Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Don't think Admin agrees with you Louisa.....


http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?30,1609711,1610289#msg-1610289



Louisa Wrote:

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

> Don't you just love it when a certain person has

> been caught red handed and tries the "not be guv"

> approach! Well done foxy.

>

> http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?3

> 0,1609711,1609774#msg-1609774

>

> Louisa.

And yet not one of your, nor Admin, says anything about my name being dragged into something when I'm not even communicating with said person and they infer I am troll. This forum is packed full of double standards, and YOU admin pick and choose when you think it's right to allow people to be disrespectful to other members of the forum. Let's all remember, I was banned for a negative indirect comment, this person and others have directed negative comments at myself and no one eye lid was raised. Sums this forum up perfectly.


Louisa.

Louisa Wrote:

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

> And yet not one of your, nor Admin, says anything

> about my name being dragged into something when

> I'm not even communicating with said person and

> they infer I am troll. This forum is packed full

> of double standards, and YOU admin pick and choose

> when you think it's right to allow people to be

> disrespectful to other members of the forum. Let's

> all remember, I was banned for a negative indirect

> comment, this person and others have directed

> negative comments at myself and no one eye lid was

> raised. Sums this forum up perfectly.

>

> Louisa.



As Maxxi said, it was the fox that brought your name in to it. I had a look at the OP's post history, and all she ever did was say that you and foxy being so negative was a downer, and suggested that you have a day off. She then did a couple of "yawn" / "zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz" posts. Nothing personal or offensive, and she was far from the only person that was getting fed up around that time.


I've never taken against you Lou, but this is a nonsense I'm afraid.

They're circling again, the same old cliquey names when they think they can smell blood.

Having read the thread I also think there is a pattern emerging and so agree with Louwich to that extent. Obviously the poster dislikes Louwich and slags them regularly. The pattern being for example that if the poster alleged that Louwich constantly complained about ED streets and then the poster started threads praising ED streets just to pop/provoke Louwich. Possible.

The poster also then publicly calls for banning, and admin responds publicly with a warning to Foxy. Bad form.

Poster msy not have called Lous name first but knows Lou is unjustly banned from that section so can be construed as a wind up/dig.

I also feel that it is worth bearing in mind that Foxy, as can be seen from his public postings, is a single pensioner living alone in a rapidly changing ED where he has lived for years with previous demographic stability, and he uses the forum a lot, and it is almost Xmas.

Being as most of the regulars that used to be the mythical clique no longer post, I'm interested to hear who "the same old cliquey names" are this week.


Anything can be construed one way or another. Doesn't make both ways right.


I don't know whether foxy's post was actually meant as a bit of a joke, because otherwise it just seems an absurd accusation to make.

If Fox's problem was that this poster had previously singled out himself and Louisa, then he should have said so.


Making some sort of vague accusation (of what, exactly?) because of a handful of business recommendations... that's just bizarre behaviour.

Louisa- you do realise the OP in the thread never mentioned you right? Only DF? And that the OP has only posted a complaint about you hijacking threads once? DF's suggestion that the reviews are genuine is absurd. I suspect if he keeps at it, he'll be locked away here in the lounge with you soon too.

Absolutely miga and Loz. I know sometimes people feel foxy and I almost court this sort of thing, but it does come to something when you are consistently singled out when you've not done anything and yes it is almost a rite of passage to have a dig at us for no apparent reason on this forum. Admin doesn't even acknowledge that point and often time almost encourages it by favouring these people over foxy and I regardless of circumstance. I for one am bloody sick of it to be honest. Admin? Explanation please?


Louisa.

Is this a wind up? Maybe people do pick on you and DF but not in that thread and not that poster. S/he never mentions you, DF does in his bizarre accusation. In the thread where the OP does complain about you, the complaint is that you are taking the thread of topic (which was true). What do you think Admin should do in those circumstances?

Troll? Jeremy are you being sarcastic? I have not done any trolling, I've expressed my opinions numerous times and been shouted down by clique members in a mocking fashion on most occasions. And the point about taking threads off topic is pot calling the kettle black territory. Every single one of you has done that, and continues to do that on a regular basis. Am I wrong? So please don't patronise me by suggesting that's the reason for me being shoved in the lounge like some sort of outlaw.


Louisa.

And LM yes that person has mocked me in the past, despite having barely a handful of posts to refer to. But no you are right, they are far from the biggest culprit in that sense. There was no need for them to mention me at all, surely that's the purpose of admins failed attempt at putting me in the lounge to silence my opinions about gentrification and the damage being done to the area.


Louisa.

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

    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
    • Very sorry to hear this, but surely the landlord is responsible for fixing the electrics?  Surely they must be insured for things like this? I hope you get it all sorted out quickly.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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