Huguenot

Something along the lines of the Daily Mail-o-matic? Fairly limited vocabulary poorly spelt and used inappropriately, metaphors derived from sci-fi films targeted at teenage boys, indecipherable sentence structure, and a loosely organised warehouse of conspiracies all interconnected as statements of fact.

Whether I put my money in Spain or not has nothing to do with the Euro. There is no basis for the idea that everything for the UK would have been twice as bad if we were in the Euro. You contradict yourself when you say people are investing or not in Spain based on the local conditions, but that the problems were brought about by cheap credit based on Germany. What's it to be? Local or Euro? You want to have it every way. We're all aware of the challenges, some of us recognise that it's not all down to the Euro.

You wouldn't need to go to court - that would be far in excess of the crime itself. You just need evidence of the miscreant sufficient for the SNT or environmental health chaps to pop around with an 'informal' warning. There's not one bloke creating that much piss, it's at least 5 of them who probably run a business. They don't want local plod getting too interested so they'd soon cease and desist.

You may have noticed that Britain is also undergoing 'austerity' and isn't part of the Euro. We also have strikes, riots, wobbling coalitions and partially nationalise banks, and we are not part of the Euro. Greece is undergoing financial meltdown because the government spent far more than it raised in taxes. Whether this is European austerity or a devaluation of the Drachma the outcome would be the same: a drastic reduction in the spending power of Greek citizens and a collapse of government spending. Spain is predictably under attack because the markets are trying to roll these countries to make a fast buck. We are watching the redistribution of global wealth and power, not some sort of salutary lesson on common currencies. The economists know that, and the financiers are trying to capitalise on the misery.

People love it mate. What do people think about working for you? I'm not too keen on bullshitters and manipulators, nor people behaving selfishly or ungraciously. Those kind of people don't work very long for me, but then they're not generally happy in their lives either.

Charlotte86, you've just negated everything your defenders claim. "I was simply just trying to get people?s views on whether they think ED forum (in particular when it comes to selling) be just for people who live in East Dulwich" This is NOT 'just' when it comes to selling, this is 'in particular' when it comes selling. I accept that you have revised your comments, but the essence of what you have repeated is that you are talking about the site in general, and the selling in particular. It's not me that needs to change my interpretation, but the people who claimed that you were just talking about selling. You were not, and you are not. I stand by everything I said. I'm not trying to get a rise, I'm simply stating the obvious. You contribute next to nothing to this site, and yet you propose to exclude 80% of it's users simply because they're not convenient to you. More shame on you.

Wreck all the games Quids? I'm not trying to wreck any games - quite the contrary I believe that everyone should be able to play. Besides which, you forget that 50% or more of your posts on the forum are venting spleen at people like me. Where would you be if there weren't people like me to disagree with? Not on here. It's your joy, your passion, your raison d'?tre. Look at you on this thread, actually changing what she said in order to make me sound more unreasonable than I already am just so you can have a rant! ;-)

It would surely make sense when buying or selling, but that's not what BNG suggested. BNG suggested that individuals should have to identify themselves when discussing ED issues. That's the problem with both of your justifications - you're rewriting the proposals to be something more reasonable than they actually were and then slagging off people who disagree with your new versions. That's simply misrepresentation. It's dishonest. Besides which, this sounds like a rather spiteful girl writing a birthday party invite list that starts with all the people they're not going to invite. She'll end up appearing rather horrid, and be sat alone with her party hat crying into stale butterfly cakes.

"should the ED forum be just for people who live in East Dulwich?" No she doesn't, she's absolutely clear that it's the forum she's talking about. BTW what clique is this one? I wasn't aware that gigirl, BNG, Marie81 and myself formed a clique? We don't even agree with each other - I was responding to BNG's suggestion that we identify ourselves when posting as a form of segregating 'valid' opinions from 'non valid' opinions. You can tell it's a mickey-take by the 'haha' that precedes it. As for the low volume poster feeling unwelcome, this isn't the fault of a clique. She's just come onto a chat forum she hardly visits and proposed that 20,000 people be banned from posting by virtue of their location. You think I'm the one that's being unfair?

NN, describing my comments as bullshit implies that I have been deliberately misleading or used incorrect information. This is clearly not the case - those are all verifiable facts. So I can only assume that you saw that GIF and thought it was so smart and clever that you used it in completely the wrong context. This only adds to the impression that you're not all there. BTW I always wanted to know: are you British, An Amercian living in Britain, on an American living in America?

Surely it only takes someone with an overlooking window to use a webcam?

Why do people look down their noses at ready meal eaters? What is so superior about the wasting all that time cutting, peeling, cooking and creating piles of washing up? Fine if cooking floats your boat, but it hardly makes you superior.

