Tuesday, 4 June 2013

Royal Sands Development on the Pleasurama site in Ramsgate, back in the news again.



Exactly where the council are going with this one is a bit of a mystery, allowing the developer more time, when they already appear to have had ten years, takes a bit of explaining.

Anyway here is the news item on the BBC website http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-22764636

It appears the problem with the development is still focusing on the developer’s ability to raise the money, with the BBC saying that this is because of the wording of the development agreement between the council and the developer.

The key question here being is the developer a credible company, able to raise the money and complete a large development.  

I will start at the beginning here and to them chronologically as I get time:

Document 1 TRANSCRIPT OF PART OF COUNCIL MEETING
5TH DECEMBER 2002
ITEM 7 - PRESENTATION ON RAMSGATE RENAISSANCE - SITE E

I obtained this from the council under foi legislation, here is the link to the whole document https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B0erQxRYd9_rVVc5MnRZVG5PTGs/edit

So here is the first quote from it.

“Over the past year we have been working with officers to find a suitable location for Whitbread, and their Travel Inn Restaurant and Pub, and this location was their preferred site. Whitbread also have won Margate's Civic Society Award for their Promenade development in Margate. We know they have a sustainable product and it's deliverable, and they do deliver.”

And here the second.

What is important about this is that it's in the key position on the site, and a lot of funds have been put aside to make this an extremely attractive building rather than the normal Whitbread scheme that you would see elsewhere.”

After this meeting Whitbread were contacted and here is what they had to say:

Here is the next quote from the council document:



"The Promoter behind the scheme is Sean Keegan. Sean is in Portugal at the moment and can't be with us. He's our Project and Director of SFP Venture Partners Limited, which is the project arm of the investors in the SFP Private Bank of Geneva."

In 2003 the SFP Private Bank of Geneva obtained a banking licence and replace the F for financial in their name with B for bank causing them to be renamed SBP Private Bank of Geneva.

After this meeting SBP were contacted, here is what they had to say:


Still in November 2002 here is the presentation document that SFP produced for the council outlining the development http://www.michaelsbookshop.com/blogpicts10/id5.htm this may be helpful for people trying to understand why the council decided to chose this developer.  

I think the next main stage was planning, the planning ref is F/TH/03/1200 and lots of planning sheets can be found on the council’s planning website  http://www.ukplanning.com/thanet  the plans were approved in January 2004.

The planning and deign statement, which is the non technical explanation of the development document that forms part of the plans published on the council’s website says; “Great care has been taken during  the design and development to ensure that the roofline of the proposed building does not obscure views from, and of Wellington Crescent. As a consequence the roof of the new building sits below the cliff top balustrade.”  

The problem was though that the actual planning sheets were for a building that was higher than the cliff top balustrade, at the highest point about 3 metres.

I don’t really know if the developer had intended this and hoped that it would slip under the radar or whether his architect was just incompetent, either way the council wouldn’t take any notice of the people who pointed this out and passed the plans.


Of course once the council have passed plans for a development that doesn’t fit in the available space, everyone involved is landed with a huge problem. The developer doesn’t want to reduce the number of apartments as this will reduce the profit. The public won’t really accept a building that is higher than the cliff top. The council can’t admit that it has made a mistake, what you have is a mess and very little chance of completing the development.     

69 comments:

  1. Call me old fashioned, but did I not read on one of Ian's blog posts some weeks back that a similar fraud has been perpetrated on another Local Authority?

    By continuing with this same developer, it's a bit like inviting a thief back into your home that he has burgled, on condition that he promises not to take quite so much this time?

    Does anyone have knowledge of the true value of the freehold without leases?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Solo whilst I agree with your 1st sentence I have to disagree with the word fraud, amoral would be more accurate. The Council was Peterborough and the business was Peterborough United Football club. Any google search on Wetmore, Barry Fry, Colin Hill and their land company Peterborough United Holdings Ltd. Shaun Patrick Keegan was a director during its transition and the Council finally paid £8.65M to remove these people (in 2010). So from 2003 to 2010 by sitting on their hands they made around £5M. not illegal (maybe!! there is some question about the covenant on the land that still needs investigating)

      Delete
    2. Barry, it would be useful if the similar false documents I have read about could be shown here to compare and contrast don't you think?

