StraferJack

Tindersticks at Somerset House next week

Yep ? same here quids. I have various family members ?up to London? and that was a potential night out. Not any more But I?m sure they are all web-savvy enough to still be reading this thread. If I was a businessperson, in a recession, working hard to build up my reputation and business I would read the various posts and have a word with myself. I would then contact admin and retract any embargo and I would then start a thread advertising some deal or other and some kind of ?oops, might have overreacted there. And our cakes are LOVELY ? type statement. Lord knows most of us on this thread have done that at various points. No shame in it. Everyone kisses and makes up. A happy ending If the business WAS subject to anything libellous, those messages get removed anyway by Admin and the team. As for the recession itself ? the customers of these businesess are suffering just as much. If they ARE going to spend any disposable income it would be nice to know if a local restaurant was falseley advertising anything. Conversely if anyone falsely accused a local business of such bad practice, it would be a 2 minute job to deny that and laugh it off

"Back on topic I must say I sympathise the businesses in question [] their representatives clearly aren't as web savvy as they need to be" Before we sympathise too much let's bear in mind at least one of those business was web savvy enough to pepper the forum with announcements and adverts long before they opened for trading. They were also web savvy enough to post fake recommendations I don't see them as "not web savvy" - I see them as "not savvy". Which is entirely up to them - but when they then forbid the local forum from even praising them they lose any and all sympathy When they close down, I'm certain they will blame some of the nagative reviews that were posted briefly. Easier for them to do that than admit it was their lack of savvy and their hostile attitude to potential customers If they had a good product, the corwdsourced verdict on here would be bringing customers to them. Their decision

I hear you. TripAdvisor has been the focus for much of this type of discussion for years - I've seen a few docs on TV even, not that they have advanced the matter significantly You could have the cleanest, most luxurious, reasonably priced, best situated (etc etc) hotel in the world, but you are still going to get a few people 1 starring it. And that's after discounting the posts from "rival" operators But any transparent business can take those posts and demonstrate they are untrue. Or just factor them in as cost of doing business. I'm sure it's not pleasant for hard-working businesses to read some failry rancid opinions on line but does it need legal intervention? Seems a bit hammer to crack a nut to me Look at the amount of negative posts "a local butcher" gets on here. Some of them bordering on libellous on occassion. Has it harmed their business? Or do they just shrug and do what we all do when we see a post in metaphorical green biro and call the person a "c**k"

Mr Ben It's a point that's already been made but really "your carefully built reputation destroyed in minutes because of potentially unsubstantiated, malicious attacks on the web forums. " I think when the ex-employee posted their side of the story, it raised eyebrows but I doubt many people would have made up their mind based on that alone. Even given the fact that the poster has a longish history on this forum and has A Decent Forum Credit Rating in my eyes, it was clearly one side of the story. Chandelier's reputation was unchanged to me at that point However, when LC came back with their draconian "orders", the owners who built up a business over years, in a recession, destroyed their own reputation in minutes. Not a cat's chance of me setting foot in the place again - and that has nothing to do with the original negative posts

I think you might be wrong there *Bob* - but no matter, UDT will be along shortly to give us the correct name of that film...

it's come to the point where it's not the weather that's hacking me off, it's the constant grim forecast that's killing me I'm reminded of John Cleese in Clockwise: "It's not the despair, Laura. I can take the despair. It's the hope I can't stand. "

Bermondsey st notwithstanding, that north end of southwark has some well grim areas. So from that perspective that statement stands From the rich and wealthy end of the things, I only have to mention anything about london bridge area (not the station) and I may as well be talking about mars to many of my colleagues

"The two establishments - which have requested that all posts mentioning them are deleted - are probably going to suffer because of it." I'm going to do my bit Jeremy. Standing outside with "careful now" and "down with this sort of thing"

"ere, rodders! The eeeeening standard as only gone and written about the exploited workers of scarf london annit?" "to be fair del, you ain't paid me in two months" "be aaaaave rodders. I gives ya roof over your ead dunnaye?"

Of course if any business decided to adopt a "it's 2012, we've read about superinjunctions backfiring on celebs, but we're SPECIAL approach" one shouldn't post anything negative on here There are, after all, a plethora of multinational websites (and suitably equipped legal teams) where one could post away, happy as larry. Time out Trip advisor London eating Top table Och, there's LOADS. So, y'know, do that. But only if you find a bad restaurant. Which I doubt there is in dulwich. Maybe you've been to cricklewood and had a bad experience tho

... That people complain about on here? Specifically I'm thinking of the bishop, the actress, green and blue They listened to complaints on here and in many cases adapted accordingly I have respect for those businesses. Those or ones like them They get my money. Money which local business appreciated in hard economic times Good on them I say

