I have decided to adopt a new approach to managing comments
on this blog, partly because of 0%, who seems to think it would be interesting
to see just what off topic, own agenda libellous comment he or she can get away
with and partly because of a commentator who seemed to want to use pseudonyms
related to excrement.
From my point of view writing this blog and the Thanet Press
release blog is fine unless doing so starts to invade my life and frankly working
my way through the 110 comments on the last post about The Royal Sands, several
times on Christmas Day, trying to work out what needed deleting is invasive.
So if you have some bizarre agenda, like a desire that I
should call the police on Christmas Day and ask them to arrest the chief executive of the council and want to
post comments to this effect on a post about a local development, then those
comments will be deleted out of hand.
I won’t bother to delete it in the ordinary way but manage
it from the spam administrator page, which is easy to use on my mobile phone.
Not long ago this sort of problem was easily managed on
blogger because every time someone posts a comment I get an email, the problem
now is that there are so many spam comments and I get an email every time one
is posted, as you can see from the picture I will have to turn my email
notification off.
My guess is that 0% doesn’t like the content of this blog
for one reason or another and would like to see it close, rather in the way Bignews
Margate closed recently for similar reasons.
God alone what the motives of anyone wanting to nickname
themselves excrement could be, but I have decided that most blog readers just don’t
want this sort of thing on the blog, there are plenty of unpleasant sites on
the internet and plenty of places for people with unusual problems.
I am very reluctant to start comment moderation, form
filling or silly numbers, when I am confronted with this I just don’t bother to
comment, a case in point today being Thanet Star, see http://thanetstar.com/article/dreamland-vs-tesco?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ThanetStar+%28The+Thanet+Star%29
Matt seems to mistakenly think that there is either going to be another
Dreamland public enquiry or the first one didn’t happen. Well I would have
commented there but, with the form to fill in and the “is it a 3 or an 8”, you
know how it is.
I am cooking while writing this post, with only
seven of us here today, an absolute doddle in a kitchen that is easy to cook
for twenty in.
sympathies Michael.. I'm seeing the same spam storm of late and it's a complete... pain having to moderate loads of comments from some English as a second language sweat shop IT operation, somewhere in India I'm guessing, as they are paid peanuts to get dodgy clients links on weblogs like ours.
ReplyDeleteAs for the libellous comments, I'm guessing it's the same person who has and excels in demanding the prosecution and possible execution of MPs, politicians and business people around planet, who populate a bizarre, delusional paranoid world of eco-conspiracies.
Simon the problem could easily be resolved by blogger, as on the whole their spam filter works very well, all they need to do is to provide the facility to send notifications for the comments they have spammed to a different email address. My preference is 0%’s.
DeleteI would say 0% has managed to destroy all rational discussion about pollution on the Thanet blogs at a stroke. Pity we can’t get him supporting live animal exports, I would imagine a series of his explanations of why it is perfectly acceptable combined with pleas to imprison anyone against it, would stop the disgusting ill managed trade overnight.
Peter I guess comment moderation comes back to how many comments you get and how much time you get to wade through it all, at the moment I am getting about ten spam comments an hour and less than 1 in 100 gets through bloggers automatic spam filter.
DeleteAll the time this comes back to my having less than half an hour of my day to devote to blogging, obviously the long and complex posts I rough out during the evening, but pretty much all of the comment management gets done with my phone, hence some unusual words appearing because of using auto complete as opposed to a conventional spellchecker.
Michael i suppose everyone knows who he is though as hs agenda is single sse. Just search against his 0% rise for Richard Samuel as Chief Exec which he still gone about, oblivious to the facts. Much like our cancer rates, which ave everything to do with lifestyle, poverty and deprivation and nothing to do with the water supply!
ReplyDeleteSorry about the spelling.. Mix of ipad keyboard, no reading glasses and Xmas spirit
ReplyDeleteNo worries about the eyepos Simon, oddly enough I am seldom confused about who is who online, although years as a shop assistant means I am dreadful at recognising people in conventional reality.
DeleteAccording to www.cancer.org, environmental exposures to different types of chemicals and radiation is one of the causes of cancer. Now that could include the water table being contaminated.