      Delete
    3. That would be up to michael but what I have I can email to you if you want a read

      Delete
    4. I can see you have done a lot of research, and I think we need to start pushing boundaries here. For what its worth, I would be willing to share that risk with others if it becomes necessary. I am a member of the facebook group but have not accessed any documents yet, might be easier to tell me how to do that here?

      Delete
    5. any document can be downloaded by going to the files section clicking on preview and saving to your drive. there are docs that aren't on there like peterborough I can email you to your gmail account.

      Delete
    6. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    7. Nearly impressive James, now if only you posted some proof or evidence of some wrong doing, but then that's not going to happen is it now, and all you have is inuendo, misrepresentation and bluster ;)

      Delete
    8. If there are parallels here with what happened in Peterborough, then I would guess that it might be the intention here to work an angry crowd so that the council has no option but to buy back those leases, and to compensate for work already carried out at inflated prices.

      What interests me is who was behind that interview on the BBC last night with Alan Poole?

      Personally, if there was just one thing I would ask of Ramsgate Town Council tonight, it would be to get an Independent Valuation of the Freehold as if there were no leases.

      Delete
    9. glad to hear that you believe it was immoral and I'm also glad I don't pay my council tax in Peterborough.
      As has been stated before this is Michaels Blog and as such I, nor does anyone else, have the facility to post. Hence my prior link to the Peterborough fiasco.
      Most people are perfectly capable of using Google. Have you?

      Delete
    10. For the benefit of readers Barry, I assume you are addressing JH here?

      Delete
    11. Why get a valuation as if there were no leases? There are leases, to get a valuation as if they don't exist is clearly pointless.

      Not sure who your talking to James, but I can't see anyone agreeing that anything was "immoral", is that yet something else you've made up to fit a space where a fact should be...

      Delete
    12. Barry,

      I have now set up this blog on your behalf which can be found at:-

      pleasurama.blogspot.co.uk (I look forward to your first post instruction Barry).

      Michael, ECR,

      Would you both be so kind as to consider setting up links with you both? I will of course reciprocate in due course.

      Delete
  2. Here we go again. Next thing Alan Poole will agree to transfer the freehold to the developer again in the hope that they will deliver the development. TDC haven't the skills or experience to deal with slick developers and their razor-sharp lawyers. At all costs, Poole will avoid sticking to his guns and throw the developer off the site. Instead, he will now cower in a corner and throw the towel in.

    I note that the shops under Arlington House, another derelict eyesore site belonging to TDC has been given a token tosh of emulsion paint by the Lessee's. No doubt the Lessees will now claim to be complying with the lease covenants. Yet another case where TDC are too frightened to take on a slick developer with a sharp lawyer. Still no car park open though. Perhaps Alan Poole would disclose what is going on and if the car park will be opened this summer.

    Perhaps Alan Poole could also explain what is happening with the Royal Victoria Pavilion. Yet another derelict site belonging to TDC. The interior has been wrecked and yet TDC choose to ignore this fact and do nothing. Not a very good record on property management.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. TDC's ability to manage ANY property has been proved to be woeful for many many years. It should be forced to sell any and all property it owns or has an interest in to the highest bidder without delay so that these properties can be properly used. How does one throw someone off a siye they have a 199 year lease on, how entertaining!

      The sooner that Tesco's goes ahead at Arlington, the sooner that appalling eyesore can actually make a contribution to the town it has blighted for over 40 years! Till then, the car park at Dreamland will remain more than adequate for the few brave souls that will venture down to Margate in 2013.

      Delete
    2. Rather, the soon Arlington is demolished and the Tesco plan scrapped the better. The CPO of Dreamland and the Cinema brings it that much nearer.

      Delete
    3. Arlington demolished, correct, Tesco will bring a lot of people and money to Margate, keep, Dreamland "heritage theme park" is not now, nor has it ever been a viable proposal, a fate i suspect the cinema will share.

      Delete
    4. They should demolish Arlington, extend and widen the road that goes behind the amusement arcades, and then pedestrianise the seafront. Tesco and Dreamland can both still go ahead.

