Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Jah Lush Wrote:

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

> the-e-dealer Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Well then it WAS partly their fault they should

> > have kicked someone incompetent out NOT

> encouraged

> > you to keep them on.

>

> Yes, but would it have made good television?


xxxxxxx


Actually they didn't cover the problems with DJKQ at all because it wasn't that kind of programme.


She appeared extremely briefly in one part of it (IIRC) demonstrating how to put paint on a wall :))


I thought that was quite funny because her painting technique was idiosyncratic to say the least, she didn't seem to have heard of cutting in.

>

> .

> .

> .

>

> Sent by Osmosis.

ratty Wrote:

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

> Does this thread make anyone else slightly

> uncomfortable?



Mmm..... I am a little surprised the site allows such an undefended diatribe against a trader - but then again I guess nobody has named the individual/company.

ratty Wrote:

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

> Does this thread make anyone else slightly

> uncomfortable?


I think probably (despite having, umm, egged it on a leetle - not that Sue needed much encouragement) my opinion is now that it (the thread) ought to go - at least until the other party makes an appearance.


As another sagely poster (not connected with DJKQ) has pointed out.. there may be other, well, issues which I don't think most amused bystanders (including myself) on here would want to exacerbate, were they to be the case.


That might be a load of old guff, of course, but maybe better safe than sorry on this one?

*Bob* Wrote:

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


> my opinion is now that it (the thread) ought to go

> - at least until the other party makes an

> appearance.


xxxxxxxxx


Well the other party is conspicuous by their absence, despite having posted on their football thread relatively recently.


Perhaps in due course the OP may expand further on their experience of the trader in question.


All I would say is, there are always two sides to every issue. Which is why I said that I would abide by the decision of an independent objective mediator. DJKQ refused mediation. Why?

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

    • End of a wonderful era. We’ve been going since it opened and even started contractions with my oldest (25 year old) son during a lovely New Year’s Eve lunch. Thank you Rod and Tim for some amazing memories. 
    • Update from SNJ following recent leaks https://www.specialneedsjungle.com/dfe-needs-plumber-better-policymakers-less-panic-truly-understands-send/
    • Let's not forget this is the lowest level of local politics. If McCash really thought his defection could trash the Labour Party nationally, and it was loaded with invective and exhibitionism, then that's pretty much the definition of a "hissy fit"! Scooping the Green nomination for DaWN constituency is also going to be a lot harder for a Marxist arriviste than you suggest. There may be a wave of new, younger Polanski-ites that have joined the Green Party of E&W recently, but it's the long-standing, often retired members of the Party that tend to participate in candidate interview panels and bother voting in selections...
    • They've had 26 years or so of trading, and if anyone deserves decent retirement... In my view they're going out at the top. It's clearly being sold, assuming it all goes through as a very more more than just a going concern. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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