ReplyDeleteIt could but the principal aquifer contaminent threat here in Thanet according to the environment agency briefing, are nitrates from farming as our soil levels are reportedly thin in places. Cancer is predominantly a product of lifestyle and found where you might most expect it. I.e Cliftonville West, Margate Central et al
ReplyDeleteWhat a disgusting statement, next your want to build a high wall, barbed wire, why you could even turn it into a ghetto!
DeleteSimon 8.09 this isn’t quite right, the principle contaminants are the towns and the industry, this means that a large part of the aquifer is now too contaminated to use, so some of the abstraction points are no longer used.
ReplyDeleteAgricultural fertiliser was the main contaminant on the parts of the aquifer that are still used, its use is now strictly regulated. This rather switched to road drainage in Thanet, but this is being rectified.
The airport aquifer contamination differs though as much of it is to do with the airport failing to comply with the environment agency’s requests, recommendations and even regulation.
Although part of this is ongoing, like only using antifreeze where it goes down the drain and maintaining the drainage system, much of it relates to having adequate facilities to contain a large fuel spillage caused by an accident.
I think the problem 0% has is differentiating between levels of contamination in different parts of the aquifer, many of which are no loner used and levels of contamination coming out of the tap.
There are weaknesses, like private boreholes used for irrigation and crop washing, but basically the situation in Thanet is about average for the UK.
However rest assured we don’t have carcinogenic chemicals coming out of the taps in Thanet in significant quantities.
Michael, i take your point on drainage but this did not appear as a factor of concern at the EA briefing i attendef
ReplyDeleteSimon this is what the Environment Agency sent me back in april:
Delete“As someone who either responded to our Environmental Permit (EP) application consultation or attended our public meeting in 2011, I thought it would be helpful to update you on our progress given that Infratil have recently put the airport up for sale.
The original EP application that we consulted on during 2010/11 was formally withdrawn by Infratil on 13 March 2012. However, Infratil have committed to providing us with a revised EP application which is more economically viable but still satisfies the key environmental risks posed at the airport from de-icers, etc that were covered in the original consultation.
Clearly, this is disappointing for us as a regulator, Infratil and the local community but I'm sure you will understand that global trading conditions for the aviation industry have changed dramatically since our original consultation period began.
In the interim, we are continuing to work with Infratil to offer advice and guidance on their revised EP application with a site meeting scheduled during April. We are also reviewing our regulatory enforcement options for the site given that the risks remain with or without a current EP in place.
Once the new application has been received we will go through a full public consultation and involve you and the local community.
Please feel free to share this information with your local community. If you have any further questions, please let me know.
Regards.
Alan
Follow us on Twitter at www.twitter.com/EnvAgencySE
P Here at the Environment Agency we've used nearly a quarter less office paper compared to last year. The paper saved so far would build a stack as high as the Eiffel Tower. Please play your part - if you only need something once, avoid printing it”
The key point being that the EA thrashed out a solution with KIA and then last March KIA reneged on their agreements.
Obviously with my background I tend to know the scientists and engineers involved and have heard first hand accounts of some of the problems.
The road situation reads like this:
“With regard to the Highways Agency - that was a quirk of the original Water Resources Act 1991. It does cause us problems to have soakaways from roads draining to the chalk. We are hoping to address this in the more vulnerable areas in the future. Any new roads built since 1992 (when the Groundwater Protection Policy came out) have been required to install interceptors and to drain the water to outside SPZ1. This has been followed on Thanet resulting in significant improvement in some areas.
We are aware that the Highways Agency is currently connected to the airport drainage system and that this drainage system does discharge direct to the Pegwell Bay. However, we have seen the planning application for the East Kent Access Road. In the plans it appeared that the section of the road currently connected into the Manston Airport drainage would be removed. We believe that the new road would be drained to ground via soakaways in areas where the groundwater is slightly less sensitive and to Pegwell Bay in areas where the groundwater is very sensitive.”
Hence the stringent requirements on the China Gateway project which never happened.
ReplyDeleteSimon both China Gateway would have been and KIA is on the part of the aquifer we extract our water from, China Gateway probably didn’t get built because the EA restrictions would have made it uneconomic. KIA on the other hand is already there and isn’t EA compliant, I wonder what level of airport activity would be needed to make doing the work economic.
