Wednesday, 18 September 2013

Midweek Ramble

I have been busy working through some of our stock of collectable books, a lot of these don’t go out on the shop shelves, not because they are expensive, but because they are either delicate.

In the case of the ones in this picture King Penguins, I would say the average price is about £4, Penguin published 76 of these books between 1939 and 1959 and I guess if you have a 1940s, 50s or 60s chic bookcase then collecting all of these to put in it would be the one.

Or. In the case of these ones Folio Society, in many cases prices are less than a tenner but people damage them putting them back in the boxes, nicer to get one of these for Christmas, which will probably realise as much as it cost in my shop on Ebay, if you don’t like it, than some expensive TV related cookery or gardening book that will be available on Amazon for £2.81 including postage, when it is obvious that it would cost you about £8 to post it.

Or first editions, the ones pictured here vary in price between about £4 and about £400, with the modern ones a tear to the jacket, the owners name written in the front or clipping the price off can turn a £40 book into a £4 book.

On the other hand if the right person writes in the book, as in this case, the value increases.

The Granville planning application comes before the planning committee today, my take being that the initial application to rebuild modern was ok, but after this had expired and a large chunk had been rebuilt in mock mock gothic, then the rest now needs to be rebuilt in the same style, otherwise we will have a mess.

Well I objected to the application and asked my ward councillor to put my views to the meeting, which he may do. The snag with this one is the developer is saying that there isn’t much profit in the development anyway, the bottom line being do we want a deserted building site or a nasty modern building, there really isn’t much chance of something in keeping with the rest of the building.

I also had a discussion about the slipways development, it seems that the council have applied for grant funding to get a larger boat hoist and if this goes through then it will make the slipways, which are already struggling with the competition of the existing boat hoist and more modern European slipways, completely unviable. So I am less inclined to object to this one.

The Pleasurama cliff is looking pretty bad at the moment, the bulge that the survey last year said need repairing is now worse, as are the cracks it said needed filling, but nothing has been done.

Another factor here is that the stopping of work on the site has left some of the footings exposed and these are starting to weather, which will have obvious effects on the structural integrity.     


The Pavilion is still making slow progress, with Wetherspoons still interested in about two thirds of it.


I have hopefully obviated the need for much of the off topic comment with this extract from The Secret Life of Walter Mitty by James Thurber

"WE'RE going through!" The Commander's voice was like thin ice breaking. He wore his full-dress uniform, with the heavily braided white cap pulled down rakishly over one cold gray eye. "We can't make it, sir. It's spoiling for a hurricane, if you ask me." "I'm not asking you, Lieutenant Berg," said the Commander. "Throw on the power lights! Rev her up to 8500! We're going through!" The pounding of the cylinders increased: ta-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa. The Commander stared at the ice forming on the pilot window. He walked over and twisted a row of complicated dials. "Switch on No. 8 auxiliary!" he shouted. "Switch on No. 8 auxiliary!" repeated Lieutenant Berg. "Full strength in No. 3 turret!" shouted the Commander. "Full strength in No. 3 turret!" The crew, bending to their various tasks in the huge, hurtling eight-engined Navy hydroplane, looked at each other and grinned. "The Old Man'll get us through," they said to one another. "The Old Man ain't afraid of hell!" . . .

"Not so fast! You're driving too fast!" said Mrs. Mitty. "What are you driving so fast for?"

"Hmm?" said Walter Mitty. He looked at his wife, in the seat beside him, with shocked astonishment. She seemed grossly unfamiliar, like a strange woman who had yelled at him in a crowd. "You were up to fifty-five," she said. "You know I don't like to go more than forty. You were up to fifty-five." Walter Mitty drove on toward Waterbury in silence, the roaring of the SN202 through the worst storm in twenty years of Navy flying fading in the remote, intimate airways of his mind. "You're tensed up again," said Mrs. Mitty. "It's one of your days. I wish you'd let Dr. Renshaw look you over."

Walter Mitty stopped the car in front of the building where his wife went to have her hair done. "Remember to get those overshoes while I'm having my hair done," she said. "I don't need overshoes," said Mitty. She put her mirror back into her bag. "We've been all through that," she said, getting out of the car. "You're not a young man any longer." He raced the engine a little. "Why don't you wear your gloves? Have you lost your gloves?" Walter Mitty reached in a pocket and brought out the gloves. He put them on, but after she had turned and gone into the building and he had driven on to a red light, he took them off again. "Pick it up, brother!" snapped a cop as the light changed, and Mitty hastily pulled on his gloves and lurched ahead. He drove around the streets aimlessly for a time, and then he drove past the hospital on his way to the parking lot.

. . . "It's the millionaire banker, Wellington McMillan," said the pretty nurse. "Yes?" said Walter Mitty, removing his gloves slowly. "Who has the case?" "Dr. Renshaw and Dr. Benbow, but there are two specialists here, Dr. Remington from New York and Dr. Pritchard-Mitford from London. He flew over." A door opened down a long, cool corridor and Dr. Renshaw came out. He looked distraught and haggard. "Hello, Mitty," he said. `'We're having the devil's own time with McMillan, the millionaire banker and close personal friend of Roosevelt. Obstreosis of the ductal tract. Tertiary. Wish you'd take a look at him." "Glad to," said Mitty.

In the operating room there were whispered introductions: "Dr. Remington, Dr. Mitty. Dr. Pritchard-Mitford, Dr. Mitty." "I've read your book on streptothricosis," said Pritchard-Mitford, shaking hands. "A brilliant performance, sir." "Thank you," said Walter Mitty. "Didn't know you were in the States, Mitty," grumbled Remington. "Coals to Newcastle, bringing Mitford and me up here for a tertiary." "You are very kind," said Mitty. A huge, complicated machine, connected to the operating table, with many tubes and wires, began at this moment to go pocketa-pocketa-pocketa. "The new anesthetizer is giving away!" shouted an intern. "There is no one in the East who knows how to fix it!" "Quiet, man!" said Mitty, in a low, cool voice. He sprang to the machine, which was now going pocketa-pocketa-queep-pocketa-queep . He began fingering delicately a row of glistening dials. "Give me a fountain pen!" he snapped. Someone handed him a fountain pen. He pulled a faulty piston out of the machine and inserted the pen in its place. "That will hold for ten minutes," he said. "Get on with the operation. A nurse hurried over and whispered to Renshaw, and Mitty saw the man turn pale. "Coreopsis has set in," said Renshaw nervously. "If you would take over, Mitty?" Mitty looked at him and at the craven figure of Benbow, who drank, and at the grave, uncertain faces of the two great specialists. "If you wish," he said. They slipped a white gown on him, he adjusted a mask and drew on thin gloves; nurses handed him shining . . .