      Delete
  3. I think this is a non-story. The problem as I see it is that TDC has hamstrung itself. By failing to consider what could and should happen if the developer failed to proceed with the development, the council has signed up to a badly drafted agreement which hands all control over to the developer. Alan Poole is desperate to negate the constant stream of negative publicity and so he is trying to create a story where none exists. The news bulletin could have been reworded to say that TDC plans to do nothing. We still need a public inquiry to lay bare who has done what and who bears responsibility for the debacle. I know that there are a couple of plonkers who believe that TDC couldn't have done anything differently but the public inquiry will demonstrate that this isn't true and that TDC has simply been shown up for a bunch of naive fools. Why do I want this to happen? Well, I'm fed up with the council ignoring local people and arrogantly making stupid decisions on the premise that only they know best. There are many highly qualified and intelligent people living in Thanet and I would like a new type of council, where councillors speak to local people and pay attention to what they are being told. If the council makes use of the vast experience that is out there they are much less likely to make the kind of cock-ups they have been making for too long.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hey, this is the council who thinks caking up £3.3m of debt as he right thing to do. Their utter contempt for the electorate and crass stupidity is beyond belief.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The latest 4 month deadline has passed. Why would TDC want to continue with the developer? This is the perfect opportunity to be rid of them. If there are bungs, and there seem to be, then the scheme is too large and too visible now to continue.

    Hart and Poole now bear responsibility for the last 2 years of failure at Pleasurama.

    Strange that SBP Bank had never heard of either SFP Ltd or a supposed SFP Bank. Sounds as if the whole lot was hoofed together by Painter's Keegan chappy. And there's a mysterious Peterborough Developer too?

    The councillors' reluctance to come clean on the goings-on looks like cover-up as with the ChinaGate bung-donation.

    Police needed.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I am on the verge of agreeing with you 1:37

    The Heritage Regeneration of Thanet needs to be Community Led. I don't think we can trust councillors to do this for us, although they of course have an important role to play, if they want to?

    Oh, by the way, it is possible to forward these aggregated posts of Michael straight to the Police.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Lyndon, Talking about crime, is the Ezekiel Confiscation hearing still on for Friday?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Oh Blast. Lyndon's done his disappearing act again! I was just going to have a look at those links he provided. I should have looked earlier but I needed to eat!

    ReplyDelete
  9. The police will be handing out fines to people who hog the middle lane, but they won't be investigating these letters.

    ReplyDelete
  10. There's clearly nothing for the police to investigate anon 1:37, if there is, why don't YOU you humiliate yourself by trying to string a long path of James's inuendos into somekind of allegation that you can actually EVIDENCE.

    ReplyDelete
  11. JH your view seems to be that there is no wrongdoing at TDC either on Pleasurama or any of the other scandals. Which is clearly ridiculous.

    What evidence though would convince you otherwise? I presume you'll be able to cite nothing, choosing to continue your usual rude insults and inane blog comments like this.

    The Police are already investigating TDC and a public inquiry should be held to review their evidence and statements on oath from McGonigal etc.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Allan MallinsonJune 06, 2013 10:36 am

      Anon, 9:52, you are a seriously boring barsteward with your perpetual prattling on about police and arrests. Whatever TDC's failing there is a huge gulf between incompetence and criminality that you seem incapable of grasping. If you want inquiries and investigations start campaigning for such properly rather than boring a handful of people on a blogsite.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous @ 9:52,

      Your phrase, "rude insults" is an error of tautology.

      Delete
    3. It is not "an error of tautology", it is tautology. And you don't need a comma after "Your phrase". Stop pretending to be an expert on grammar.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous 2:25 pm,

      Nice try, but you are wrong, again. I was pointing out that you had made an error and that your error was one of tautology.

      I will ignore your nonsensical remark about commas.

      Delete
    5. Oh no, Mallinson and Holyer together again. One of them fails to see how the Police are already making arrests at TDC. While the other delves again into the mundane having long given up on RAF Manston as Thanet's future and the good old days of cancer.

      Either of them are challenged to explain say the 0% salaries or ChinaGate donation-bung as incompetence rather than criminality.

      These grammars and granpas have destroyed Thanet.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous 6:00 pm,

      I should be grateful if you could repeat your post and include the names of those who have been arrested.

