Saturday, 20 July 2013

Dave Smith art exhibition at The York Street Gallery Ramsgate and a possible ramble

 As you can see from the pictures of the pictures (which will expand if clicked on) this one is well worth a visit if you are in Ramsgate before Wednesday












I was down on the cross wall this morning trying to get some more done to the sketch I started last week. By 8.30 the weather had gone off to the point where I gave up.

Frankly the blog is pretty depressing at the moment with mostly either spam comments, with the spammers either engaged in some dialogue with themselves or with people attempting to reply. The desire to take the whole thing over by 0% aquifer man or clone Rick, real Rick, I don’t know really, makes me reluctant to bother.  

80 comments:

  1. The local blogs are a bit like the local council, being dragged down by too many old people stuck in the past!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Michael,

    You are as they say by that awful expression, a victim of your own success. You have many readers; and for this reason alone your blog will attract the funny people. I and others attempt to ignore them, with varying degrees of success. Ignored or not they will never leave your blog for the simple reason that they know here they will be read. They are good at what they do. Consequently, it is often difficult not to rise to their bait and, thereby, give them the attention they so desperately seek.

    They seldom annoy me and I often feel sorry for them. Surely our lives are not so serious, busy and humourless that we cannot find the time and compassion to stand around a modern version of Speakers Corner.

    I say this with the overiding proviso that the rule of libel apply.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The general concensus seems to be that's it's the the JH's who are ruining the blogs, not people posting about aquifiers or gun ranges. Even Mike Pearce in the Gazette pretty much said as much, shame that Michael can't see this.

      Delete
    2. Mike Pearce criticised those that trade insults which, of course, would include people who dismiss others because of their age like 9:59. JH primarily targets one person in particular, mainly on his own blog, and one would have to say the target largely asks for all he gets with his bandwaggoning.

      On the thread, I agree with Michael that the exhibition looks well worth a visit and also that the quality of exchange on this blogsite has been ruined by those who want to turn every subject round to 0% salaries, pollution or aquifers. Rick, or his aliases, I find less destructive because he is so obviously repetitive for so long that I think most of us now just ignore him.

      Delete
    3. I have to have agree with Mr Epps. I simply post the truth and facts, something that others seem congentitally unable to do, and consequently people like to try to attack me without the benefit of anything factual to say.

      As for particular councilors, I cannot stand lies and BS, and some seem all to eager to trot out such BS attempting to pass it off as fact, while leaping from media bandwagon, to media bandwagon.

      Exhibition looks good, and it's a great shame the mr 0% seems to be everywhere with the same ole single issue BS.

      Delete
    4. "Single issue BS"? Almost every comment and blog post of yours mentions the same person!

      Delete
    5. Yes, but that person goes out of his way to get mentioned. It is what he thrives on.

      Delete
    6. No wonder you hide behind anonimity 7:55, saves displaying how utterly clueless you clearly are :)

      If the bandwagin jumper extrordiaire happens to involve himself in EVERY issue that might gain the smallest gimmer of media attention, then exposing the shallow little man's media whoring simply involves commenting on Thanet issues ;)

      Delete
    7. I have to disagree with Cllr Epps, he seems stuck in the past where corruption such as the 0% salary fraud is both acceptable and to be actively covered up.

      10:56 is exactly right that the likes of Holyer and Hamilton and Mallinson are repetitive blogging largely on insults and ruining the blogs.

      Michael's repetition on Pleasurama now seems exhausted given the site has collapsed, albeit covered up by the councillors as with Ferrygate. Stories of what sandwich he had for lunch or the price of a Jilly Cooper first edition are of little interest as are the views of the duffers on here. He needs to take a long hard look at what his blog(s), and their increasing censorship, are for.

      Like most people I visit here far less and certainly wouldn't search out Holyer or Hamilton's blogs nor indeed would I vote for Cllr Epps or Moores in future.

      Delete
    8. For the record, 10:20, I really do not give a toss whether you disagree or not for your opinion is of no consequence to me.

      Delete
    9. 10:20 am

      Please do us all a favour and stop visiting altogether. You may say you are visiting less frequently but it is still far too often for most of us.

      Delete
    10. Cllr Epps gathering in the vote for the next election I see. Another ceremonial councillor who'd do anything to avoid raising the TDC corruption. Speak up Cllr Epps let's hear from you. And 9:17 seems to confuse his opinion with anyone else's.