"Back it up, Mac!! Look out for that Buick!" Walter Mitty jammed on the brakes. "Wrong lane, Mac," said the parking-lot attendant, looking at Mitty closely. "Gee. Yeh," muttered Mitty. He began cautiously to back out of the lane marked "Exit Only." "Leave her sit there," said the attendant. "I'll put her away." Mitty got out of the car. "Hey, better leave the key." "Oh," said Mitty, handing the man the ignition key. The attendant vaulted into the car, backed it up with insolent skill, and put it where it belonged.

They're so damn cocky, thought Walter Mitty, walking along Main Street; they think they know everything. Once he had tried to take his chains off, outside New Milford, and he had got them wound around the axles. A man had had to come out in a wrecking car and unwind them, a young, grinning garageman. Since then Mrs. Mitty always made him drive to a garage to have the chains taken off. The next time, he thought, I'll wear my right arm in a sling; they won't grin at me then. I'll have my right arm in a sling and they'll see I couldn't possibly take the chains off myself. He kicked at the slush on the sidewalk. "Overshoes," he said to himself, and he began looking for a shoe store.

When he came out into the street again, with the overshoes in a box under his arm, Walter Mitty began to wonder what the other thing was his wife had told him to get. She had told him, twice before they set out from their house for Waterbury. In a way he hated these weekly trips to town--he was always getting something wrong. Kleenex, he thought, Squibb's, razor blades? No. Tooth paste, toothbrush, bicarbonate, Carborundum, initiative and referendum? He gave it up. But she would remember it. "Where's the what's-its- name?" she would ask. "Don't tell me you forgot the what's-its-name." A newsboy went by shouting something about the Waterbury trial.

. . . "Perhaps this will refresh your memory." The District Attorney suddenly thrust a heavy automatic at the quiet figure on the witness stand. "Have you ever seen this before?'' Walter Mitty took the gun and examined it expertly. "This is my Webley-Vickers 50.80," ho said calmly. An excited buzz ran around the courtroom. The Judge rapped for order. "You are a crack shot with any sort of firearms, I believe?" said the District Attorney, insinuatingly. "Objection!" shouted Mitty's attorney. "We have shown that the defendant could not have fired the shot. We have shown that he wore his right arm in a sling on the night of the fourteenth of July." Walter Mitty raised his hand briefly and the bickering attorneys were stilled. "With any known make of gun," he said evenly, "I could have killed Gregory Fitzhurst at three hundred feet with my left hand." Pandemonium broke loose in the courtroom. A woman's scream rose above the bedlam and suddenly a lovely, dark-haired girl was in Walter Mitty's arms. The District Attorney struck at her savagely. Without rising from his chair, Mitty let the man have it on the point of the chin. "You miserable cur!" . . .

"Puppy biscuit," said Walter Mitty. He stopped walking and the buildings of Waterbury rose up out of the misty courtroom and surrounded him again. A woman who was passing laughed. "He said 'Puppy biscuit,'" she said to her companion. "That man said 'Puppy biscuit' to himself." Walter Mitty hurried on. He went into an A. P., not the first one he came to but a smaller one farther up the street. "I want some biscuit for small, young dogs," he said to the clerk. "Any special brand, sir?" The greatest pistol shot in the world thought a moment. "It says 'Puppies Bark for It' on the box," said Walter Mitty.

His wife would be through at the hairdresser's in fifteen minutes' Mitty saw in looking at his watch, unless they had trouble drying it; sometimes they had trouble drying it. She didn't like to get to the hotel first, she would want him to be there waiting for her as usual. He found a big leather chair in the lobby, facing a window, and he put the overshoes and the puppy biscuit on the floor beside it. He picked up an old copy of Liberty and sank down into the chair. "Can Germany Conquer the World Through the Air?" Walter Mitty looked at the pictures of bombing planes and of ruined streets.

. . . "The cannonading has got the wind up in young Raleigh, sir," said the sergeant. Captain Mitty looked up at him through tousled hair. "Get him to bed," he said wearily, "with the others. I'll fly alone." "But you can't, sir," said the sergeant anxiously. "It takes two men to handle that bomber and the Archies are pounding hell out of the air. Von Richtman's circus is between here and Saulier." "Somebody's got to get that ammunition dump," said Mitty. "I'm going over. Spot of brandy?" He poured a drink for the sergeant and one for himself. War thundered and whined around the dugout and battered at the door. There was a rending of wood and splinters flew through the room. "A bit of a near thing," said Captain Mitty carelessly. 'The box barrage is closing in," said the sergeant. "We only live once, Sergeant," said Mitty, with his faint, fleeting smile. "Or do we?" He poured another brandy and tossed it off. "I never see a man could hold his brandy like you, sir," said the sergeant. "Begging your pardon, sir." Captain Mitty stood up and strapped on his huge Webley-Vickers automatic. "It's forty kilometers through hell, sir," said the sergeant. Mitty finished one last brandy. "After all," he said softly, "what isn't?" The pounding of the cannon increased; there was the rat-tat-tatting of machine guns, and from somewhere came the menacing pocketa-pocketa-pocketa of the new flame-throwers. Walter Mitty walked to the door of the dugout humming "Aupres de Ma Blonde." He turned and waved to the sergeant. "Cheerio!" he said. . . .

Something struck his shoulder. "I've been looking all over this hotel for you," said Mrs. Mitty. "Why do you have to hide in this old chair? How did you expect me to find you?" "Things close in," said Walter Mitty vaguely. "What?" Mrs. Mitty said. "Did you get the what's-its-name? The puppy biscuit? What's in that box?" "Overshoes," said Mitty. "Couldn't you have put them on in the store?" 'I was thinking," said Walter Mitty. "Does it ever occur to you that I am sometimes thinking?" She looked at him. "I'm going to take your temperature when I get you home," she said.

They went out through the revolving doors that made a faintly derisive whistling sound when you pushed them. It was two blocks to the parking lot. At the drugstore on the corner she said, "Wait here for me. I forgot something. I won't be a minute." She was more than a minute. Walter Mitty lighted a cigarette. It began to rain, rain with sleet in it. He stood up against the wall of the drugstore, smoking. . . . He put his shoulders back and his heels together. "To hell with the handkerchief," said Walter Mitty scornfully. He took one last drag on his cigarette and snapped it away. Then, with that faint, fleeting smile playing about his lips, he faced the firing squad; erect and motionless, proud and disdainful, Walter Mitty the Undefeated, inscrutable to the last.