      Delete
    7. Anon 9:52, I have yet to see a single shred of evidence of any kind to show wrongdoing, that isn't simply mindless inuendo. Post some, feel free, it would certainly be a 1st amoungst the inuendo and outright BS that's been posted thus far. If you have it, post it, what would YOU present in court if YOU were a prosecutor?

      There have been arrests at TDC (other than Ezekiel, excuse spelling)really? Do tell, names and charges perhaps? Perhaps they were in possesion of stolen noise and pollution meters that they spirited away while the police were trying to work out what a 0% salary is as it's only really you that seems to have a handle on the particular form of renumeration...

      If the police are already investigating, and you can't name those you claim have been arrested, then the inference must be that there are no charges to answer, and thus nobody has as yet seen the inside of a prison cell!

      Delete
    8. Holyer and JH-BS have forgotten Sandy arrested and jailed for corruption. And Samuel and White the senior civil servants sacked. It's like spoonfeeding contrary children....

      The 0% salary is detailed elsewhere, go Google. Moores has denied none of the points and his role in the scandal.

      Delete
    9. Anon

      I have read your post at 11:39 am; it is a pity that you did not do so before you sent it.

      I should be grateful for contact details of your carer.

      Delete
    10. Allan MallinsonJune 07, 2013 2:01 pm

      11:39, Ezekiel was not jailed for corruption but misconduct in a public office. Basically he purchased a council owned property through a friend without declaring an interest. Nonetheless, he still paid a higher price than any other bidder, there was no loss to public funds, no brown envelopes and no one else was involved. This resulted from a lengthy police inquiry so it is not unreasonable to assume that if there was all the corruption you go on about it would have been revealed.

      Incidentally, the only chicken round here is you, afraid to disclose who you are, never back up any of your claims with real evidence and resort to rudeness whenever anyone challenges you. In a word, a right tosser.

      Delete
    11. Mallinson you're very naughty with your rude words. In a word you say then use two you foolish fella. At least Holyer bores politely with his helicopter breadcrumbs etc.

      Not corruption you say for Sandy? Even for you this is foolishness incarnate. He was the council Leader corruptly using his position with council information and staff and properties etc etc. Misconduct in public office would be corruption wouldn't it?

      The police inquiry into TDC is ongoing unless you have some information otherwise rather than the empty rattle of your foolish opinions inside your foolish head.

      You seem desperate to suggest that there is no corruption at TDC? Against my better judgment I'll ask you why to see if there's any credible response or just yet more foolishness.

      You can advise on the 0% issue if you wish. Let's pretend that's not corruption nor Chinagate.

      JH-BS talks more sense than you.

      Delete
    12. Anonymous 2:43 pm,

      You do not understand, or effect not to understand, that in law there exists the presumption of innocence. Which is paramount. In other words the burden of proof is upon you to show that there is corruption. It is not the burden of Allan Mallinson or indeed anyone else to prove to you that there is no corruption. Suspicion is not enough. In other words it's a case of no proof then no corruption; whether you like it or not.

      I often get the impression that you were once a schoolmaster or hankered to be one.

      Delete
    13. And here comes the other one of the tag team. Indeed there is presumption of innocence so in that case please explain, for example, how the 0% salary is no wrongdoing at all. Indeed maybe you can explain how we should have more of it?

      Unusually, Mallinson was arguing that Ezekiel's case wasn't corruption but some other permutation of wrongdoing - which is a completely separate foolishness from your statements now.

      I suspect you may be a drab pensioner with nothing better to do but nitpick.

      Delete
    14. Allan MallinsonJune 07, 2013 7:59 pm

      Anon 2:43, I would imagine you have been a tedious little pratt right back to school days. All I said was that despite a long police inquiry all that Ezekiel was found guilty of was misconduct in a public office, thus no embezzlement of public funds, brown envelopes or sundry other misdemeanours. As for the ongoing investigation, nobody knows yet what it may reveal so all your allegations are just groundless nonsense until someone proves otherwise.

      On the 0% salaries, you explain to us where the criminal act was there. Likewise with the monitors and unpaid fines you go on about. Strange as it may seem to your tiny mind it is not a criminal offence to remove a monitor nor is it for a council to decide not to enforce a fine. You may not like it but it is not against the law.

      I do not agree with John Holyer about you once being a schoolmaster. You are far to thick.