      Delete
    11. I really don't think "give a toss" is the right way for an elected cllr to react. Time for another standards complaint perhaps?

      Delete
    12. I don't particulalry mind Eppsy swearing but I do object to him covering up the TDC fraud and swanning around having tea and biscuits on the rates and doing stuff all. On Michael's other blog the silly old fool is berating an Arlington resident and saying that the Manston Fires don't cause cancer.

      Delete
    13. 10:23, apart from being a laugh a minute you are also the Arlington Resident on Thanet Press Release site as, at other times to suit your argument, you live in Ramsgate or don't live in Thanet at all, just care from a distance. Must go now before I split my sides with hysteria, joker.

      Delete
    14. Nope. I'm not the Arlington resident. Many people are concerned over then pollution Laughing Boy. Do Manston Fires cause cancer?

      Delete
    15. Obviously, 10:51, otherwise you would be aware that wind blowing in an easterly direction would not put the smoke over Ramsgate and Broadstairs from Mansto9n. Also, why would that bother an Arlington Resident anyway. Like I said elsewhere, you are just a pathetic joke.

      Delete
    16. Eh? What if the wind changed direction you twit 10:56? And what if the wind blew the smoke over Arlington? So, would the Manston Fires cause cancer Laughing Boy?

      Delete
    17. Why is Cllr Epps saying above that Mike Pearce in the Gazette criticised those who trade insults? No he did not. The article specifically criticised Anonymouse Holyer for ruining the blogs.

      Delete
    18. Sorry, 11:20, but no time to answer your query as too busy having tea and biscuits at your expense. Perhaps you would like to initiate the standards complaint, but please include your name and address.

      Delete
    19. I am fully aware that I have to give my name and address to make a standards complaint. As I said, it's not the first time I've done it.

      Delete
    20. In which case I look forward to hearing you give your evidence at my hearing. Nice to put a face to an anonymous for a change.

      Delete
    21. Now that would be amusing, if of course the cowards who post anonomously finally have the balls to poke their head above the parapit.

      Delete
    22. I was wondering the same thing 11:20. Perhaps he's thinking of a different article written by Mike Pearce that I / we can't recall?

      Delete
    23. Apart from Eppsy's tea and biscuits on the rates did he/we ever find out about Manston Fires and cancer?

      I'm sure someone will paste the Pearce/Anonymouse criticism of Holyer article here for him.

      Delete
    24. Peter Checksfield 11:34 pm,

      Help me out. Who is Mike Pearce, should I know him? If he has mentioned me by name in print then I think he and I need to have a talk.

      Delete
    25. Peter Checksfield,

      Please see my 11:34. I have just spoken to the ITOG News Room. They confirm that Mike Pearce has never mentioned me by name or implication.

      Delete
    26. How strange maybe they don't read his column - you should check Mike's articles of the last 3-4 weeks. He definitely complains about blogs ruined by Anonymouse/Holyer. As do many other because, as here, the debate on say Arlington's cancer fires has been distracted by Holyer's empty waffle. No doubt a wander down memory lane and the price of butter in 1963 beckons.

      Delete
    27. John
      I do remember Mike Pearce having a go at a blogger who uses the expression "anonymouse." and talking about the "foxtrot oscar brigade" in the same breath, and how they should all meet up to settle their differences (then what would be left?). This would, in my view, enable participants to single you out. I felt uncomfortable when I read that. Maybe I should have spoken out, but I was only just finding my feet at the time.

      Delete
    28. I never said he mentions you by name Mr Holyer, but as SG confirms, it was pretty obvious who he was talking about.

      Amazing that you've never heard of Mike Pearce, as he's been a big part of Thanet for 30 years. Here's an interesting article from just two days ago:

      http://www.thanetgazette.co.uk/Mike-Flipside-mate-MP/story-19552077-detail/story.html

      Delete
    29. Solo,

      Thank you. I'll speak to Mike Pearce about this.

      Delete
    30. Peter Checksfield 3:48 pm,

      And long may I continue to amaze you.

      Delete
    31. What's to discuss? Pearce says that Anonymouse Holyer has ruined many of the blogs with childish insults, pointless posts and repetitive blogging. Most people would agree with that. Only Hamilton is worse.