"You're tensed up again," said Mrs. Mitty. "It's one of your days. I wish you'd let Dr. Renshaw look you over."


So remember if you are on medication, please take it before commenting here.

Port Ramsgate is another issue at the moment, the council has probably let us down on some fronts and may have been able to get some money if they had secured their debt against the company’s assets.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but even so I think our council could be more astute in these matters.

But frankly it is looking forward that matters and with the port I think the council need to take a much wider view of the problem. It needs a temporary solution, funfair or something on the site while they are trying to get an operator.

The options are Dunkirk or Calais or possibly Oostende when it comes to a ferry from Ramsgate and the snag is that Dover is closer to France and doesn’t have The Goodwin Sands in the way.

This wasn’t such a problem before the Chunnel as Dover was running at full capacity.    

The main question for any potential operator using Ramsgate is which way to round The Goodwins.   

I guess the main problem for the council is that it may be a long time before the alternative quicker crossings reach their full capacity and Ramsgate becomes viable again.

Another factor here is the price of fuel and the environmental impact.


I notice the south Thanet Conservative group say on their homepage http://stca.org.uk/

“Could you serve as a Councillor?

We are all very conscious of the national political scene, but many of the decisions that affect our everyday life are made at local level – in parish, town and district councils.

There’s always a need for people of ability and integrity to serve on these.  If you would like to help your neighbours with planning issues or influence the way scarce resources are allocated, or serve on a scrutiny committee that holds executive decision-makers to account, then becoming a Councillor can be a stimulating experience. Of course you will need to commit a certain amount of your time to do the job properly, but most Councillors find it a rewarding way to put something back into their communities.”

The North Thanet Conservative group have a minimalist website as they ever have http://ntca.org.uk/index.html so they don’t say anything.

Joking aside, the Thanet Conservatives seem to very quiet at the moment and obviously with both the district and national elections coming up in not much more than a year and a half, they are gong to have to do some groundwork soon.      

Update At the Planning Meeting tonight, TDC councillors rejected the proposal to erect 38 flats to the rear of Granville House.

I gather the designs were thought to be out of keeping with Granville House.

102 comments:

  1. Michael, is there such a thing as a catalogue or price guide for collectable books, like Millers for antiques or Stanley Gibbons for stamps, or is it entirely down to expert knowledge.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. William, before the internet we mainly used Book Auction Records for the value of books over £100, the periodical Book and Magazine Collector and various other reference books for the less expensive.

      Now I guess it is the internet we use mostly abe.com being the easiest if you expand the picture of the first editions and look up one of the Dick Francis firsts, using the advanced search form on abe, put Francis in the author field Joseph in the publisher field, this will eliminate the American firsts which are not so desirable with a UK author, put bonecrack in the title field and tick dust jacket and first edition.

      You will be looking for one that isn’t price clipped or has an inscription in it.

      To get a realistic idea of whether the book actually sells, look on Ebay “Dick Francis First Edition” then tick the sold box and the ones that have sold recently will come up with the prices in green.

      For the most part a first edition mentions no reprints on the verso of the title page or has a complete number string including 1 e.g. 1 9 2 7 4 5 6 3 8 often the price appearing on the jacket is part of the proof it’s a first.

      Delete
    2. Many thanks, Michael, all useful information.

      Delete
    3. William the golden rule is, make sure the books on your shelves represent your interests, or are reasonable looking editions of you favourite authors, if you can’t afford expensive editions go for one that are contemporary to you. That way you won’t be disappointed if the values drop. I have a large collection of books about The Isle of Thanet and the county of Kent, so if a book I bought for £700 four years ago is now only worth £400 it doesn’t worry me much as I still enjoy it and use it. In the same way I read a lot of naval fiction, so a Hornblower first that I paid £15 for selling on Ebay for £5 doesn’t worry me that much, as the book is just as enjoyable. However if I had collected Beano annuals because of their value and the prices dropped, I guess I would just have a lot of books I didn’t want to read. Different of course if you enjoy reading Beano.

      Delete
    4. Thanks again and I take your point, Michael. I have some interesting books on Rhodesia, including first editions and authors signatures, which are probably not worth that much, but which revive pleasant memories. That said, I would not want to part with them even if they did have increased value because I enjoy going back to them from time to time.

      Delete
    5. I managed to get a book with Cecil Rhodes bookplate in it, the only example I have ever seen, but yes I think you have the right idea.

      Delete
    6. I have one 'My Son' inscribed by the author to Sir Roy & Lady Welensky, one time PM of the Rhodesian Federation and 'The Great Betrayal' signed by Ian Smith. Mind you, Cecil Rhodes is something else again.

      Delete
    7. It’s that sort of collection that is more valuable as a collection than as individual books.

      Delete
  2. Your comment about the Conservatives advertising for councillors says volumes about the state of public apathy towards politics. Only today I was reading an article spelling out the membership losses all the parties have suffered and it is from the members that the activists, candidates and foot soldiers are normally found.

    The present coalition government seem to be bringing the economy to order but, in others ways, they have won no friends. Many Liberals will never forgive their party for going into a coalition with the Conservatives whilst, on the Conservative side, David Cameron seems to have alienated whole swathes of his party's traditional support.

    Labour meanwhile are in turmoil, twittering about their leader and almost totally devoid of policies. They have become the party of opposition for oppositions sake, but they seem to be without ideas on how to govern.

    UKIP is but a party for protest voters with no prospects of winning many seats, if any, and so a low turn out with another hung parliament looks on the cards. Heaven forbid that the Lib/Dems should again be the king makers pulling the puppet PM's strings, but it looks very much on the cards at the moment.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Frankly Allan here in Ramsgate both MP candidates are fairly ok and it won’t worry me much which gets in, I will vote for the candidate and not the party, mostly based on what sort of response I get out of them in the run up.

      District wise though, it is a different matter, I have no real idea where the Conservatives stand on the main Ramsgate issues, at the end of 8 years they left us with most of the council owned big high profile sites derelict and the feeling that they had no desire to relate night flights with any commercial benefit.

      I guess a Ramsgate Conservative candidate would have to make a pretty convincing case to be considered.

      However with the blog and other parts of Thanet I take a different position, eight years of Conservative leadership seemed to leave Broadstairs fairly ok and greatly improve the lot of Margate old town.