Don't get me wrong - I'd rather we were able to keep him. Or more precisely I would like him to stay and repay many of the years he spent on treatment tables and play his part as captain of the club he supported as a boy The Arsenal teams in Wenger's era whic have been successful and own trophies and went seasons unbeaten were largely earning significantly less than they could have elsewhere - but they stayed and they played. before the title in 2002, approx 2 years earlier Viera was voicing his concerns about the team, the direction and the results and was told in no uncertain terms that he was the one out on the pitch performing (or not) Significantly he rolled up his sleeves (albeit with improved terms - again not as much as he could have elsewhere) and improved and pushed those around him to do the same RVP, the captain, leaving is one thing. To do so in the manner he has (with the wording of that statement yesterday) is the complete opposite last seasons panic buying was genuinely horrible - and before the 1st July Window this year we had already signed two strikers. So, this year is different on that score Basically, I want Wilshire back, one of those strikers to do well, a relatively injury free back four and push on as best we can. I can get behind that.

"Do people seriously pay to sit on the top floor of the multistorey car park in Peckham for a drink?" On a warm summer evening, there aren't many better places to be. What's the problem? Where do you like to pay for drink that couldn't be reduced to such simplistic levels?

Fox The building sits on top of one of London's main train stations. Why would you want to drive there?

"By then it could be too late for a club that can't keep it's best players, the gap too big to bridge..." Debateable he will be our best player next season - I expect his form to be far below last season Secondly the idea that by spending (and how much are we talking about here? a bit more? a lot more? Man City levels?) will give us success is a nonsense. Far more likely we will end up as Leeds than it is anything else Put it this way - if Wenger and his like were in charge of the banks/treasury, the world would be more stable place. Listening to the siren voices of "spend spend spend" is a folly

can't exactly have a pint afterwards tho can you Loz? It's a tall building - it would be nice to see view from the top but I'm not paying money to do it here, NY, or Dubai. If some people want to .....

exactly Otta. What are the chances of him ever having a season like last ever again in his career? Doesn't mean that there aren't things to worry about for Arsenal - losing 4 captains in 5 years in no joke. But I still stand by the club's philosophy. To take on Chelsea and Man City at their own game is folly, especially with FFP coming in soon. When that happens, Wenger's long-play could well be vindicated

"Anyway, no amount of bullying will force me off the forum." I think people are saying, "stop being such a tit". They aren't saying "get off the forum"

speaking of Messrs Brown and Co, the email in this link could be fairly explosive, no? http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2012/07/03/1070001/mr-tucker-stated-that-it-did-not-always-need-to-be-the-case-that-we-appeared-as-high-as-we-have-recently/

"in fact I'm staggered that the Glaxo story hasn't generated more commentary. It's far more shocking, though the fine is gargantuan." It is shocking but I think Joe Public has had a long history of Big Pharma pulling numbers like that and when they get caught they tend to pay a price I think with banks there is a sense that not only does Joe Public not know the half of it, but that banks continue to be mollycoddles and yet even so, teh worst is yet to come. And things like Libor-fixing looks a BIT like a scraggly, skinny dude on horseback

"ALready spent more time on this quick note than I" And I've broken my "not getting involved in these debates again" rule

"And how is saying he's a scapegoat like saying it was one rogue reporter. " because in both cases, the argument is "nothing to see here" If IB doesn't rely on trust, how would you describe the practice of how the Libor rate is arrived at? Does it have SO much compliance in place? In which case how have the recent JPMorgan and Barclay situations arisen, given the spotlight on banks since 2008? How come you have seen all the "practices utterly widespread in the industry, and known to be so for a long time. " but "so much compliance" hasn't? (my argument there is not that I disagree with you on the practices, but on the banks complaining about compliance being a burden. If it was such a burden then one would expect the practices to at least be mitigated)

"far more pressing concerns such as the exploitation of immigrant workers, supermarket's bullying produce suppliers etc etc etc that noone raises an eyebrow over as those price manipulations help to keep our costs down and keep us happy like any other amoral derivatives trader." As for this one, it's true as far as it goes. However: 1) to suggest that people aren't concerned about them is wrong - those topics have been discussed on here plenty and will be again 2) I thought arguing "can't talk about X when Y is happening and that's worse" was considered poor form 3) If the world loses faith in banks for playing with the fundamental building blocks of banking, then all other problems will seem like small beer.

Sorry Pibe but that?s slightly surprising coming from you Calling Diamond a scapegoat is a bit like our ?single rogue reporter? excuse trotted out by News International before it became obvious they were knee deep in trouble (and didn?t a CEO resign in that industry?) Not to say Diamond isn?t being singled out (now at least ? this is going to get a lot worse before long) but it isn?t banker bashing in the slightest when an industry which relies so heavily on trust is found juking the stats. It?s just common sense to say ?if this is widespread it?s got to be stopped?