a big problem. A very sad individual,I would laugh at him, but i think he may need help.


Reply #18: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 07/01/06

User anon

Yet again, this whole 'freedom of speech' thing being trotted out.

If I didn't work full time and could be arsed, I'd submit a piece entitled, 'Why universities are a complete waste of taxpayers' money that should be scrapped', but they clearly wouldn't publish it.


Reply #19: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 07/01/06

Crouching Panda
Sex male
Age 43
Posts 414

Yeah I agree CityFox, also to an extent with birdynumnum (btw I still don't get why you chose that name even after seeing your post explaining it!..but it's got a ring to it), in that it's a waste of time and energy to get too worked up about that idiot.....

On the other hand it's good to challenge these statements sometimes..can we not send a reply to him, even if the University won't remove the offending article?

Talking about education I saw on the front of some angling paper that fishing lessons are to be part of the national curriculum....some mistake , surely? I had to check the date in case it was April 1st...


Reply #20: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 07/01/06

Cactus
Sex male
Age 43
Posts 51

I wonder if the author of this article wrote it in jest or seriously, (or a combination of both)? I sent the link to a meat eating friend at work who's just told the organisers of our staff conference that's she's vegan, to make things awkward regarding the catering. I await her view on it.

Lots of humour is based on offending or belittling someone. There are lots of jokes, comedy and humour based on death, the situation in Iraq, the apparent stupidity of foreigners, slavery, disability, religion, etc etc. None of these topics or ideas is actually funny, yet they can be humorous. For example, I find racial stereotypes very funny, yet racism pisses me off big time. I'm sure that statement would enable some people to feel they can brand me a racist. There's also world of difference between what people think, say or actually do; you can't stop people thinking.

In a lot of cases we have laws in place to protect certain groups of people and in general the majority of people claim to support these. Yet there are endless jokes and TV programmes etc based around these very subjects that lots of people think are funny. In actual fact, society has so many double standards regarding what it find acceptable or unacceptable, it would take a long time just to identify them all.

If we tried to stop anything funny that was offensive to anyone (including vegetarians and vegetarianism) we would fail; and anyway if we did manage it we'd end up with humour at little more than the level of: "What's big and red and eats rocks? A big, red, rock eater." (And I wouldn't be surprised if that offends someone in some way, somewhere).

Whether we like it or not, vegetarianism is a political ideology, an ethos, a set of ways we choose to act, an outlook on life where we deem something is not acceptable for a range of reasons, so we choose to restrict our ability to do something as a result. In a lot of cases it is very hard to actually 'prove' these reasons are valid, although common sense does it for me. Perhaps one day eating meat will be as socially unacceptable as drinking and driving or racism, however these things will still continue to happen and have jokes and serious 'unacceptable to the masses' comments made about them.

If you feel it is unacceptable for this article to be published then you must also accept that what you are really saying is the author does not have the moral right to express these views. This is freedom of speech. I actually find that quite scary. If we didn't have freedom of speech then you wouldn't feel safe even challenging its existence (assuming its publication hadn't already been restricted in the same way). In any case, the whole issue that the university has bought up about freedom of speech is really a red herring (or whatever the vegie version of that is). What I think actually annoys a lot of people here (and me) is that the article seems factually inaccurate, although again you have to be clear about what is fact and what is opinion. Facts can be shown to be wrong, someone's opinion is never wrong, it's just that you don't shared it. This is an entirely different issue to freedom of speech. The author does have the right to publish the article, but facts ought to be accurate (otherwise it become propaganda) and most people and organisations, including universities, ought to understand the difference between advertising and propaganda. Of course, if the article is meant to be taken humorously rather than seriously, then the situation changes again.

I read somewhere once that what you read in a newspaper is either news (which is something someone doesn't want you to see) or advertising (which is something someone does want you to see); this isn't the same thing as viewing a newspaper as a mixture of articles and adverts. Let's treat this article as factually inaccurate advertising, not news.

Anyway, I actually like the part in it where it says that men who are vegetarians will become more attractive to women and probably only do it for this purpose anyway. So one at a time ladies, form an orderly queue...


Reply #21: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 07/01/06

birdynumnum
Sex male
Age 49
Posts 25

Well put Cactus, regards the racism jokes etc i agree with what you wrote.
And regarding vegetarianism being an ethos, surely that's why we are on this site?.
Maybe that guy is joking, as it's so pathetic.