      Delete
    2. Valid points, Michael, on the district front though on MP for Thanet South I think the place has been well served by Laura Sandys. Do you, therefore, vote against a good constituency MP for an unknown simply because they appear to be a good candidate? That said, I think she will have a tougher fight than last time because Equal Marriage has turned off a lot of the blue rinse church going voters, normally Conservatives.

      On Will Scobie I share the concerns others have expressed about Clive Hart's endorsement of Will's qualities because, if he is good enough for Westminster, why has he been given nothing at TDC, not even a committee chair.

      Delete
    3. I have no worries about Will, he can’t help being young, he came round here around the time he got his masters and held his own well in the general conversation, my son is about the same age and is just starting on his Chemistry phd, so he is fairly bright and a reasonable judge of that age group. I think if Will had any toys loose in the attic one of us would have noticed. Same with Laura, my younger children like her and she can hold her own in the company here. Also as far as I can ascertain both Will and Laura appear to have a mutual respect and liking for each other. I am expecting a good clean fight. I just wish the same applied a district level, obviously Will is one of the more able councillors and should hold a cabinet post, Steve Ladyman was leader of TDC before he became MP, which begs the question, why isn’t Will?

      Delete
    4. I could imagine some of the comments around here if Will became leader of TDC! I agree that he'd probably do a decent job though.

      Delete
    5. In fairness, Peter and Michael, he could not do worse then the present and some previous leaders and it would be good training for moving on up the political ladder.

      Delete
    6. I guess the county elections suggest some sort of mandate, I don’t think having an intelligent councillor that people vote for is what the other councillors are looking for in a leader.

      Delete
    7. Few comments as usual with Anon enabled and less of any interest.

      The slipway is a good point though: rather derelict than the existing Jack Shack proposal (again) and maybe a better scheme will happen in future. And interesting the council-funded hoist is in competition with the private sector slipway, as with Top Travel and Top Temps etc at KCC.

      Maybe everyone working for the council and funding the council is the economic future for Thanet though? Presumably the Port is now funded to do nothing?

      Delete
    8. Strangely enough, Anon 10:02, your comment is one of the least interesting so far having enjoyed reading the exchanges about books and the candidates for the next general election. What makes you think your comment is anymore relevant or are you trying to bolster your own self esteem?

      Delete
    9. Mallinson pops up and the debate declines...

      Delete
    10. Better that than with you, 11:34, for when you pop up everybody else goes off to find something more stimulating to do and the debate ends.

      Delete
    11. Anonymous 11:34am

      Your slime trail is everywhere.

      Delete
    12. It beats me why Michael Childs allows John Holyer to continue to post on this blog. The vast majority of his postings are nothing more than nasty little abusive retorts such as the one above. Interestingly, many of these retorts emerge when somebody comments negatively about the appalling output of Mallinson and Hamilton. You have to wonder why Holyer is so defensive of these mystical posters.

      Delete
    13. Strangely enough, 10:04, the comments only tend to become insulting when you re-appear. Until then several people were discussing books and political candidates without calling each other names. Perhaps it is you that provokes others into retorts in kind.

      Delete
    14. I only posted one message and that was the one at 10:04. I'm afraid you are falling for Holyer's pack of lies about there only being one anonymous poster. It isn't true as I can testify.

      Delete
    15. I cannot understand why you and John Holyer assume that all the Anons who disagree with you must be the same person. On a couple of occasions I have entered debates as Anon, because the company that employs me might worry that people would think I was representing their views, and each time I have drawn a response claiming I'm someone else! When I said I wasn't, I got the predictable "You would say that, wouldn't you?" reply. I thought 10,04 made a good point. What does a post saying "Your slime trail is everywhere" add to a debate? I enjoy reading contributors' views - I do not enjoy playground rudeness.

      Delete
    16. 7.38 your solution is quite simple, when you comment select “name url” instead of “anonymous” and use a nom de blog, you can make this even more definitive by getting yourself a Google id, you don’t have to use your real name and compromise your employment you know.

      Delete
    17. Thank you Michael. I didn't realise that. I'm 7.38 by the way and not any of the others.

      Delete
    18. lol 7:38. Your experience reminds me of my first interjection with John Hoyler as an anon: I thought I had made a rational observation based on experience, when he accused me of always standing on the clifftop throwing breadcrumbs at helicopters!

      Delete
    19. Solo 9:36 pm,

      So that was you - sorry. But at least I did not accuse you of feeding the toilet duck.

      (You have mispelled my name).

      Delete
    20. Anon 7:38 pm

      A post saying, "Your slime trail is everywhere" registers my contempt for the obnoxious little creep who has infested this blog for months [Manston, aquifer 0%, etc, etc]

      I take that you intend to follow Michael's guidance.

      Delete
    21. John, sorry, yes, I realised I spelt your name wrong as soon as I had posted. Comments do not appear to have an edit facility here as on Facebook?

      Delete
    22. I am not the Anon who was writing before but another Anon who wrote after him.

      I not the Anon who writes on the thread but the one who writes on a whim.

      I may be the Anon who finds Holyer hard to take.

      I am not the Anon eating contaminated cake.

      I am not the Anon spitting from behind the grubby nets.

      I am the Anon who is as daft as it gets.

      Who am I? Why just a bit of a tit!

      Delete
  3. I wonder if Driver will be applying to the conservatives, i think it's the only party he hasn't so far claimed to represent.

    I see the Granville flats have been rejected.

    Well done everyone, there was a danger that an investment was going to happen and progress made! Well done in acting so swiftly to stifle both.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well John it’s always bit difficult with you anon types, but I am trying to deal with the comment here, so some questions.

      Do you think there should be any planning restriction whatsoever in the UK?

      Are you familiar with Ramsgate and its major sites, Granville, Pleasurama and so on?

      If you are then do you think there should be any limitations on what a developer can build on the Granville site?

      In view of the recent rebuilding of part of the Granville site in a style sympathetic to the existing Pugin building, do you think further building there should be in any way sympathetic with the rest of the development?

      Delete
    2. I and very familiar with Thanet and it's buildings Michael, having lived here for many decades. Sadly Michael, it seems that your grasp of anonymity is still tenuous at best, but I shan't seek to educate you further in that point, it's a waste of my time.

      There should be the mildest of planning consent the country. Who are the council to impose restrictions on what people wish to build. We are left in the tragic situation these days, of beautiful old buildings, that have been added to and changed over many years, yet today, that progress stops because tiny groups of nimbys with access to the internet can stop all progress with lengthy legal processes, whining, court action etc etc etc.