Ha ha. Could we all wear yellow stars too, 10 centimeters wide, on the right arm, just below the armpit? Perhaps we could be restricted only to certain areas of the forum - a sort of ghetto? Maybe you could wait in alleyways for us with axe handles?

Does that make any sense at all? I don't think NN understands it anyway. I admire the resolute jingoist flag waving, that claims that the US is going to bail out Europe! Does this guy have ANY clue who launched the last financial crisis? More importantly does he have any idea of the $4.6 trillion the US currently owes foreign governments who bail them out year after year? To suggest the US taxpayers would be bailing out foreign governments, when US taxpayers actually refuse to pay enough tax to pay for their own administration, and need to borrow from foreign governments every day just to run the country? Are they aware that a huge proportion of that is owed to the members of the European Union, and over $1.1 trillion to China? It would be hilarious were it not for the fact the NN reads this garbage and actually believes it.

I was just returning his compliment ;-)

No Simon, as you've so masterfully observed it wasn't a simple critique of your argument. It was a bit of fun. Unlike yourself and SJ, I don't believe that debate needs to be dull, worthy and monotonous. It's probably just as well. The EDF would be guilty of genocide by boredom. It seems however, that you've have deliberately looked for offence by interpreting the perfectly normal use of 'you' in the sense of 'one' in a more personal manner. I don't think that's reasonable, nor do I find the 'wounded bunny rabbit' air you are taking on as befitting for a grown adult. Having said that, many thanks for giving me permission to make my own choices, I am grateful that someone of your intellectual elevation would stoop to granting such freedoms to such unworthy acolytes. ;-) So pompous it's laughable. Best wishes to you.

If I recall correctly around 25,000 people view the forum regularly, and since the population of ED is only about 5,000 you've just insulted at least 80% of them (20,000 people) by saying 'get orf my laand'. This is, of course, land that you have neither owned, worked or nutured yourself. You haven't really contributed much either - only 14 out of the 500,000 posts currently on the forum. You don't have to be quick to judge to point out that it takes a particular kind of person to suggest 'excluding' from the forum people whose popularity and success they have contributed so much to over the years. How many other things do you do that you would like to exclude other people from because it just doesn't suit you? Perhaps we could exclude people from shops that get in your way? ;-)

I'm just having a bit of fun - the EDF isn't a therapists convention, we've got to keep 25,000 viewers happy every day! ;-)

Membership is only 45 quid - is it not worth taking the hit?

Actually Simon mate, I think you'll find that you started the personal insults - I just described your argument as toss. Go on mate, read back and you'll see that although I was grandstanding, bellicose and dismissive of your argument, I didn't actually insult you. It was you that created the phrase 'silly little man child'. It was you that started the personal attacks, and I just chucked 'em back at you. Don't like it much when you're on the recieving end? Man with a short memory? Ho ho. Now you're just galumphing around with bloated self-righteousness. Get over yourself. *sighs*

Simon you are clearly taking yourself so seriously that you struggle to recognise someone having a bit of fun at your expense through the haze of your own pompous self regard. Silly little man child indeeed. People who vote without thought or consideration for the policies and philosophies of their candidates by definition have no impact on policy. Politicians cannnot cater for their tastes if they demonstrate none. In other words, whether your vote counts or not is an entirely personal decision. There is an elegant irony in the fact that we address people who 'flip flop' on issues or are influenced by public opinion as 'weak'. They are in fact the most democratic of politicians.

The voting patterns demonstrate that for most Londoners this was considered an 'either/or' between Boris and Ken. If only 31,270 marginal decision makers had plumped for Ken instead of Boris then Ken would be in. That's a pretty small number. If you were wobbling before you made your choice it's likely you were one of them. Marmora Man commented on the fact that Boris is a pretty uncommitted Tory, big on a lot of traditionally 'left' issues. There's one obvious reason for this - he was courting those 31,270 people who were floating. It essentially means that if you are a floating voter who made decisions based on policy then YOU MADE THAT POLICY. Those people who think their vote doesn't make a difference then it's because you have made it that way. If you make your decision intelligently based on policy rather than tribal affiliation you are more influential on the attitudes and approaches of government than you imagine. The idea that 'you don't make a difference' is ridiculous.

My favourite is 'Crucifixion Man'

http://cache2.artprintimages.com/lrg/29/2913/ZERPD00Z.jpg

Like one of those politicians you so gravely despise, woodrot, instead of addressing the point you embark on a dull and predictably clich?d attack on the person making it. How very.... tabloid. For all your self esteem, does it disappoint you that (like an old and unimaginative hack) the only abuse you could summon was based on such a tired and inappropriate stereotype? ;-) Is your own support for apathy fuelled by a pressing fear that you'd prefer to spend a lifetime on the sidelines yelling abuse, lest actually trying to do something may expose crushing inadequacies...? I sorely hope not! Hee hee.