Reply #22: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 07/01/06

e.g. teddy bear
Sex male
Age 26
Posts 153

The articles are stupid but censoring him would be strange, internet is a free medium. There is plenty of information online to put the record straight on this guy and his love of meat, hunting and fur.


Reply #23: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 09/01/06

martini
Sex male
Age 39
Posts 27

OK here's the webmaster's official response. Maybe a call to the Sun with a suggested headline of "University advocates force feeding vegetarians with lard" should be our next course of action.

**

Dear Mr Martin

You made a complaint about web content in the Staff Personal Home Pages to be found at
http://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/nikolas.lloyd/opinion/veggie.html.

I have considered very carefully your correspondence in this matter and give below the formal response of Information Systems and Services (ISS) of the University of Newcastle upon Tyne.

SUMMARY

The University of Newcastle upon Tyne allows its staff and students limited personal use of University computing facilities and the Internet as a matter of policy.

The University also has a legal obligation to uphold the principles of free speech within the law.

The beliefs or views of which you complain are a personal and lawful expression of opinion by a member of staff on a University web server. They are not defamatory of a person or organisation. They have no implicit support from the University. They are not otherwise in breach of UK law or of any University policy or rules for reasons explained in more detail below.

Information Systems and Services is thus unable to agree to your request to take down the web pages of which you have complained.

ISS notes that you find personally unacceptable the beliefs and views expressed on the site. However you should consider whether this person deserves the publicity you and others are giving him by responding to his provocative views. It appears that you are playing into his hands by providing him with the reactions and material he is seeking.

Please find below a more detailed explanation of this decision. This should also address specific points you have raised in your correspondence.

DECISION IN DETAIL

1. The University of Newcastle upon Tyne has a legal obligation, imposed upon it by Section 43 of the Education (No 2) Act 1986, to "ensure that freedom of speech within the law is secured for members, students and employees of the establishment and for visiting speakers."

2. The University discharges that obligation by publishing and enforcing a Code of Practice for Freedom of Speech that has to be observed by members, students and employees of the University.

3. The University as a separate matter of policy allows its members personal use of University computing and Internet facilities subject to certain conditions. These conditions include a requirement that "Such use does not infringe any legislation, nor any other University policy or rules."

4. Among the University rules to which this applies is 'G8 Unacceptable use' in the University's Rules of Use of Computing Facilities (July 2005 edition). The responsibility for applying the Rules of Use rests with Information Systems and Services (ISS).

5. Rule G8 states that "University computing equipment may not be used for the creation, display, importation, referral, transmission, circulation or storage of material which is offensive, intended to annoy, defamatory, copyright, or which endangers the reputation of the University. This list is not exhaustive; the definition of unacceptable use of the national network [JANET] is at the UKERNA Web site."

6. The definitions of unacceptable use of the national network, defined in the JANET Acceptable Use Policy (AUP), must take priority over the University's local rules on unacceptable use when electronic communications from our site transit the national network. This is the case, for example, when a University of Newcastle web site is viewed from outside the University.

7. For this reason the University bases its 'G8 Unacceptable use' rule on Section 9 of the JANET AUP at http://www.ja.net/services/publications/policy/aup.html.

8. When interpreting terms such as "offensive" and "intended to annoy" in the University's own rules ISS has to look at their use and intended meaning in the JANET AUP. Furthermore the application of that interpretation has to be consistent with the Education (No 2) Act 1986.

9. In Section 9.1 of the JANET AUP the word "offensive" is used solely in the context of "obscene or indecent images or material". The use of the word "offensive" in Section 9.1 is not meant to apply to the creation or transmission of material such as expressions of lawful beliefs or views as personal opinion. ISS applies the same interpretation to the word "offensive" in the University's rules on acceptable use.

10. In Section 9.2 of the JANET AUP the prohibition on the creation or transmission of material "which is designed or likely to cause annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety" has to be interpreted within UK law as it applies to universities. For this reason Section 9.2 cannot offer a remedy to your complaint. The University's Code of Practice on Freedom of Speech means that the term "intended to annoy" cannot be used to deny freedom of speech within the law to members, students and employees of the University.

11. It follows from the above that such terms in the JANET AUP and in the University's own rules of use cannot be used by ISS as grounds for suppressing the lawful expression of personal beliefs or views by members, students and employees of the University because you find those beliefs and views provocative, objectionable and challenging to your own sincerely held beliefs and views.

12. The University makes clear that the content of the Staff Personal Home Pages are the sole responsibility of the individual maintainers. The University exercises no editorial control over the content but reserves the right to remove material "which breaches copyright, is offensive, obscene, defamatory, inaccurate or otherwise brings the University into disrepute".