      It seems that as a result of this, Thanet is now turning into the inevitable wasteland that that approach makes a certainty. Investors and developers are becoming rare in Thanet as a result of the ridiculous costs and delays that tiny groups of people, with little to do except whine cause to be imposed. The examples are legion, Pleasurama, Dreamland, Arlington, Manston, Thanet earth, Ramsgate port, Westwood Cross etc etc etc, all delayed or destroyed by these clowns.

      As far as Granville in concerned, it will now be a derelict building site for some years no doubt. When the whining starts, just remember, it's what YOU chose when someone was prepared to invest money to make Ramsgate a better place.

      Think that just about covers it :)

      Delete
    3. John, next time you use Michael's shop, why not introduce yourself? That way you'll both know you're not anonymous! ; )

      Delete
    4. Thanks for the advice Peter. Sadly however, even if I chose to follow it, I am sure that Michael would then argue that simply having seen my face makes me no less anonymous. He would need a passport, utility bill and a sworn statement from a judge to fulfill his strange definition of what constitutes non anonymity.

      Delete
    5. To be fair, no-one on any of the blogs or on the FB page seems to have actually met you, quite an achievement for someone who claims to have lived in Thanet for decades...

      Delete
    6. John, personally I don’t really care either way about your anonymity, however your current Joe Bloggs situation does mean that what you say lacks any authority whatsoever. That said it is helpful that you are one of the few anons with a nom de blog.

      You seem to be saying that the only planning constraints you would like are those that would protect your own personal nimbyism and that despite saying that you are familiar with Thanet and its buildings, you then go on to comment about the Granville as though you had never actually seen it.

      So we have one lump of mock gothic, one lump of mock mock gothic and have just turned down adding a lump 1970s plastic windowed condo.

      So once again:

      do you think there should be any limitations on what a developer can build on the Granville site?

      In view of the recent rebuilding of part of the Granville site in a style sympathetic to the existing Pugin building, do you think further building there should be in any way sympathetic with the rest of the development?

      Perhaps your considered opinion as a well known Thanet worthy, or perhaps the questions were too complex and difficult.

      Delete
    7. Bearing in mind the groups where I encounter you are nimby and anti progress groups, and blogs I only discovered some months ago, not really surprising Peter, it may surprise you to learn that they don't make up a large part of my internet use. It's not a claim Peter, it's a fact :)

      Some of us live our lives in the real world, with the internet form a tiny part of our leisure time ;)

      Thankfully Michael, your mis-understanding of the term anonymous is of little consequence, similar to your opinions re the noahesq flooding alarmism you try to peddle to prevent (another) development you don't like ;)

      Your next paragraph makes little sense. It seems you are trying to claim that I have complained against some kind of development at some point, perhaps you could enlighten me with some detail on that point, or is your definition of nimbyism as wide of the mark as your definition of anonymity..

      Not sure why you seem to want to ask the same questions I have already answered? As i have already dealt with your points in my previous post, I think the best way to address them the 2nd time is to simply re-produce my earlier post, as it deals with your question perfectly, as it did the 1st time.

      "I and very familiar with Thanet and it's buildings Michael, having lived here for many decades. Sadly Michael, it seems that your grasp of anonymity is still tenuous at best, but I shan't seek to educate you further in that point, it's a waste of my time.

      There should be the mildest of planning consent the country. Who are the council to impose restrictions on what people wish to build. We are left in the tragic situation these days, of beautiful old buildings, that have been added to and changed over many years, yet today, that progress stops because tiny groups of nimbys with access to the internet can stop all progress with lengthy legal processes, whining, court action etc etc etc.

      It seems that as a result of this, Thanet is now turning into the inevitable wasteland that that approach makes a certainty. Investors and developers are becoming rare in Thanet as a result of the ridiculous costs and delays that tiny groups of people, with little to do except whine cause to be imposed. The examples are legion, Pleasurama, Dreamland, Arlington, Manston, Thanet earth, Ramsgate port, Westwood Cross etc etc etc, all delayed or destroyed by these clowns.

      As far as Granville in concerned, it will now be a derelict building site for some years no doubt. When the whining starts, just remember, it's what YOU chose when someone was prepared to invest money to make Ramsgate a better place.

      Think that just about covers it :)"

      Perhaps the answers were to simple for you as you wrestle with trying to find other reasons to protest and complain about any progress anywhere in Ramsgate or Thanet....

      Delete
    8. John thanks for the laugh, I do hope you at least see what is funny about the statement; I am not anonymous but I am very careful to ensure that no one knows who I am.

      My understanding of the term anonymous is someone who no one knows who they are apart from presumably their relations and friends if they have any. In your naïveté you seem to think letters to the paper signed “disgusted Joe Blogs” have the same standing as those coming from known figures in the community.

      I assumed that your only concession, which you did make, that there should be some sort of planning law, could only apply to your own nimbyism, particularly as you seem to be saying that anything from a corrugated iron squatter camp to a tower block would be quite acceptable on the Granville site. So once again do you think there should be any sympathy whatsoever with the existing Pugin or the already added Pugin style part? Or for you does just anything go?

      Delete
    9. I do find it very very funny Michael, I wish I had said it :)

      As I stated earlier, I have offered you education on the subject of anonymity in the past, but you have chosen to carry on with your own misguided definition. That is a matter for you, but don;t be surprised when I am unconcerned at your mistaken definition.

      Once again Michael, I await the details of my "nimbyism" something which it appears you are keen to keep the details of fairly close to your chest, no doubt because trying to detail such an accusation would attract certain and correct ridicule.

      Your false dichotomy did indeed make me actually lol. A squatter camp would clearly attract occutards, and NOBODY wants them around. As for a tower block, clearly that would lead to another slum such as Arlington, clearly equally as unpleasant. I wonder when planning was turned down for either proposal, and at what point an empty (for many years) site is preferable to newly developed dwellings? Presumably any development must be approved by you before being allowed to go forward, indeed your machinations re the slipways have been amusing me for sometime.

      It seems you would like to be seem as some kind of authority of planning policy in Thanet, instead of just someone who seems to have a little to much time on his hands, and a little over inflated sense of his own importance ;)

      Once again, to aid your understanding, for the 3rd time now;

      "I and very familiar with Thanet and it's buildings Michael, having lived here for many decades. Sadly Michael, it seems that your grasp of anonymity is still tenuous at best, but I shan't seek to educate you further in that point, it's a waste of my time.

