Jump to content

Nunhead post - removed.


hadenuff

Recommended Posts

You really need to be more alert AdminMan/Woman....... What about the Telegraph Hill post by "Jeremyweate" on the 2nd Nov.... Come on now tut tut tut. One rule for some & all that. I suggest you ditch the awful sarcasm your posts generally adopt & you spend a good 10 minutes traipsing through the residential section for any sidewinders, aliens & interlopers. Come on AdminMan/Woman you can do it.... The Good Folk of East Dulwich are depending on you.

Is it a bird? Is it a plane?...... No, it's AdminMan/Woman.:)-D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, Huguenot... that naughty Adminman/woman wrote me a really horrible sarcastic response.... but completely ignored the fact that posts that were sitting right next to mine advertising properties outside of ED were somehow getting the old green light from him/her.

I'm just reacting to the Admistrator's blind eye approach to some & Thought Police approach to others.

Very Kafka-esque if you ask me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this a new order because people have been advertising rooms, houses, etc. in Nunhead, Peckham and Camberwell for ages. Does that mean the Bellenden/Dog Kennel Hill (SE15 and SE5) area is also off limits? And what about Honor Oak Park etc. Is there some sort of map you could refer to Admin?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Cate,


I couldn't understand it myself. A friend pointed me toward EDF & sure enough there were lots of people looking for accomodation in & around ED. I saw that other posts were from Herne Hill, Sydenham, Peckham, Nunhead, Dulwich Village & Crystal Palace were there so didn't give it a second thought. I was getting good responses but then my post would just dissapear. 3 times it vanished with no polite reason given. I finally emailed admin & got back a terse reply & that I should use the Nunhead Forum. I have reacted by asking him about the other "alien" posts. I am now wondering if it has anything to do with Daisylets who just happen to be a sponsor of this site. The daft thing is my property is on with them, Foxtons & Ludlow Thompson. As I've not had much movement on my property I thought I'd give the EDF a go. So there you have it. I've had my wrists slapped along with a handful of terse & sarcastic emails. I will be uploading these emails for all to see very soon. Why have the creators of this site got so precious about postings or is this particular admin person got an overbloated opinion of themselves.


Regards, Gary

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Administrator Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> No, it's the same as it has always been.



Don't think it was ever clearly defined before. Some people living in East Dulwich SE22 can't afford to stay here (rent or buy) so naturally look for something nearby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Administrator Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> cate Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Admin, what is East Dulwich to you?

>

> It's the time, it's the place, it's is the motion.

> East Dulwich is the way we are feeling.


Eh? Can you be a bit more specific.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator

OK, look, the forum property section is entitled "Residential property in East Dulwich".

Now Nunhead is not East Dulwich, so a property in Nunhead does not belong in there.

I am not going to allow property from Nunhead, New Cross or Greenwich in that section.


I have no idea what people not being able to afford to live in East Dulwich SE22 has to do with the boundaries.


Gary, you're just being insulting now. You are complaining that a free resource will not let you use their services for free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He/She is a bit lame this admin person. He's obviously only responding to ads that get flagged up by other users. I'm wondering just who flagged mine up? This could be the death of EDF.... Nothing worse than an admin person who is doing dodgy under the table deals. Wake up Adminman/woman. What the hell was that daft response to "Cate"? Are you propped up at the bar in the EDT with your laptop?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

God has spoken... You really have let this admin role go to your head.

How have I been insulting? Where do you get your boundaries from?

You certainly can't be selective either.

You can't just pluck them out of mid-air & move the goal posts.

You really do have a very high opinion of yourself.

Must be a damn lonely place to be you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is that what this is really all about? You really hate this role don't you?

You are like Frankenstein's creator... you can't look in the mirror can you?


You say in a previous post to Cate, that you will not let people post properties on EDF if they

are in Nunhead, Greenwich or New Cross.

Fair enough, Greenwich & New Cross come under the borough of Lewisham, but Nunhead is actually in Southwark which is just

the other side of Peckham Rye Common.


It is very obvious that as far as the the residential forum is concerned that people are looking for more affordable

means of housing other than ED.


I believe you know you are wrong but can't afford to lose face at this point of proceedings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hadenuff Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Is that what this is really all about? You really

> hate this role don't you?

> You are like Frankenstein's creator... you can't

> look in the mirror can you?

>

> You say in a previous post to Cate, that you will

> not let people post properties on EDF if they

> are in Nunhead, Greenwich or New Cross.

> Fair enough, Greenwich & New Cross come under the

> borough of Lewisham, but Nunhead is actually in

> Southwark which is just

> the other side of Peckham Rye Common.

>

> It is very obvious that as far as the the

> residential forum is concerned that people are

> looking for more affordable

> means of housing other than ED.

>

> I believe you know you are wrong but can't afford

> to lose face at this point of proceedings.


--------------------------------------------------


Oooh, i love a good rant,

but i think i've..

had enough!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • What would I do about cyclists?  The failed Tory manfesto commitment to train all kids was an excellent proposal.  Public information campaigns aimed at all road users, rather than singling some out, to more considerately share the road, as TfL have done, is welcome too. As for crunching vehicles.  I'd extend this to illegal ebikes, illegal e-scoooters (I think some local authorities have done this with the latter) but before that I would (a) legislate that the delivery companies move away from zero hours contracts to permanent employees and take responsibility for their training, vehicles and behaviour on the road.   More expensive takeaways are a price worth paying for safer roads and proper terms and conditions (b) legislate to register all illegal e-bikes and scooters so that when they are found on the road the retailer takes a hit, and clamp down on any grey markets.  If you buy an e scooter say from Halfords this comes with a disclaimer that it can only be used on private land with the owner's permission.
    • I know a lot of experts in the field and getting a franchise was a license to print money, that is why Virgin were so happy to spend lots of dosh challenging government ten years ago when they lost the West Coast franchise.  This will not be overnight, rather than when the franchise has come to the end. Government had previously taking over the operator of last resort when some TOCs screwed up. Good, at last some clear blue water between the parties.  Tories said they were going to do a halfway house, but I've not noticed.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_British_Railways   : "On 19 October 2022, Transport Secretary Anne-Marie Trevelyan announced that the Transport Bill which would have set up GBR would not go ahead in the current parliamentary session.[15] In February 2023, Transport Secretary Mark Harper re-affirmed the government's commitment to GBR and rail reform.[16] The 2023 King's speech announced the progression of a draft Rail Reform Bill which would enable the establishment of GBR, although it has not been timetabled in the Parliamentary programme.[5] The Transport Secretary Mark Harper later told the Transport Select Committee that the legislation was unlikely to reach Royal Assent within the 2023-2024 parliamentary session.[17]"
    • Can't help thinking that regardless of whether Joe wanted to be interviewed, the 'story' that Southwark News wanted to write just got a lot less interesting with 'tyre shop replaced with ... tyre shop'! 
    • Labour are proposing to nationalise the railways, (passenger trains but not fright)  Whilst it removes them from shareholders control, and potential profit chasing, is it workable or will it end up costing tax payers more in the long run?  On paper the idea is interesting but does it also need the profitable freight arm included to help reduce fares,? 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...