13. ISS acts on behalf of the University in the application of those reserved rights. ISS is diligent in the performance of those responsibilities to the fullest extent that UK law allows. The content of which you complain does not breach copyright nor is it defamatory of a person or organisation nor does it appear to be otherwise in breach of UK law.

14. ISS has done all it can to resolve this matter within the constraints of UK law. The outcome cannot be taken as implying support or approval by the University of any of the content of the Staff Personal Home Pages.

15. In the light of all the above it would be perverse to assert that the continued presence on a University server of lawful expressions of beliefs and views with which readers may strongly disagree must therefore bring the University into disrepute.

16. After considering the points set out above, Information Systems and Services has no choice but to reject your request to take down the web pages at http://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/nikolas.lloyd/opinion/veggie.html.

17. ISS has taken your complaint seriously and has given a full and carefully considered response. It is possible that you may be unhappy with the outcome but there is no formal procedure for appeal against the decision I have set out above on behalf of ISS.

18. However as your complaint is in respect of the activities of a member of the University who is designated as "staff", you could refer the matter to the University's Human Resources section by e-mailing "HR@newcastle.ac.uk". You should be aware that the same legal constraints will apply to Human Resources if they are asked to consider the matter.

Your sincerely

Quentin Campbell (Postmaster)
------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply #24: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 09/01/06

User anon

Please be joking Marini! I don't think Sun readers would be on our side, I can imagine hoardes of the great unwashed taking up this nutter's banner!


Reply #25: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 09/01/06

User anon

Sorry Martini, missed the 't'


Reply #26: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 09/01/06

martini
Sex male
Age 39
Posts 27

I wasn't thinking of converting the Sun's readership, more generating unwanted publicity for the University. Any popular media outlet would do. I don't think the attention would help the uni's marketing efforts much.


Reply #27: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 10/01/06

Crouching Panda
Sex male
Age 43
Posts 414

maybe not the Sun, but they had a campaign against animal cruelty and we should inform about the cruelties of the meat/dairy trades and see if they would run stories on those.

The deciesion they made is wrong and their reasons are rubbish, to say it's not defaming "a person or organisation" is suspect as he offended and attacked a large group of people in an insulting way without justification.

If I were HR Director there I'd have doubts about employing someone with such deranged views and so we should email ""HR@newcastle.ac.uk" and tell them so politely...

Maybe someone can remind us of the name of the offender? We'd have to be careful not to "defame" him in any email or we lose the high ground....


Reply #28: WE KNOW RIGHT FROM WRONG!
Posted : 10/01/06

greying and green
Sex male
Age 61
Posts 19

It's as simple as that!Our conscience tells us that as does our soul.We need no morons even from universties to tell us otherwise.I would imagine the this Nikolas charactor has other uses for his lard and it's probably cheaper than Vaseline!


Reply #29: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 10/01/06

filmloverbabe
Sex female
Age 32
Posts 19

Hello again everyone,

Well, I got the same reply from Newcastle as Martini. Thanks Tofuman for also writing in and for your excellent comments.

Yes, I definitely support writing to a newspaper and getting this out into the open a bit more. Great idea Martini; I hope you do it. This guy is actually a STAFF member at Newcastle Uni incidentally; which to me makes it even more disturbing that he holds such an angry viewpoint towards vegetarians. One would hope that people in the education sector would be a bit more tactful in the way in which they communicate.

I do support freedom of speech but it is the WAY this guy has expressed himself which I find offensive and worrying. As tofuman says, the idea of force-feeding vegetarians lard is a violent one. Whilst that comment might be partially tongue in cheek, there is some nasty energy behind it. Yes there are some funny jokes about all kinds of things but I really don't think his posting is deliberately supposed to be funny; I think it's an expression of rage. Maybe he had a veggie girlfriend who broke up with him or something? Who knows what could be behind all that.

Anyway, I'm still shocked that the University would permit such a thing, because indeed, if he was suggesting Jews should be force-fed pork, no doubt they would remove that! I think our only recourse now is to go to someone higher up in the University or generate some publicity about all of this. That could, of course, be playing into his hands, but it just *might* result in the Uni being forced to back down...


Reply #30: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 10/01/06

topaz1
Sex female
Age 33
Posts 5

If not The Sun why not try writing to one of the broad sheet newspapers? I think it would be just as good a headline for them, and they might be more sympathetic.