      Delete
    15. anonymous 5:22 pm,

      I do not have the faintest idea what you are trying to say. Please go away and gather your thoughts. Or else stick to tossing breadcrumbs at helicopters. At least you are good at that.

      Delete
  12. John most of us understand the concept of innocence however there is a far more important range of traits that business and human beings by extension should live by such as honesty, integrity, and morality. for example its just been reported that Vodaphone has paid no tax in the UK despite being one of the top providers of mobile telecommunications in the UK. Doubt they have done anything wrong but it seems so immoral.
    At the top of the page is a discussion of Peterborough United Football Club and the fact that something immoral occurred but, and I stress, BUT nothing illegal happened but our present developer on the Pleasurama site was a director and made a fortune out of Peterborough Council which was to the detriment of all the council tax payers. This because they, the developers, didn't follow the terms of a Covenant written into the Title deeds of the ground when they sold the ground to themselves in 2003.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Barry,

      Nothing is more important in law than the presumption of innocence with the burden of proof being upon the accuser. In my view this should be no different in the case of moral judgement. The circumstances of which is usually dependent upon the various predilections of those that judge. The fact that we dislike something does not necessarily make it wrong, morally or otherwise.

      Delete
    2. John I am more than happy to send you the precis of what went on over those 7 years should you wish to read it

      Delete
    3. Thank you for the offer, Barry. But I already understand the thrust of your argument with which I do not entirely disagree. All I am saying is that if anyone out there has compelling evidence of corruption that offends the Law then they should go to the police. Suspicion is not enough. Moral corruption is not a matter of Law. It is often nothing more than a matter of opinion and, at the risk of being frank, does not interest me in this case.

      I suggest that if there were convincing evidence of illegality in TDC then the national media would be all over it.

      How would you describe the hopes, fears and expectations of FORS? Is the primary purpose to instigate a public inquiry into the Pleasurama fiasco? What should be the terms and scope of such an inquiry?

      Delete
    4. How about some evidence of wrongdoing James? You have failed UTTERLY to prove that anyone has done anything wrong in relation to pleasurama, and all you have really is empty inuendo, which you hope people will take seriously.

      People do not have to live by what YOU see as morality, indeed you seem to apply morality only where it will further what cause you seek to promote. I would question your morailty in making accusations against others which you simply can;t back up, no matter how many times you avoid the direct challenges made against you.

      Put up or STFU James.

      Delete
    5. Mr Holyer (don't want to get you mixed up with anyone else) the reason Peterborough has been mentioned is to show to TDC that the business morals of Shaun Keegan are not to be trusted. TDC cllrs have bent over backwards to facilitate Shaun Keegan and yet all Ramsgate has is tombstone city.
      The go ahead was given in late 2002 for them to build their actions over the last 10 years has only produced rows of Tombstones. Whatever excuses others come up with for their lack of progress do not stack up when you look at the overall picture. Shaun Keegan doesn't need apologists he needs to explain his inaction. As I said about Peterborough nothing was achieved except for a large chunk of ratepayers money leaving the council coffers and lining the pocket of WETMORE Foundation registered in Lichtenstein

      Delete
    6. Barry,

      I take your point, I really do. But what can FORS or anyone else do about it bearing in mind that there is no evidence of a crime? Perhaps a Public Inquiry would uncover wrongdoing, or maybe not. Whatever the case may be, how does FORS intend to instigate a Public Inquiry?

      Delete
    7. Do you think embarrassing TDC might work

      Delete
    8. Not at all James, the inclusion of a football club in your continuing stream of inuedno, that it utterly untroubled by any facts simply underlines the clear and obvious truth is that you absilutely cannot prove any wrongdoing by anyone, despite how mich you wish you could.

      Post a fact or some evidence James, you have NOTHING and those of us who live in the real world know it. You have become a laughing stock, post some evidence of the wrong doing you claim has occured James....

      Delete
    9. Barry 11:17 pm,

      I suggest that the protagonists at TDC are a purblind oligarchy that is inured to embarrassment.

      Delete
    10. Mr Holyer I suspect you have the right of it. however pointing out facts and not hiding them away will hopefully change some minds especially where it matters. I get the feeling as the rhetoric gets louder the closer we get. At the end of the day calming pointed things out gets more results than merely shouting.
      People tend to make mistakes when they are painted into a corner.