      There should be the mildest of planning consent the country. Who are the council to impose restrictions on what people wish to build. We are left in the tragic situation these days, of beautiful old buildings, that have been added to and changed over many years, yet today, that progress stops because tiny groups of nimbys with access to the internet can stop all progress with lengthy legal processes, whining, court action etc etc etc.

      It seems that as a result of this, Thanet is now turning into the inevitable wasteland that that approach makes a certainty. Investors and developers are becoming rare in Thanet as a result of the ridiculous costs and delays that tiny groups of people, with little to do except whine cause to be imposed. The examples are legion, Pleasurama, Dreamland, Arlington, Manston, Thanet earth, Ramsgate port, Westwood Cross etc etc etc, all delayed or destroyed by these clowns.

      As far as Granville in concerned, it will now be a derelict building site for some years no doubt. When the whining starts, just remember, it's what YOU chose when someone was prepared to invest money to make Ramsgate a better place.

      Think that just about covers it :)"

      Delete
    10. John avoiding answering a simple direct question by repeating the same non answer would make you look idiotic if you had any identity beyond your nom de blog. So I guess I had better leave you alone, just in case you are ever revealed as person.

      Delete
    11. Answered 3 times now Michael, not sure which part it is you are failing to understand. Sadly your failure to understand my straightforward replies merely underlines your failure to define anonymity and nimbyism correctly.

      Delete
    12. John, the key question is, do you think there should be any sympathy whatsoever with the existing Pugin or the already added Pugin style part? Or for you does just anything go?

      As I was evidently to stupid to understand your answer perhaps someone else can translate the Hamiltonese for me.

      Delete
    13. I've come to the conclusion that what Thanet needs is MORE people out getting themselves known in "the real world" as you put it John, people like Ian, Louise, Christine, James and Michael! You (and sometimes I) might not agree with everything they say and do, but at least they CARE about Thanet. A good example is Louise's post on Margate Architecture last night, highlighting the poor security at Dreamland. Now, wouldn't even you admit that this is a good thing?

      Far worse for thanet are:

      (a) Self-serving councillors (Moores, Worrow, etc) that are more interested in petty point-scoring than the interests of the people who voted for them (and how many letters in the local press do we need from Worrow highliting the plight of Russian homosexuals? This isn't what people voted for!).

      (b) Constantly negative bloggers (Flaig, Brown) who always put the area down & rarely if ever find anything positive to say & do (and Tony's rants about Clive Hart are almost as obsessive as yours about Ian Driver!).

      (c) Anonymous commentators with their constant allegations of corruption & calls for petitions, who are too scared to actually put their name & face forward and actually do anything.


      THESE are who you should be complaining about John!

      Delete
    14. Peter I am no really sure you are being entirely fair to Simon Moores, who does seem to attempt to address local issues, while yes. I often disagree with him. I wouldn’t call him self serving, perhaps you could expand on that one.

      Anyway sticking to the thread, can you understand what John Hamilton is trying to say? Do you think he thinks that further extension of the Granville should be in some sense in keeping both with the original and the recent rebuild? Or do you think he is saying anything goes there?

      Delete
    15. OK Michael, you're probably right regarding Simon serving his community... What I object to though is the amount of ill feeling he causes amongst other councillors with his blog - not just John Worrow and Ian Driver, but also Will Scobie for committing the mortal sin of being both young and successful, as well as others - all under the name of "satire", but often just one step removed from John Hamilton's outright nastiness. Perhaps the fact that even most of TDC's other Tories dislike him speaks volumes.

      I've given up trying to understand some of John Hamilton's rants.

      Delete
    16. Presumably you didn't disagree too much with my other points though?

      Delete
    17. Thank you for your comedy piece Peter.

      I think you are a little confused.

      To say that Driver is not a blatant publicist, that will attach himself to any and all topics to ensure media coverage is laughable. Or perhaps LGBT issues at the Olympics, who own the railways and what the level minimum wage is set at are burning Thanet issues all of a sudden..

      Oldfield is probably the single largest barrier to Margate's regeneration at the moment. Not only has she wasted everyone's time being the mouthpiece for a tiny group of nimby's, when she loses at the enquiry she demanded, she stamps her feet like a petulant child, and drags everyone off to the high court, so she can have an expensive forum to stamp her foot in! She's in it for her own self engrandishment, and the people of Thanet have given her a royal FU, and rightly so.

      I have condemned Worrow on a number of issues a number of times, you need to pay more attention.

      As for the others you list, I haven;t come across them much in the blogs or FB. I do have other things to do than trawl for each and every blog based in Thanet.

      You do make some good points sometimes Peter, but they are getting fewer, and your memory shorter. Remember the tack you suggested I take on the Tesco group ;)

      Delete
    18. A very "selective" reply JH, but let me try this one again for now:

      A good example is Louise's post on Margate Architecture last night, highlighting the poor security at Dreamland. Now, wouldn't even you admit that this is a good thing?

      Delete
    19. As for Ian Driver, he's undoubtedly a self-publicist who indulges in non-Thanet issues (though mimimum wage does affect many people in Thanet), but he also raises important questions regarding many things in Thanet. So I'd say he does more good than bad, at least to us who'd like to see some things in Thanet change for the better.

      Delete
    20. Hamilton's non de blog might be because if he used his more noteworthy name he would not be able to say what he really wants to say

      Delete
    21. And his "more noteworthy name" is?

      Delete
    22. I wish I knew. Along wish many others

      Delete
    23. From Twitter:

      Duncan Smithson ‏@DuncanS 2h
      @margatearchi thought you would like to know @AnnBarnesKPCC is looking at #JohnHamilton for us. I hope you show your support :D

      Delete
    24. John Hamilton even makes "smudger" in the Gazette today.

      Delete
    25. Really? What does it say?

      Delete
    26. That girl is a bit young for him!

      Delete
    27. Selective Peter... You mean I answered all the queiries you raised, and illustrated why the likes of Driver and Oldfield serve no useful purpose for Thanet, and the people of Thanet properly demonstrated at the KCC elections, when a resounding 96% of the Thanet electorate presented them with a volumous FU.

      Oh yes, of course, a tweet about an open door, as opposed to a phone call, wonder why, oh yes, a phone attracts no attention to herself, and thus doesn't feed her narcissism.

      I wonder what the charge will be? Perhaps "exposing a liar with intent"... You're STILL a joke smithson.

      And no Michael, aswell as Driver, it appears you've backed another loser :)

      Delete
    28. Come on John, you know full well that blog posts are far more effective than private phone calls or emails. Otherwise you'd just send a private message to Ian Driver everytime you disagreed with his policies.

