*PLEASE NOTE** Our comments on the other petition's posts and any any from their supporters posts is correct at the time of writing - their information may or may not be changed which could impact on the relevance and accuracy of what we post but this is outwith our control - we do not have the capacity to keep checking their posts for changes*

Hi all

Thankyou to everyone supporting us and the people we are fighting for!
 
Do not feel disheartened by the other petition having more signatures there are many possible reasons for this other than support for their cause such as publicity as discussed 2 days ago - there is also very powerful actual evidence that supports us which in theory in the eyes of councillors is most important and what they will make any decisions based on, a petition is a helpful addition to evidence but it is not everything.
 
Remember you only have until 8th August (at the moment) to have your say. Please see the end of this post for other ways to get involved.
 
Remember you can email us at: cemeteries4all@yahoo.com

The other petition have provided us with a couple of interesting posts the last couple of days - yet they have still not addressed their denial (lies?) about non-existent trial rules.

Their first post (Saturday) referred to us posting information from their private facebook group where they accused our supporter and ourselves of fraud and accused us of infiltrating their private group.

We would like to make it clear we have never attempted to join their group nor have we ever asked anyone else to - feel free to check our posts which are all public as we don't want to keep anything from anyone, especially our own supporters.

The person came to us with the information and we have no idea why they joined the group. It could have been a perfectly innocent reason with no monkey business at all - could they actually have supported the other petition and then changed their mind? Maybe they were put off by the other side denying (lying?) there were no trial rules or posting photos of people outside the cemetery with their dog on a lead, insulting them and claiming without any proof that their dog had dared to sniff near Xander's grave.

Perhaps they joined because they were thinking of supporting them and then changed their mind? Perhaps they  feel dogs are a problem in cemeteries but then decided there was another way rather than a ban that will affect a majority or rule abiding people for a minority of rule breakers in a minority of cemeteries?

We have no idea, people have their own minds and are perfectly able to think and act for themselves and there may be many innocent reasons they do so.

Perhaps the other petition need to think outside their apparent hatred for us and have a serious think why someone would join their group and do this as it was nothing to do with us? Perhaps they need to vet their people more carefully? Perhaps they need to think if what they're saying and doing it actually turning their supporters away from them?

All we did was post information they had been keeping secret - was this fraud or was this full disclosure of facts, campaign methods and reassuring the other side they did not need to worry about us "copying" "their" idea of flyers.

Interesting we believe flyers have been used for many many centuries - who knew Paul and Andy were that old, they wear it well.

In their second post they discussed how they were trying to track the person down. Fascinatingly they have excluded family, friends and friends of friends. That's 58 out of 98 group members - it's lovely they automatically trust them so but in reality should they be so easily discounted? Especially friends of friends who they may not even know very well. Who's to say the person is even in the group anymore?

They finished with this statement:

"Just one more thing..." this now puts the individual in a very difficult position, between a rock and a hard place so to speak...do they leave the group now, before we identify them (and thus immediately expose themselves)…or do they stick around to be publicly humiliated?"

Is it just us this sounds threatening and intimidating to? Is this some kind of threat? I seriously hope this person reports this to the police if they agree with us that that is unacceptable behaviour. We are considering doing so ourselves depending on what action the other petition propose.

It could always be that the person who wrote to us from this group really doesn't see it in the same light as the tiher petition, it is after all just a facebook group. It is not a secret safe space and it's not state secrets we are talking about. Yes, it was important to the other petition but that does not make it a heinous crime or indeed a mountain from a molehill.

We say this because anyone who has ever been in a private group on Facebook knows people join for all sorts of reasons and do all sorts or things with the information - it's actually a favourite trick of some of our media outlets - private favebook groups are not a secret or sacred place, and people you don't want in them will join; it's possibly a sad fact of life but it is a fact of modern cyber life. 

I can't actually think of a private group I've been in where information has not been shared outwith the group despite group rules or where people have joined for reasons otherwise specified by the group - perhaps the other petition is unfamiliar with social media and never experienced this before, like their supporter who likes their own posts perhaps they just don't know the cyber world very well and genuinely expected they would only get people they wanted.

As stated we have never asked anyone to join their group but we wouldn't be surprised if there were many people in there who did not join under the ethos of their group membership.

Again the other petition fails to acknowledge or apologise to their supporters the public in general for not only consistently misleading (lying to??) them but also now withholding information.

Instead they choose to appear to criticise us for someone joining their group (nothing to do with us and possibly initially as a supporter of them), for doing what they can't do (be honest and open with people) and because we offerred the other petition reassurance for a concern they appearred to have in relation to us "copying" "their" centuries old ideas.

We're ok with that, we know people's actions are their own and we personally feel being open and honest and reassuring of people's fear is doing nothing wrong but instead actually something to be proud of.

If you want to support a petition you can trust to tell the truth and be open and honest with you whilst trying to improve problematic behaviours in all our council cemeteries without excluding those who are doing no wrong - please consider supporting us.

We think a ban on dogs is a lot more complicated than one would initially think and believe it needs careful considertation of mamy aspects.

Below are some of our concerns in relation to a ban on dogs (with or without exemptions).

• Mourners who may be disadvantaged by any form of ban on dogs and not able to griev as is helpful to them.
• The deceased resting in our cemeteries who may have loved dogs in life and like to see them in death
• There are many socially accepted reasons one might visit a cemetery why should somone miss put on this because they have a well behaved dog on lead causing no issues
• Women and vunerable groups state they feel safer with a dog in a cemetery- should be take away their safety net? Remember they may be a mourner
• People with dogs can amd do help in cemeteries
• The footfall of dogs may offer cemetery inhabitants and visitors protection from unwanted or illegal behaviour
• The no dogs rule pre covid was not enforced or adhered to in at least 2 cemeteries (all if you believe some council officials) - what would this rule actually to do improve the behaviours of the minority of rule breakers?
• Is it porportionate and just to remove a rule abiding majority for a minority of rule breakers in a minority of cemeteries?
• The list of aspects could go on but we feel that is enough to demonstrate how complicated this after truely is.

Let's keep cemetries4all responsible, respectful people!

Official current cemetery rules: 
https://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/33467/cemetery-management-rules

 
Other ways to get involved and share your view:

Write to your local councillor - List of your local Councillors:
https://democracy.edinburgh.gov.uk/mgMemberIndex.aspx?FN=WARD&VW=LIST&PIC=0
 
Write to committe members who will discuss and decide on cemetery rules - List of who is due to be at the committee meeting including committee members:
https://democracy.edinburgh.gov.uk/mgMeetingAttendance.aspx?ID=7281
 
Consider giving a written or verbal deputation - Website where further information will be posted in relation to the meetings, we understand around a week before the meeting:
https://democracy.edinburgh.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=139&MId=7281
 
Vote on the Scotsman's article where you can place your vote (it is not binding in any way):
 https://www.scotsman.com/news/environment/why-council-will-vote-on-a-ban-dogs-from-all-edinburgh-cemeteries-4679251?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1jiu0nmOB5KkeddVY_d0oDN6U2gt09cUrdWgBgQNW9Nr0N14p8EnUv3gs_aem_n3NYnWSu9Bpe_wP_x0twLw#disqus-comment-section