      Delete
    32. Mike Pearce did not mention John Holyer, or anyone else for that matter, by name. He was critical of the low standard of debate around the blogs, the gratuitous insults and mentioned expressions like 'anonymouse' and 'foxtrot oscar' as examples. You, 10:57, are probably more guilty than most at mindless repetitive comment and resorting to insults, so hardly have the right to condemn others. Surely though, didn't you say the Holyer, Hamilton, Mallison trio had decided you against visiting this site anymore.

      Delete
    33. Cobblers 11:08 he meant Holyer. Nobody else uses the Anonymouse term. The Foxtrot Oscar chap was Clarke from memory.

      I don't understand your other points although they do seem pointless. To elevate matters though let's discuss another sewage leak this week?

      Delete
    34. Anon and I know who you are 10:57,

      I have spoken to Rebecca Smith and I now have the Pearce article in front of me. Mike Pearce has said none of the things that you claim. You are being mendacious.

      Delete
    35. Not into sewage I'm afraid, but back to your comment. His article was about the general poor standard and saying he meant Holyer is very different to your earlier comment where you implied he actually named him. As to 'foxtrot oscar' that may well have been used by Clarke (or should that be Clarkey in your rather lower deck jargon), but is relatively common usage around the blogs along with STFU. Sorry to hear you are having problems with understanding, but, if it is any consolation, it comes to many as they grow older.

      Delete
    36. Careful, John, 10:57 already struggles with single syllable words without triples like mendacious. You might bring on a brain storm although, silly me, he would have to actually have one for that to happen.

      Delete
    37. Or there's Kent Police's new Most Wanted list: know anybody in Thanet?

      http://www.kent.police.uk/appeals/most_wanted/most_wanted.html

      Delete
    38. Can you remind us of the exact wording of Mike's article? Thanks.

      Delete
    39. Anonymous 11:40

      Let me have your name and email address and I will be pleased to send a copy to you. Alternatively, you can ask the IOTG for a copy.

      Delete
    40. What strange chaps. But let's indulge you. So Pearce did mention Anonymouse? And was critical of him? I never said he mentioned Holyer by name. Clearly he meant Holyer though.

      I've said all this above albeit more briefly.

      Unless Holyer wants to confirm that Pearce never mentioned Anonymouse. Or was positive then even this seems exactly the sort of pointless debate Pearce was criticising. And if Holyer is not Anonymouse then who is?

      Dull.

      Sewage seems more interesting. Why are there more leaks and how are they reported?

      Delete
    41. Anon 12:44 pm,


      I acknowledge site of your post the content of which has been noted.

      Delete
    42. Holyer being evasive now: 11:40 is asking for a reminder of the Anonymouse criticism as Holyer has a copy of the article. Or paste the weblink here.

      Delete
    43. Holyer 1:01, you did accuse me of being mendacious and the article not containing any of the points made. You were simply lying or at best inane quibbling weren't you?

      You're a very, very naughty pensioner. Now off to your own blog to write your piffle where we can not bother to read it.

      You are clogging up and ruining these blogs with drivel, inaccuracies and now naughty little lies.

      Delete
    44. Anon 1:18 pm

      To answer your question: I say again that you were being mendacious.

      If you did not mean what you said then you should say so.

      If you wish to see a copy of the article in question then I will email it to you. Alternatively you can request a copy from the Isle Of Thanet Gazette.

      I will forward a copy of your recent comments to Mr Pearce bearing in mind his concern about the deterioration of Thanet blogs.

      Delete
    45. Anon 1:18, you have been offered a copy of the article. We are all also aware that the term 'anonymouse' was used by John Holyer, and a couple of others including me, to refer you. It is not a description of John Holyer.

      You are exceedingly boring with your childish comments and why you refer to others as pensioners when you are clearly in your dotage yourself, escapes me. Are you ashamed to be old or are you simply trying to cling to some last vestiges of a long gone youth.

      Delete
    46. 2:01 you seem to be defending the indefensible with Mr Holyer. He is Anonymouse and the article made that clear.

      It most certainly is a description of Mr Holyer as his catchphrase. You've provided no comment of interest either and resort to the same infantile insults while complaining of insults. I am ashamed to be surrounded by foolish pensioners like Holyer and yourself. They do these blogs and Thanet a disservice.

      Delete
    47. Oh no Holyer's back at 1:55 - what exactly was mendacious in my previous post? Post the article or the extract here and be done with your drivel. Send my comments to Mr Pearce - or anyone else - they support Mr Pearce's view of you as an annoying and ruinous character to these blogs. If only he could clean up the sewage or Thor as easily as Anonymouse.