      As for them doing so badly in the polls, the same could be said of Tony Flaig (who probably did even worse) yet you never mention that.

      Anyway, do you have a public message for Ann Barnes in case she's reading? Or will you just give her a phone call? ; )

      Delete
    29. I simply reply in the media that the BS I am commenting on was published (don't have twitter though, it annoys me). If you think tweets and pictures of an open door are the cutting edge of social responsibility Peter, that is a matter for you. The fact that it is simply and obvious self engranishment is plain for all to see.

      Never really ended up on a blog or FB with Mr Flaig, nor am I aware of his electorial history. Not really sure why you think I should be mentioning each and every planning application, and local "politician" on every subject Peter. I am not a career whiner like many on the blogs and FB, hence I don't look for new and varied subjects to be outraged about.

      Delete
    30. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/self-aggrandisement

      Delete
    31. As Mr Flaig's blog is one of a handful that you link to from your own blog I'm rather surprised that you're "not aware" of his electorial history... or is because he's a whining right-winger (despite calling himself a liberal) rather than a whining socialist?

      You didn't answer my question regarding Ann Barnes, any message for her in case she or the police are reading?

      Delete
    32. Well Peter, as I have no idea which his blog is, it is unlikely that I would be aware of any further detail of his political aspirations wouldn't it now. Unlike some, I don;t require a passport, birth certificate and CV from people posting online.

      As for your irrelevant question, it is simply that, irrelevant.

      Delete
    33. It's this one: http://bignewsmargate.blogspot.co.uk

      As for my "irrelevant" question, you're the one that claims you're not doing anything illegal with your postings. Of course, you could always email her direct, as you suggest other people do instead of posting things online: contactyourpcc@pcc.kent.pnn.police.uk

      Delete
    34. PS. I'm surprised you didn't do a blog post on your mention in this week's Isle of Thanet Gazette, but here it is in case you missed it:

      "John Hamilton", whoever he may be, should be afriad. Smnudger hears that no less a great personage than Kent's Police and Crime Commissioner Ann Barnes has been asked to investigate his blog site which has become home to a nasty array of personal attacks on Thanet folk. Smudger's sources whisper that Mr Hamilton may, in fact, be a member of the Thanet political community and exposure would be very embarassing for a certain party. Oh dear.

      Delete
    35. Thank you for the information Peter, I may have a read of it when I get 5 minutes, but as I say, I'm not a professional whiner, so don;t really seek out things to be offended about. That may exposure of liars, peons and occutards gains followers daily is touching, but not really noteworthy, read the "Smudger" piece, entertained at how inaccurate it is, and that the whispering "sources" are no doubt the anons that plague this blog aswell.

      Was nice to have something to laugh at for a while though.

      Delete
  4. It's good to see that the Thanet Independent Group are encouraging cycling:

    http://thanetindependentgroup.blogspot.co.uk/

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thanet Independent Group Peter's linkie

    Looks more like a strategy to take 4 bikes off the road Peter ?

    Englander drowning tragedy

    I think the Granville is an Englander investment ? But I don't know if it is intended to support the retreats and mikveh rituals. Or if it is a purely commercial investment.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thanet Independent Group Peter's linkie

    Looks more like a strategy to take 4 bikes off the road Peter ?

    Englander drowning tragedy

    I think the Granville is an Englander investment ? But I don't know if it is intended to support the retreats and mikveh rituals. Or if it is a purely commercial investment.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I have just returned home after my day off, I only had to knock of a couple of anon comments as spam. They both seemed the same on the mobile screen, the gist being: While in contact with MI5, the firing on the gun range went ta-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa. Walter Mitty took the gun and examined it expertly. "This is my Webley-Vickers 50.80," he said calmly…

    I didn’t knock of poor old 10.02, 11.34 as he seems to have read about half the post and taken about half his medication, so this could be a sign of improvementum.

    I am wondering in view of the double posting if 4.16 – 17 isn’t Walter again after having read the rest of the post, it’s certainly confused enough. Anyway property investor Eliasz Englander did buy part of the Granville site, this was the part comprising the Pugin Victorian building, not the part rebuilt in mock mock gothic nor the part still derelict that these plans apply to.

    I have covered all of this on the blog before auction results, land reg docs plans etc and am not going over it all again.

    ReplyDelete
  8. For general information:

    Under Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 it is an offence to ‘send by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character’.

    Offenders convicted under Section 127 of the 2003 Communications Act can be jailed for up to six months and fined up to £5,000.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fair enough, 5:58, but such a prosecution would be an infringement of my Human Right to freedom of expression and would thus be overturned.

      Delete
    2. Anon
      Such arrogance 6:47pm: I'm afraid that the Law disagrees with you. The HRA would not rescue you. There have already been successful prosecutions under Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003.

      It has long been established in Law that freedom of speech does not mean it's OK to falsely shout fire in a crowded cinema.

      The net is closing in on internet trolls.

      Delete
    3. If someone kills with a car whilst uninsured, without driving licence and under the influence, but still manages to use the HRA to over turn his deportation order following conviction, don't count on your theory 7:01. The European court is capable of quite bizarre decisions in the name of human rights. I do not support it, Blair should never have enshrined it into our law, but the fact remains it is there.

      Delete
  9. Section 127 was never intended to apply to the internet and it is a gross misuse of the law to apply it to people who are exercising their right to free speech. The police are wasting their time and our money arresting people under this legislation. I appreciate that those who wish to prevent free-speech (mainly the rich and powerful) are keen to see this law used but our laws should be decided by parliament.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well 7:16 pm, you can explain all that in Court. I am sure that the Judge will be guided by your interpretation of the Law as you see it.

      It was Parliament that introduced Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 so your criterion is met.

      Delete
  10. Interesting post Michael with a number of points and a good level of discourse that was on topic. Until the anon comments began. Is there any way to prevent this? Its not hard to set up a google account - you dont have to be a real person - but it does let you track people a little more so you can take their comments however you feel. I know its a little anti-democratic but it may raise the level of discussion. Just a thought :D

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A few of us have suggested that Duncan, but (as I pointed out the other day) I think Michael secretly enjoys all the drama that the anons bring! Certainly there's no other explanation.

      Delete
    2. Masochist probably Peter, but seriously, I have always from the beginning tried to run this blog as an open where people can discuss local issues and issues relating to what I do which is bookselling and publishing books related to local history.

