Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1. Choose a topic guaranteed to mobilise a sizable portion of forum-readers.

Houseprices, for example, is always a fave. Or incomers. Or children. Or, let's say, breastfeeding.


2. Retire to a safe distance and play no part in the ensuing debate, chuckling as a load of people who essentially agree become more and more polarised as the ante is upped with each posting.


3. Put the kettle on. Job done!

Think I am regularly conned and taken in by this. Still, I can't stop myself when I see something prejudiced or misinformed.


That dog leads thing had to be a deliberately misleading one, didn't it? And some of the breast-feeding posts are a bit dubious. I would expect them in Bromley or Tunbridge Wells but not here... (oops, being prejudiced myself now)

Perhaps the Admin could fashion a new button (on the home page somewhere) to save 'stirrers' the tedium of having to register etc. If clicked, it would randomly generate some bit of inflammatory guff guaranteed to elicit a tonne of middle-class self-righteous indignation.


Which isn't to say I didn't enjoy it all. Because I did.

i did some stirring on another infrequently visited forum the other day.


i just took an extreme verson of my own views, added some derisory comments and let the insults pour in. i came back with a few posts after but my heart wasn't really in it. i'm not a natural troll i guess.

People who deliberately go onto a forum to stir up trouble are usually control freaks who need to vent anger at a faceless enemy to feel better about themselves. People who come onto forums with genuine views and are ready to debate them are the butter of the bread to the forum.

*Bob* you know full well i do not fit the above criteria stiring things up on here. Firstly, the majority of my threads which I personally start, are about trivial things. I never start a thread with inflammatory intent.


In response to others I do take pleasure in mocking posts about so called 'yummies' because they do genuinely annoy me! (generalisation before you kick me in the never regions), but I never sit back and let a debate get out of hand without me being involved. ;-)

Hee hee.. just having a bit of a stir.


That said, I don't think you're being entirely honest with us (or yourself) here. 'Yummies' (whatever they are) irritate you. They are your very own 'faceless enemy' and you 'vent your anger' (ie "take pleasure in mocking posts" as you say above) right here on this forum.


ie.. stirring.

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

    • I think it’s directly related because a major factor in so few houses actually being built despite the demand is  a) financial incentives for builders isn’t there. Longer they wait to build the more prices go up. Because too many people want prices to go up    b) nimbys. In expensive houses.  Don’t build here it will devalue my property   Because my property price has to go up 
    • Some of these things are going on for quite a while, and consistently. I'm just guessing but it seems better organised/choreographed than just a back garden shindig or kids chucking them around. Surely it's got to be wedding venues etc that are putting them on or maybe just allowing them...?
    • It is. It's just not gonna happen. London is supposed to get 440,000 new homes by 2030. Just 10,000 were completed in 2024-2025 so housing supply is barely growing. Meanwhile, housing demand continues to increase. Net migration to the UK was +204,000 in 2024-2025 (and that's a big drop from the previous year). Of those people, about 25% will come to London ie 51,000 people. The average occupancy of a home in London is 2.5 persons i.e. we should have built 21,250 new homes in London just to keep the current supply equalised with current demand. But we didn't - we built half as much. We're not even keeping things steady with new housing, let alone improving the structural long term shortage. That's not helped by NIMBYs and politicians like @James Barber opposing new housing on infill sites like the old Jewsons yard. But I don't see how people complaining about more tax on £2m homes affects any of that one way or the other. Perhaps I'm being dense. https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/press/net-migration-falls-78-in-two-years-returning-to-pre-brexit-levels-every-major-immigration-category-except-asylum-declines/ https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1ldgqvypqpo https://www.hbf.co.uk/news/urgent-government-action-needed-to-prevent-london-housing-delivery-collapse-warns-hbf/ https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/householdcharacteristics/homeinternetandsocialmediausage/bulletins/householdandresidentcharacteristicsenglandandwales/census2021  
    • That is true, but that short burst of intense noise can cause life-changing, long-term damage and consequences for pets and their owners. A quick internet search shows there is a developing craze for as-loud-as-possible fireworks- the emphasis is on how much of a bang they make, not on the visual aspect. What is it that people love so much about this and why do they think it is okay to impose it on everyone else? I am appalled that the government clearly have no intention of doing a thing about it. Our allegedly 'green' council should probably take a closer look. If we start having fireworks going off every night for 6 months of the year, that is going to have a variety of environmental impacts.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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