[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Chris

Then the problem is in your personal redefinition of commonly understood words. You implied as I described because of your decision to misuse the language. In two way communication it makes things simpler if you acknowledge and accept common definitions rather than insisting on your own.

In this case, “the Scots” is a plural, proper noun for those of a particular national identity. I am eligible to vote in a referendum held in Scotland but I am not, and will never be, one of “the Scots”. I am one of “the English”. This is not splitting hairs - it is categorically different and, as I’ve illustrated, it’s important that distinctiveness is understood because it has the capacity to cause a serious migrant crisis. It serves nobody to obfuscate that point.

You're going in hard on a very minor point. I am not a Scot so I can be forgiven for using the dictionary definition of "Scot".

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Scot - the other dictionaries say the same thing.

Scot noun (1)

Definition of Scot (Entry 1 of 2)
1: a member of a Celtic people of northern Ireland settling in Scotland about a.d. 500
2a: a native or inhabitant of Scotland
b: a person of Scottish descent

Please allow me to put a question back to you. Would the average reader in this thread have reached a different conclusion had I used a different term from "Scots", or your preferred term now that you know what I meant by it?