Reply #31: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 07/02/06

irrationalman
Sex female
Age 38
Posts 2

Excellent. Personally, I believe that nobody should be allowed to publish or say anything that offends me, and I will always campaign to get it removed so that no-one else is allowed to read it. It is vital that we join together and campaign to remove this article. But that's not enough. I plan to go over to Nikolas Lloyd's house and set fire to it. Afterwards, I will behead him, as that seems an appropriate response to the emotional hurt and offense that he has caused me. If only he had a flag I could burn!

It is also important that we don't actually list any of the 'factual errors' in the article in any letters that we write, as that would invite rational discussion. We must concentrate purely on our deeply hurt feelings.

Thank God we are finally able to lay to rest the impression, put over in this and other articles, that vegetarians are oversensitive, insecure, humourless and intolerant of other people's views!

Seriously though, how does this sort of stuff sound to others, particularly with what's going on the world at present because of something humourous giving offence? Are we on the side of free speech or censorship by letter writing campaigns?

Irrational Man


Reply #32: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 07/02/06

Cakefinder
Sex male
Age 36
Posts 1

Quote: "But that's not enough. I plan to go over to Nikolas Lloyd's house and set fire to it. Afterwards, I will behead him, as that seems an appropriate response to the emotional hurt and offense that he has caused me. If only he had a flag I could burn!

Thank God we are finally able to lay to rest the impression, put over in this and other articles, that vegetarians are oversensitive, insecure, humourless and intolerant of other people's views!"

Hilarious!

Personally, I find cake, especially Chocolate Cheesecake (vegan of course) excellent for hurt feelings.

Perhaps you might try eating some? It may help.


Reply #33: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 07/02/06

Maximax
Sex female
Age 33
Posts 81

I was also very cross after reading some of this silly man's ideas!

I hope that it is taken off the internet!


Reply #34: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 07/02/06

User anon

What a pillock! I dont mind the entry existing on the net, freedom of speech and all that. (If I expect to be allowed to yell outside oxfords lab then he has to be allowed to air his views too.)

Ive sent him an email countering all his points, if I get a reply from him I'll post it here.

Reply #35: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 07/02/06

User anon

Im calling Nikolas a pillock, just to clarify!!


Reply #36: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 07/02/06

User anon

This Nikolas Lloyd must be rubbing his hands together that he's got such a response.

Can't we just loosen up a little?

Look at the situation in Norway now - it's not the cartoon publishers coming out of it looking the bad guys, it's the extremists. Exactly like the christian protests at the Jerry Springer stage show. That would happen here, the media would not paint a good light on another group of whingers hating freedom of speech.


Reply #37: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 08/02/06

martini
Sex male
Age 39
Posts 27

Hmmm some people have strayed from the orginal argument a little here. Free speech isn't the issue (although it is an interesting one given the cartoon antics at the moment). The issue is that his comments are hosted on a university webserver and transmitted by the JANET academic network, both of which have clear acceptable use policies (AUPs) determining just what these services can be used for. He can say what he wants (sort of) from a personal homepage, but not from The University of Newcastle website. He's clearly in breach of these AUPs, but the webmaster is defending him to the hilt at the moment.

I'm currently progressing this issue with his HR dept. I'm not holding my breath for a positive response, but I fail to see how this rational action can be compared to setting light to his workplace or asking for his head on a plate.

And if you think that we should all laugh about this because we are so uptight because we are veg*ns then maybe we should all book a big table to at the Embassy club to see Bernard Manning. Or even Jim Davidson for the southern contingent. That'd be funny because it's OK to be racist and sexist. It's just freedom of speech, right? Why are we all so uptight about that?


Reply #38: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 08/02/06

irrationalman
Sex female
Age 38
Posts 2

Well, 'martini', I'm sorry but that won't wash.

Using the excuse that these views are on a University Website isn't adequate. It is plain to any reader that these do not represent the views of Newcastle University, but a personal view. The fact that a member of that institution thinks and says things that are not in keeping with official policy is surely not a bad thing; it is arguable that it is this very independence of mind that universities should encourage. Perhaps people working in public institutions should only represent the views of the Government? It certainly works in Iran…

What you are doing is, frankly, pathetic and cowardly. Running to mummy and telling on someone that is doing something you don't like and asking mummy to tell them to stop it. Who are you doing this for? Is your own moral standpoint so weak that it can't take someone arguing with you and making fun of you? I doubt it. Presumably you are doing it for other people who aren't as clever as you and confident of their sense of 'moral superiority' (your words, your profile)? Well that is disgustingly condescending. Argue it out by e-mail, post up your own opinion piece, but don't try and stop other people having their say. Grow up and stand on your own two feet, and don't tell me you're doing it for the sake of others.

