Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Brendan Wrote:

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

> katie1997 Wrote:

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

> -----

> > and apologise with a zeeeee ?

>

>

> Zed.

>

> Please, please, please. It makes me see reed.


me too B - just wrote it like that cos(z) its the way those words are spelled if using a US spell check.


zat iz all ...

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

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

> Sounds very authorative brum ? you saying this as

> a man who knows or a man with a hunch?



I'm saying this as a man who knows Mike.


Oh, and thanks for spilling about my 'hunch'. Now everyone will recognise me as I lurch up and down Lordship Lane, doing my shopping.


PS - thanks for the sympathy, *Bob*.

So, would I be correct in assuming that some of you are implying that I'm a reincarnation of a former (unwelcome?) user?


If this is the case, and you're surreptitiously using that as a default excuse to ignore, or dismiss what I claim and opine on as false, then frankly that seems like the cowardly way out.


Is this how you treat all newcomers, even if they've tried to make amends for any indiscretion?


Oh and, *Bob*. You're quite right to point-out that I misspelt 'offence'. But if we're going to be pedantic, there's a 'y' in betchya.

I think it is fair to say that this is exactly how the forum will treat any newcomers who are as peculiarly, erm, forthright as you are. You are more than welcome to apologise for misjudging the tone of this forum and being very offensive, and I think Ladymuck was very gracious to accept so quickly. But just as you claim the right to speak so frankly, others have the right to find your apology insincere or simply inadequate.


No one on here asked for a superhero, Axeman, and no one elected you to the post of chief whip. So don't be surprised that you aren't getting a warm welcome.


(Yes Brum sweetie, I know. Sorry.)

No way Axeman's Mike - unless Mike has spent every hour god sends since his unfortunate Nunhead ramblings at the school of spelling and rhetoric and didacticism.


Axeman, you were quite rude, but no ruder I think than some people already on here - so I'm going to go against the flow and not tell you to f@ck off. I think you're right to say there's insincerity on here, but you're wrong to assume that nobody really likes each other - they do - and axe or no, they'll hack you to pieces if you suggest otherwise.


Anyway, for my part, welcome, with one massive caveat. Pronouncing yourself the Chief Whip and talk of "putting the stick about" is the kind of pomposity that suggests you're masturbating furiously in front of both a mirror and your computer screen. So, you know, don't.

Yes there probably is insincerity on this forum, and I've only ever been to a couple of the forum "socials" because smalltalk with strangers isn't really my bag. So I kind of understand what axeman is on about.


But plenty of people enjoy the drinks, so why criticise? I don't get it.

He is so obviously a troll....why pamper to that?



Ladymuck Wrote:

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

> I agree karter. S/he has behaved poorly (but so

> have others, including myself, in the past - it

> happens), has apologised, and has been duly

> reprimanded. Hopefully this has been a learning

> experience...

Oh dear Karter and LM. In one sentence you are both telling him to f off and in another there's no reason for him to be banned, it's a learning experience. This person doesn't want to exchange opinions with forumites. He just wants to wind people up. You two have had your happy pills far too early.

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

    • Hey Sue, I was wrong - I don't think it would just be for foreign tourists. So yeah I assume that, if someone lives in Lewisham and wants to say the night in southwark, they'd pay a levy.  The hotels wouldn't need to vet anyone's address or passports - the levy is automatically added on top of the bill by every hotel / BnB / hostel and passed on to Southwark. So basically, you're paying an extra two quid a night, or whatever, to stay in this borough.  It's a great way to drive footfall... to the other London boroughs.  https://www.ukpropertyaccountants.co.uk/uk-tourist-tax-exploring-the-rise-of-visitor-levies-and-foreign-property-charges/
    • Pretty much, Sue, yeah. It's the perennial, knotty problem of imposing a tax and balancing that with the cost of collecting it.  The famous one was the dog licence - I think it was 37 1/2 pence when it was abolished, but the revenue didn't' come close to covering the administration costs. As much I'd love to have a Stasi patrolling the South Bank, looking for mullet haircuts, unshaven armpits, overly expressive hand movements and red Kicker shoes, I'm afraid your modern Continental is almost indistinguishable from your modern Londoner. That's Schengen for you. So you couldn't justify it from an ROI point of view, really. This scheme seems a pretty good idea, overall. It's not perfect, but it's cheap to implement and takes some tax burden off Southwark residents.   'The Man' has got wise to this. It's got bad juju now. If you're looking to rinse medium to large amounts of small denomination notes, there are far better ways. Please drop me a direct message if you'd like to discuss this matter further.   Kind Regards  Dave
    • "What's worse is that the perceived 20 billion black hole has increased to 30 billion in a year. Is there a risk that after 5 years it could be as high as 70 billion ???" Why is it perceived, Reeves is responsible for doubling the "black hole" to £20b through the public sector pay increases. You can't live beyond your means and when you try you go bankrupt pdq. In 4 yrs time if this Govt survives that long and the country doesn't go bust before then, in 2029 I dread to think the state the country will be in.  At least Sunak and co had inflation back to 2% with unemployment being stable and not rising.   
    • He seemed to me to be fully immersed in the Jeremy Corbyn ethos of the Labour Party. I dint think that (and self describing as a Marxist) would have helped much when Labour was changed under Starmer. There was a purge of people as far left as him that he was lucky to survive once in my opinion.   Stuff like this heavy endorsement of Momentum and Corbyn. It doesn't wash with a party that is in actual government.   https://labourlist.org/2020/04/forward-momentum-weve-launched-to-change-it-from-the-bottom-up/
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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