DeleteThor and mercury
ReplyDeleteWith regard to Sericol and cyclohexonone. I feel sure, Michael, that I sent you a copy of the reply from Kent Health Protection Agency Dr Chandrakumar. I was asking for an epidemiological study having learnt that Thanet has double the average rate of ectopic pregnancy. There also seems to be the question of high rates of polycystic ovary syndrome. And, the point you initially raised, that there are direct water abstractions for commercial and agricultural use close to Thor and Sericol.
I am hazy now on memory but I seem to recall there is a contaminate site at what may now be Pioneer Ind Estate. But I did not follow this up. That would be close to what was Whitehall abstraction I think.
The question of whether the K laundry abstraction area and works suffered/suffers an aberrant level of cancers and early deaths from aneurism was something I asked Health and Safety Exec and Kent Health Protection about. HSE replied that it is a matter for Environment Agency.
This is clearly a matter for the experts. Cyclohexonone is used to treat breast cancer I think because it acts on the female oestregen biochemistry. It would seem reasonable to suspect a causation then for high levels of ectopic pregnancy and polycystic ovary.
The argument, Simon, that these industrial contaminations are not the main cause of aquifer pollution is irrational. It is like saying Jack the Ripper was not as bad as Fred and Rose West in an effort to reassure everyone about nice ole Jack.
Glad you're back Richard: your work on Sericol and Thor has been invaluable.
DeleteAny thoughts on MOD Fire pollution continuing?
The fertiliser contamination of aquifers sounds nonsense - they're approved for land and water use. Not ideal but certainly not dangerous like mercury or aviation fuel.
Leave it to the experts of SW and EA and HSE and of course nothing will be done.
Except jiggling the paperwork to preserve their pensions and salaries.
They're not bathing in it or drinking it though are they?
And as you point, out the wives and daughters and granddaughters and nieces that have to be cut open to remove the tumours will suffer.
And any children they have: bred in the bone and passed throuhg the generations and all that.
Richard.. It's simply what the EA gave me in answer to my questions in regard to potential aquifer contamination locally.
ReplyDeletePeter my understanding is
ReplyDeleteThanet District Council was successful in its application to have the Dreamland Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) appeal prioritised on Thursday 20 December.
A two day hearing will now take place on Wednesday 20 and Thursday 21 March 2013.
If the appeal by the landowners is unsuccessful, Thanet District Council will immediately begin the process of acquiring ownership of the site.
The council received approval from the Secretary of State for the Compulsory Purchase of the site in August 2012, following a public inquiry.
The landowners then challenged the decision by the Secretary of State.
I guess that if TDC are sucessful then the site has to be valued. We know that another site in Ramsgate with planning permision for a hotel, about 100 dwellings and a few shop is worth £3.3 millions. The Dreamland owners can expect to receive an amount (plus expenses) on the basis that planning permission would be granted for any scheme they propose. So a 400 dwelling site as they have indicated in their plans could cost rather a lot. Asacommercil owner, the purchaser (TDC) would also have to pay 15% stamp duty on such a large land purchase.
ReplyDeleteI guess anyone who feels they have been libelled is free to take action and the perpetrator will be unmasked. Of course, in reality, libel is a difficult thing to prove in a court of law. For a start, you have to be able to prove that you have a good name which has been damaged by the allegations which have been made. More importantly, you have to be confident that the person making the allegations cannot prove any of what they are saying. It isn't libel if it's true AND you can prove it.
ReplyDeleteIt isn't that I approve of anyone who is using a discussion board to pursue an alternative agenda. I would much prefer that anyone with evidence of malfeasance went through the proper channels. However, my impression is that the proper channels are not working properly. The Council has proved itself incapable of dealing with wrongdoing, either by councillors or officers. We are left with a situation where the police are taking action against individuals, but nobody else has done anything wrong. Councillors hurl foul abuse at fellow-councillors, language which would see them barred from many professions. Yet the council's own disciplinary systems don't ensure that they are removed. Just what does a councillor have to do to get fired?
As shown on BBC TV, TDC is a laughing stock, yet the standards committee is unable to find anybody who has done anything wrong. Voters are outraged, yet impotent. This is just a small example of the widening gulf between politicians and voters and explains why voter turnout is in termianl decline.