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.
News, Local history and Thanet issues from Michael's Bookshop in Ramsgate see www.michaelsbookshop.com I publish over 200 books about the history of this area click here to look at them.
Saturday, 20 July 2013
Dave Smith art exhibition at The York Street Gallery Ramsgate and a possible ramble
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.
77 comments:
Comments, since I started writing this blog in 2007 the way the internet works has changed a lot, comments and dialogue here were once viable in an open and anonymous sense. Now if you comment here I will only allow the comment if it seems to make sense and be related to what the post is about. I link the majority of my posts to the main local Facebook groups and to my Facebook account, “Michael Child” I guess the main Ramsgate Facebook group is We Love Ramsgate. For the most part the comments and dialogue related to the posts here goes on there. As for the rest of it, well this blog handles images better than Facebook, which is why I don’t post directly to my Facebook account, although if I take a lot of photos I am so lazy that I paste them directly from my camera card to my bookshop website and put a link on this blog.
The local blogs are a bit like the local council, being dragged down by too many old people stuck in the past!
ReplyDeleteMichael,
ReplyDeleteYou 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.
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.
DeleteMike 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.
DeleteOn 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.
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.
DeleteAs 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.
"Single issue BS"? Almost every comment and blog post of yours mentions the same person!
DeleteYes, but that person goes out of his way to get mentioned. It is what he thrives on.
DeleteNo wonder you hide behind anonimity 7:55, saves displaying how utterly clueless you clearly are :)
DeleteIf 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 ;)
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.
Delete10:56 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.
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.
Delete10:20 am
DeletePlease 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.
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.
DeleteI really don't think "give a toss" is the right way for an elected cllr to react. Time for another standards complaint perhaps?
DeleteI 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.
Delete10:23, 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.
DeleteNope. I'm not the Arlington resident. Many people are concerned over then pollution Laughing Boy. Do Manston Fires cause cancer?
DeleteObviously, 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.
DeleteEh? 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?
DeleteWhy 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.
DeleteSorry, 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.
DeleteI 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.
DeleteIn 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.
DeleteNow that would be amusing, if of course the cowards who post anonomously finally have the balls to poke their head above the parapit.
DeleteApart from Eppsy's tea and biscuits on the rates did he/we ever find out about Manston Fires and cancer?
DeleteI'm sure someone will paste the Pearce/Anonymouse criticism of Holyer article here for him.
Peter Checksfield 11:34 pm,
DeleteHelp 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.
Peter Checksfield,
DeletePlease 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.
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.
DeleteJohn
DeleteI 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.
Solo,
DeleteThank you. I'll speak to Mike Pearce about this.
Peter Checksfield 3:48 pm,
DeleteAnd long may I continue to amaze you.
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.
DeleteMike 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.
DeleteCobblers 11:08 he meant Holyer. Nobody else uses the Anonymouse term. The Foxtrot Oscar chap was Clarke from memory.
DeleteI don't understand your other points although they do seem pointless. To elevate matters though let's discuss another sewage leak this week?
Anon and I know who you are 10:57,
DeleteI 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.
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.
DeleteCareful, 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.
DeleteOr there's Kent Police's new Most Wanted list: know anybody in Thanet?
Deletehttp://www.kent.police.uk/appeals/most_wanted/most_wanted.html
Can you remind us of the exact wording of Mike's article? Thanks.
DeleteAnonymous 11:40
DeleteLet 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.
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.
DeleteI'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?
Anon 12:44 pm,
DeleteI acknowledge site of your post the content of which has been noted.
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.
DeleteHolyer 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?
DeleteYou'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.
Anon 1:18 pm
DeleteTo 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.
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.
DeleteYou 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.
2:01 you seem to be defending the indefensible with Mr Holyer. He is Anonymouse and the article made that clear.
DeleteIt 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.
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.
DeleteI 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.
DeleteHow 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.
DeleteHolyer 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?
DeleteAnonymous,
DeleteI acknowledge sight of your 2:29 post the contents of which have been noted.
Ignored.
DeleteI 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.
DeleteYou'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.
DeleteThe 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?
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.
DeleteCertainly: ACG's own website in the ticker tape bit, Wikipedia entry on ACG and 3 or 4 articles on ACG. Just Google it.
DeletePresumably 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?
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.
DeleteYes 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.
DeleteYou'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?
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.
DeleteI 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.
Not at all 9:02 I've pointed out that ACG is bust which you disagreed with - even though ACG themselves confirm it.
DeleteWhy 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.
Anon 9:59 am,
ReplyDeleteWill 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.
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.
DeleteAnonymous 10:54am,
DeleteI 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?
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.
DeleteI 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.
William,
DeleteI 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.
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.
DeleteThe 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.
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.
ReplyDeleteThe gallery looks good and I shall wander down to have a look.
ReplyDeleteJust 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.
ReplyDeleteAt least Checkers comment seems to have shut John up!
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 12:52 pm
Delete?
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.
ReplyDeleteThere 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.
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.
DeleteMike 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.
ReplyDeletePublished 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.
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.
DeleteIf 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.
ReplyDeleteWe were looking for you Anonymouse.
Delete