      Delete
    48. I am not defending Holyer, who seems quite capable of defending himself. I merely seek to correct the deliberate misimpression being created by yourself. I see I am added to the foolish pensioner collective that you regard as abuse despite the fact you know nothing about me. You really do not see what an idiot you make of yourself with these comments which say much about your mental state, 2:23.

      Delete
    49. How rude and dull and pointless 2:31: Anonymouse is not a description of Holyer you say? Absolutely down to your usual standard although what deliberate misimpression of your feeble yet pompus mind do you perceive? You sound like a nutter: Holyer deserves you.

      Delete
    50. Holyer will no doubt sulk at ACG Air at Manston going bust, or like Buchanan, explain why no flights mean less queues and less delays. I wonder which airport Buchanan will turn up at when Manston closes?

      Delete
    51. Anonymous,

      I acknowledge sight of your 2:29 post the contents of which have been noted.

      Delete
    52. I very much doubt it, 2:59, for whereas ACG have had solvency problems they retain an operators licence and are in negotiations currently involving a merger or possible take over. Since the same amount of cargo has to be shifted regardless of by whom, some other company will no doubt pick up the business. Sorry if this deflates your expectations of an imminent collapse of Manston airport.

      Delete
    53. You're right 5:18 ACG are bust. Completely bust. And they have their paperwork for 2 planes as do many airlines. They may be able to merge etc but I wouldn't hold your breath.

      The collapse of Manston is very imminent: Infratil selling it, Buchanan will have his CV out there, and there's yet more declining business with ACG. Your love of the airport of yesteryear is blinding you to the business realities.

      How much will you be investing in Manston or ACG?

      Delete
    54. Please direct me to any site or article that says ACG are bust, 5:58. As always with you, you make these allegations and never ever produce anything to substantiate them.

      Delete
    55. Certainly: ACG's own website in the ticker tape bit, Wikipedia entry on ACG and 3 or 4 articles on ACG. Just Google it.

      Presumably you'll slink away now with barely an apology or will you be investing in Manston and ACG?

      And what do you care whether ACG is bust or not?

      Delete
    56. ACG's own website says it has solvency problems, but retains its operators licence. Do a bit more research, 8:25, in company mergers and takeovers before you start crowing. I shall not be slinking anywhere.

      Delete
    57. Yes ACG does have solvency issues: it's bust. I wouldn't expect an apology just more feeble nitpicking. It's not a company merger (or takeover) if it's bust. nobody's bought it. If they did it would be a firesale.

      You're a twit pretending to be clever.

      You haven't mentioned why you're so keen on ACG going bust or not or how much you'd invest in ACG or Manston.

      Worked at Manston years ago?

      Delete
    58. You really do not get it do you, 8:46? You take a piece of an item in isolation and then use it to make your claims conveniently ignoring anything else in the story that might put a different light on the matter. That said, it really makes no difference to Manston because some other carrier will simply pick up ACG's work if they prove unable to fulfil it themselves.

      I see you describe me as a twit pretending to be clever whereas you are just a twit who no-one, even in their wildest imagination, could even remotely regard as clever.

      Delete
    59. Not at all 9:02 I've pointed out that ACG is bust which you disagreed with - even though ACG themselves confirm it.

      Why you think ANOther airline will pick up whatever ACG business there was as it went bust is just your own random opinion.

      I was being polite when I called you a twit. You're a complete idiot.

      Delete
  3. Anon 9:59 am,

    Will Scobie is a local politician and he is only 25. If this is old by your benchmark then you must be about 15 yourself. Which I am prepared to believe.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course Will is not old. Which is why the likes of you, Moores and all the others constantly criticize him because of his age rather than the rather splendid job he's doing.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous 10:54am,

      I am giving you the benefit of the doubt and treating your opinion on age as being genuinely held, and that you are not just being gratuitously rude. You have raised an interesting point for discussion. I should be grateful for your opinion on the following.

      At what age does a person become too old to serve on the council;

      what do you understand by being, "stuck in the past";

      can you give some examples where in your view local politicians are, stuck in the past;

      how much value do you place on experience;

      and how old are you?

      Delete
    3. John, having advised others to ignore you know who, you are now asking him questions. Whilst I am inclined to agree with you that he will not necessarily go away simply by being ignored, he cannot take over the thread unless others engage in exchanges with him.