      I do now turn off the anonymous comment facility when I am too busy to deal with it and spam comment, which I judge as being spam, this is mostly comment where a few individuals have got obsessed with issues and try to take over every thread on the local blogs with them.

      Sad really but I think the Granville planning application, various aspects of collecting modern books and so on, is a bit beyond some of the commentators here. I guess you have a large collection of books about music and photography, think what things would be like if instead you had the books you got for Christmas and the and the old paperbacks you bough in Tesco.

      Delete
    3. In my opinion it's Michael's blog and he can allow what he likes. If he chooses to allow anonymous comments that's great with me. If Smithson and Checksfield don't like it I would suggest that they set up their own blog. Of course, they won't do this because nobody else would go there to read it. They wouldn't have such a large audience for their irrelevant banter.

      Delete
    4. I already have 4 blogs you imbecile.

      Delete
    5. I have a facebook site that has gone through over half a million feeds in three months John, as you know. As of yet - I have not had to ban anyone. But I think that - because you comment as yourself on Facebook - it keeps the ranting down to a minimum. But it means people cant hide behind anon. And I appreciate your efforts Michael - bravo :D

      Delete
    6. Unless they sign up to FB under a false name of course... ; )

      Delete
    7. If you have your own blog why do you feel the need to infest and try to dominate this one with your minority views?

      Delete
    8. Hmmm, let me see now... Naked Photoshoot on The Wye Downs? A Stroll Around Dungeness? The UK singles of The Dave Clark Five? A Complete Listing of the 1965-1966 'Shivaree' TV Series?

      Now these ARE "minority views", hence my blogs"

      Delete
    9. "John" is suddenly behaving himself, maybe he's getting nervous!

      Delete
    10. Nothing to comment on 7:09, maybe you'd like to make your name public and what comments are yours so we can discuss your irrelevance... ;)

      Delete
  11. Freedom of speech does not give anyone the right to post comments that are racist, homophobic, obscene or menacing. It does give you the right to hide behind your computer screen instead of debating your points in full public view. Ask any Troll which they would prefer.

    ReplyDelete
  12. We are getting a bit off thread here, but to clarify this issue.

    In cases involving ordinary people who are abused on the internet, solicitors are not usually an option because of the cost, my solicitor charges £190 per hour plus VAT.

    So to use an example here from the thread about what usually happens.

    Let us say that that Mr Englander considers 4.16 – 17s comments to be anti-Semitic his first recourse would be to email me asking me to remove them, another action he could use would be to go to the police, who would, if they decided this was the case would probably contact Google. Depending then on the ins and outs of the thing, either google would remove them, or go as far as passing on the ip address which could then be turned by 4.16 – 17s isp into a real identity and anything from legal action to some sort of caution.

    I now keep a searchable record of all published, deleted and spammed comments, so that I can pass them to anyone who wishes to take this sort of action, and indeed I have already passed on comments that mention individuals who feel the have been victims of cyber bullying, libels and so on.

    Of course Mr Englander being a multi millionaire would be able to afford such lawyers, as he wanted, so presumably would go directly to them.

    In a general sense for the police or a lawyer to take up a case you would have had to have been mentioned by name, I am afraid that calling an anon a naughty anon wouldn’t hold much water.

    The situation with the blogs and the law changes as different cases and appeals go through, but at the moment, both from google’s and my point of view, the responsibility equates to someone who owns a wall in a public place and someone comes along and writes graffiti on it. Which is remove anything really obscene or nasty when you see it or when the victim asks you to.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How would the comments have been anti-Semitic. There was a link to a newspaper report of a tragedy and the implication was that if the orthodox Jewish community want to use Ramsgate for their rituals it befits the area to be aware of the history (especially as another of that Jewish community drowned recently at Broadstairs.) Then it is up to Ramsgate to make them as welcome and safe as possible. Try reading.

      You are just spouting off Michael. When you know full well that the commenter is a Guardian of the Flame of the Simon Wiesenthal organisation.



      Delete
    2. Anon I think you have missed the point that this was an example I used to explain the legal situation, obviously if I though the comment was anti-Semitic I would have removed it.

      Delete
    3. Bit harsh, Michael, expecting poor old anon to understand that. He thought you were serious.

      Good point about the unlikelihood of being prosecuted for calling an anonymous person an offensive name, but an interesting situation the other way round. Some anonymous troll regularly treats me to insults by name so I suppose I could have a case, but why would I. I enjoy exchanging views on here and the insults come as part of the price of my pleasure. If I do not want to be called silly names I can always disappear or become anonymous rather than getting too excited about it.

      Delete
    4. If anonymous comments were banned here then this wouldn't be a problem...

      Another reason why I don't like them is because it gets so confusing, often with 2 or more anonymouses arguing with each other.

      Delete
    5. Actually, Peter, it is often the same anonymous arguing with (or supporting) himself. Over on ECR's site, with no limitation on anonymous comments, there are often a whole trail of comments by the same anonymous, easily recognised by his subject matter and generally bilious attitude.

      Delete
    6. I think your comment TDC has probably let us down on some fronts is a bit of an understatement. A bit like saying the banks probably let us down. I fully accept we need to look forward, but TDC needs to accept responsibility for the mistakes it made rather than pretend it didn't happen.

      Delete
    7. You don't have a case Epps. Firstly, to prove libel to have to prove that you had a good name and that it has been damaged by the comments about you. How exactly do you plan to do this? You're hardly a celebrity and, as far as I'm aware the only reputation you have is the one you have posted yourself. Secondly, you would have to demonstrate the damage which had been caused. Have the comments on a blog caused you to lose business or money? Clearly not. So, why would the court award you any money?

      Delete
    8. I certainly don't assume you're all the same. Still bloody confusing though!

      Delete
    9. Anon 7:33, your grasp of what goes before gets worse. Having said I am not getting excited about being called silly names by some anonymous creep on a blog, I am hardly likely to rush off to court. Do pay attention, there's a good chap.

      Delete
  13. Err, excuse me 11:17, but which thread are you on or who are you answering? It does not seem to follow what went before.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anon 7:28 pm 20 September,

    You have mumbled to somebody or other, "I only posted one message and that was the one at 10:04. I'm afraid you are falling for Holyer's pack of lies about there only being one anonymous poster. It isn't true as I can testify."

    You are confused but this is usual. I appreciate that you have a short attention span and that you find it difficult to concentrate. What I said was that there is only one nutter posting and that nutter is you. If you do not realise how I know this then you are as dumb and disturbed as I imagine you to be.

    ReplyDelete

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.