Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I usually derive a certain amount of enjoyment from the Drawing Room. Recently unfolding events in the Pensions' thread have, however, proved to be a matter for regret.


I understand that a forumite from that thread (Undisputedtruth) has now been banned. The thread contains more than one speculative reference to the fact that he may be a previously banned user (i.e. mikecg or Atila). My concern is that, if the ground for his banning is based on such conjecture, then - I fear - that a mistake (and therefore an injustice) might have occurred. I have met the (recently) banned forumite and also know of both mikecg and Atila; and UDT is neither of those previously banned posters.


I hope I am making sense, and that I haven't misunderstood the situation.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/18290-pensions-thread-drawing-room/
Share on other sites

The sheer injustice of it makes me sick to my very core. How can this terrible wrong be righted?


One can only hope that good will prevail and that any wronged parties will be allowed access to the local free internet chat forum - so that they may continue to engage in more knockabout inconsequential banter - as is surely an integral part of their human rights.

If I wanted to question the Admin's decision about some perceived 'injustice', I think I'd be more inclined to send a private message than start a whole new thread about it.


Having read their sh1t stirring posts, I'd say they got banned for being UDT rather than being linked to anyone else.

Lady Katharina is right, on hindsight, I should have aired my concerns via PM. I apologise for not thinking properly.


BTW, I'm not suggesting Admin are wrong to ban UDT (I'm sure Admin wouldn't impose a ban unless they felt they had good reason to do so), I am merely saying, that, if done on the ground of former banned poster - that they may have made a mistake. The 3 posters are 3 different people. I am 100% certain about that.


Hope you aren't offended Admin.

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

    • Had a great experience with Paul. He sorted out a lighting issue we had very efficiently and I would highly recommend him! https://www.checkatrade.com/trades/edgleycontracting382245
    • Week 11 fixtures...   Saturday 8th November Tottenham Hotspur v Manchester United Everton v Fulham West Ham United v Burnley Sunderland v Arsenal Chelsea v Wolverhampton Wanderers   Sunday 9th November Aston Villa v AFC Bournemouth Brentford v Newcastle United Crystal Palace v Brighton & Hove Albion Nottingham Forest v Leeds United Manchester City v Liverpool
    • Another recommendation for Dulwich Test and Services Centre. Only been using them for a couple of years but wish I’d found them earlier 
    • A new roadmap (surely railmap?!) for rail accessibility has been published: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/accessible-railways-roadmap It says "approximately 56% of stations and around 66% of the 1.3 billion journeys that take place on the network have step-free access to platforms...  "£373 million has been committed over the next 5 years to deliver Access for All projects, providing step-free access from station entrances to and between platforms, alongside other essential accessibility upgrades. These works, together, will increase the number of step-free stations across Great Britain from 56% to 58%. "This improvement will make travel easier with step-free access available at stations covering an increased share of total rail journeys – from 66% up to 71%" Don't know what that means for us here: upgrading Peckham Rye would cover a lot of rail journeys but the cost has no doubt increased from the £40m figure previously quoted. So that would eat into a lot of the funding.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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