      I think we should try to support Micheal in ignoring these spammers or spoilers and to build our debate around the subject matter of the post. Mind you, I would agree that in this instance it is a choice between art and attempting to retain the sanity of this blogsite.

      Delete
    4. William,

      I did not identify 10:45 as the usual suspect and gave him the benefit of the doubt. I'll wait to see if or how he replies.

      Delete
    5. I guess the thing that spammers don’t see about spam, is that it doesn’t matter if the have the best payday loans, the cheapest double glazing, the most convincing case for dated retribution, the most confused understanding of environmental science, or even the strongest case for damaging local tourism, more than a couple of times a year it becomes boring.

      The argument that “I am right” and of course it follows that the majority of people are wrong isn’t what’s at issue here, what is at issue is spamming up this blog which. What? Makes the comments too boring to read. Puts of normal interaction, comment and conversation.

      I am not even talking about commenting off thread, but the boring pursuance of a few repeated themes, over and over and over again, to me this is spam and now when I see it. it will get spammed.

      Delete
    6. John Holyer, I guess Simon Moores is the best person to answer that: he claims that both Will Scobie is too young and Roger Latchford is too old, so presumably he (late '50s?) is "perfect"...



      Delete
  4. Thankyou for puting up the gallery pictures. Sometime in the not too distant I hope to get the time to wander around the various Ramsgate Galleries.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The gallery looks good and I shall wander down to have a look.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Just removed what in the glare on my mobile appeared to be another stream of spam comment relating to the same old issues, gun ranges et al. I guess the problem here is that the spammers don’t really read what anyone else writes and seem to assume that if they think something is true it isn’t spam.

    ReplyDelete
  7. At least Checkers comment seems to have shut John up!

    ReplyDelete
  8. John. If you are identifiable in what has been written then it is the same as naming you. For example anagrams. In the Ferryman trilogy anagrams are used. "Raican" is clearly the late Bobby Nairac. George "Inamos" ?? Identifiable persons, who feel they have been libelled, do have a cause of action. Who ever "Inamos" is clearly did not want to bring an action.

    There is a limitation within which to bring an action. One year. So for example even if it were true that a councillor had been accused of perjury by Rick in the week his wife died and that was Sept 2010 then he had until Sept 2011 to bring an action against Rick. The fact that he did not do so would mean either he did not want to challenge the truth of such an allegation or that no such allegation was made. The lie on thread thus being easily identifiable by a reasonable man it is not libel.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Or he was too upset too bother or he dismissed the allegation as too silly to warrant challenge. To assume an allegation is correct simply because someone chooses not to sue is nonsense. The allegation was made on the Bignews Margate site at that time and on several other occasions as Rick well knows. It has from time to time been deleted by blog administrators.

      Delete
  9. Mike Pearce, since he has been mentioned, was the editor of Isle of Thanet Gazette. And no stranger to the complexities of libel by virtue of his professional training.

    Published by Searchlight 1996

    Although the story refers to Ramsgate Harbour and implies a lack of security, the TDC solicitor refused to copy the article to elected cllrs as that would be publishing for the purposes of libel law.

    However Mike Pearce's Thanet Gazette took a differing position. They published responses from some of the named members of League of Saint George. But no detail of what it was the League of St George men were responding to.

    Some time later Police made a warrant raid in Ramsgate and seized what were thought to be firearms and explosives. And again IIRC Mike Pearce's IoT Gazette published the response from the alleged target of the raid.

    If Searchlight had libelled anyone it appears Mike Pearce was happy to become their co-defendant. Or maybe he knew there was no libel or would be no libel action? And rehearsing possible criminal charge defences in the local press would generally be frowned upon.

    I am sure that as self appointed arbiter of blogging standards Mr Pearce will provide us an explanation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So right, Rick, and the Hell Fire Lodge masons were, meantime, galloping into Ramsgate on their chargers, swooping up virgins and carrying them off to the tunnels. One of the reasons the tunnels cannot be re-opened is that the establishment wish to suppress the fact that encaged virgins and weapon caches are hidden there for coven nights. Of course, the hand of Rothschild is very evident in all this skulduggery and of all us plebs, only Rick knows the truth.

      Delete
  10. If anyone is looking for the Manston aquifer troll you will find that he has switched his attention to the Carnival postings, with his 0% salaries and corruption, etc.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We were looking for you Anonymouse.

      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.