      Delete
    11. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection an interesting concept Mr Holyer applies to hate filled bloggers. Not you of course

      Delete
    12. Barry,

      Let us assume for the sake of argument that there has been serious wrongdoing at TDC; in which case I suggest that FORS requires a whistleblower. However I suggest that the FORS Facebook page would scare them off. In my experience their page is in the main populated by placard waving pseudo Anarchists, the SWP and flaky 1960s liberal wets. There would no safety there for a potential whistleblower. FORS should know that they need to cultivate a reputation for rectitude - and stick to it.

      Delete
    13. FORS lost all credibility sometime ago John, your assesment of it's members is right on the nail, and evidenced by their latest little outing to the council meeting.

      Delete
  13. Anon 2:43, whereas I can follow the logic of the arguments of John Hamilton and Allan Mallinson, your mindless and repetetive nonsense defies understanding. You seem hell bent on castigating the council, whatever they do, and one wonders if perhaps you do not have some personal axe to grind. Perchance a councillor ran off with your wife?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Supposing my mate owns a bank. He issues a draft letter with which I secure a contract. Later on I say "Oh the bank won't lend after all on the basis of the contract we agreed. I need a better contract"

    When a local concerned citizen writes to my mate, naturally he replies that he has no business involvement with the party to the contract.

    There's no hole in that bucket. Hope this is helpful.



    ReplyDelete
  15. Supposing I was the least bit interested in membership of a Friends of Ramsgate type group. And suppose I became a tad bored with the Mallinsons, Holyers and Hamiltons of this world. Then I would ask that trio to provide linkies to anything that Shaun Keegan and his son in law have built.

    Just so we can judge what excellent developers they are.

    Asking Mallinson and Hamilton to provide evidence, there's novel.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. anonymouse 4:49 pm,

      Heaven forfend that I should bore you. I expect you are easily bored. However, having a rant must give you a break from your usual hobby of throwing breadcrumbs in the toilet to feed the toilet duck.

      Delete
    2. I'm happy to wait for some evidence of wrong doing thanks anon 4:49, but alas I've been asking for that for sometime, and as yet none has appeared.

      Delete
    3. Cardy who have an excellent reputation and a proven track record of delivering high quality developments.

      Delete
  16. If the rumours are true and the local estate agent has severed ties with the project, we could be seeing the final parts of the sting coming into operation. And sorry - havent read previous comments. But I am looking for something particular.....

    ReplyDelete
  17. The exchanges viewed on these pages are bottomless rants and go nowhere. They exhude personal abuse and achieve little to nothing at all. IF YOU ARE UNHAPPY WITH YOUR DULY ELECTED COUNCIL OFFICIALS, PARTICUCULARLY THE BESPECTACLED NEW LABOUR COHORT and his patronising speeches to the BBC - VOTE THEM OUT -USE THE BALLOT BOX.
    Only then will they turn around at prospect of losing the increased expenses, dodgy deals, brown envelopes passing greasy palms at the golf club WAKE UP !!! Shut up moaning and do something worthwhile - don't vote them in again

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 2:39 pm,

      Thank you. I hadn't thought of that.

      Delete

Please note comments that may be libellous, comments that may be construed as offensive, anonymous derogatory comments about real people, comments baiting internet trolls, comments saying that an anonymous comment was made by a named real person, boring comments and spam comments, comments in CAPs will be deleted. Playground stuff like calling real people by their time stamp or surname alone, referring to groups as gangs, old duffers and so on will result in deletion. Comment that may be construed as offensive to minority groups is not allowed here either, so think before you write it, remember that the internet is a public place, that it is very difficult to be truly anonymous and that everyone who uses it leaves a trail of some sort. Also note the facility to leave anonymous comment will be turned of during periods when I am unable to monitor comment, this will not affect people commenting who are signed on to their blogger accounts. When things are particularly difficult on the commercial spam front I may turn comment moderation on for periods.

If you feel that someone has left a comment that is offensive and directed at you personally please email me (link on the sidebar) asking to have it removed, you will need to tell which post and the date and timestamp of the offending comment. Please do not reply to the offending comment as I will assume you continuing the dialogue as meaning that you want the comments left there.