Is it a 'rational action' to talk to HR about someone writing something that makes you all upset? What - trying to get someone disciplined or sacked is a 'rational response'? What planet do you live on? Who is getting things out of proportion? I think that your actions are quite wicked, to be honest.

I find it interesting that someone has said that he should 'get out more'. I notice that Nikolas Lloyd teaches swing dancing, does semi-professional photography, war gaming, role playing and playwriting. I would suggest he 'gets out' more than people sitting writing complaining letters about their hurt feelings.

Would I go and see Jim Davidson? No. But I would fight for his right to say what he says. If he is wrong, it is an open society that will allow others to speak against him and give their viewpoint. Once you start deciding what can and can't be said, justice and liberty go out of the window. Freedom of speech doesn't mean that 'everything is OK'. But it gives people the chance to decide for themselves, rather than Big Sibling deciding for them

Noam Chomsky says that if you believe in freedom of speech, you must fight for the right of people to say things that you don't agree with - in fact, particularly those people. Anything less is not free speech, whatever else you want to call it.

Toodle pip.


Reply #39: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 08/02/06

snowbunny
Sex female
Age 42
Posts 1

Grrr! When I come across err, 'people' like this (don't want to be rude)I want to beat them over the head with my vegan cook books!


Reply #40: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 09/02/06

martini
Sex male
Age 39
Posts 27

Irrational (wo)man - I guess you are Nikolas Lloyd then. Hello and thanks for popping by - albeit in a thin disguise. For info: it was your webmaster who suggested contacting HR. You'll see that if you re-read the posts. I never said I wanted to get you sacked - unless that's what HR have said to you and you've assumed it came from me. It didn't. Maybe it's time to get your hand in your pocket and buy your own webspace that isn't subject to any Acceptable Use Policies. Save yourself some bother.


Reply #41: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 09/02/06

veganonthenet
Sex female
Age 34
Posts 79

Yeah irrational speak for yourself alot of us appreciate what Martini has done, seems to me it's you who has the problem of Martini having an opinion - what happened to his right to freedom of speech then? if you're so big on that then why have a problem with Martini expressing his (and our) view on what's been said. Or do you expect us to shut up and take your crap when you insult us, as if..


Reply #42: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 10/02/06

Sensitive Guy
Sex male
Age 45
Posts 470

Dear Irrationalman,

You're never gonna interest anyone with such a 'small profile'! Why don't you post a photograph? Being a semi-professional photographer, you should no difficulty with that - then we can ALL see who you are.

<"Once you start deciding what can and can't be said, justice and liberty go out of the window.">

You're absolutely right, IM. Just look at 1930's Germany - No doubt you would not have attended Hitler's rallies, but you would have fought for his right to say what he wanted - right? - While he and his cronies subjugated Eastern Europe under their jackboot tyranny. Perhaps you might have formed a different opinion, had you been a Jew, or a gypsy, or a transvestite (I notice that you enjoy 'role-playing') living then..?

NL, go back to 'school' where you may impress your students with your 'witty' humour - you certainly don't impress anyone on here…

SG (Senseless Git)


Reply #43: Re: i was fuming
Posted : 24/02/06

Baby Buell Rider
Sex female
Age 35
Posts 115

Hi

has anything further happened with this?


Reply #44: Re: i was fuming Posted : 14/03/06

Littledevil
Sex male
Age 25
Posts 5

I think the article was extremely childish and used some very weak arguments; however censoring is not the way forward. Vegetarians frequently come across such trivial rubbish. I think it is helpful for such views to be brought into the public domain and directly challenged. I think a more helpful course of action would be to ask the university if we could submit an essay directly challenging such nonsense.

I am strictly against censorship of any kind as it is a tool often used by our opponents. Just think of the current worrying examples such as proposals to ban incitement to religious hatred and the attempts to criminalize the "glorifying of terrorism"

---

The Register's first article
The Register's second article
Dr Bruce Charlton's press release
The Times Higher Educational Supplement's article
Fraser Charlton's list of web-links on this affair
Richard Lockwood's blog, featuring many comments (you'll need to select normal founts)
The first (failed) attempt to have me banned
The silly essay that started the whole thing
Reinstate the veggie forum thread! Fight for freedom!