Jump to content

Rules of the forum


lilly123

Recommended Posts

really dissappointed in admin of this site, it does clearly state that " This part of the forum is not to be used for commercial or business retailing purposes" please quote me if i am wrong. It has come to my attention along with a few other members, here is an example of just 1 of the members of this forum a private message i had regarding Corallium aka boots.


"facebook page, I think this person up-cycles

> > > furniture and

> > then

> > > sells on for excessive amounts of money. I've

> > > noticed she messages people selling or giving

> > away

> > > free furniture... I wouldn't be impressed if

> I

> > > gave away something in good faith and it was

> > sold

> > > a week later after she has just given it a

> coat

> > of

> > > chalk paint! Especially if someone is in

> real

> > > need and has limited funds to buy anything."

Corallium aka boots has been using this site to sell her items from her business, items that she also advertise on quite a few other selling websites. In a private message from boots she does ask me to edit or delete one of my posts to her as my comments affects her, i private message admin on 7th august to which was read and very kindly did not reply regarding this matter as i am confused to the rules of this forum, (which i did not make), so if someone can enlighten me on the real rules please i would be most grateful.either we can use this site to sell our business/ retail wares or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator

Hi lilly123


Yes I did get a message from you but I also got a message from someone else accusing you of bullying. Sorry I didn't get back to you but I'll handle it from here.


And you are correct, businesses are not allowed to advertise in the for sale section so please flag them up to me, a PM will do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for your reply,I assume that this person/ persons who have lied and accused me of being a bully has given you evidence of this? I say persons as they sell their business under different names on the forum, it's just a shame that they not only lie about 1) their name,2) deny selling goods as part of their business on the forum, and 3) accuse me of being a bully,and have the cheek to private message me to ask me to edit or delete my post as it affects them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Hello,


There's a brilliant piece on the cycling quietway consultations by slartji(?), updated this morning and we wonder if ewe could copy/paste and put it in an email to a residents' association in the affected area?


Thanks


Anna

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

    • The most recent one did, despite the council making it very difficult for anyone to object (which interestingly they were forced to change for the CPZ consultation and look how that went for them). I will dig out the responses for you when I have more time so you can enlighten yourself.   Ha ha...the language used by councils when they see the results of a consultation and need an out to ignore the views of locals...;-) Did you not notice how this only became a thing once the consultation had been run....one wonders why!? Earl you can bluster all you like but you cannot ignore the fact the council closed the junction to emergency services and put lives at risk and resisted all calls (from the emergency services) to open it for them. Surely you can't defend that  or are you willingly turning a blind eye to that too?
    • I believe around 57% of the 5,538 people who were part of the self selecting sample making up the original consultation, opposed the LTN. So just over 3,000 people. This was around 3 years ago now. I think there’s something like 40,000+ living across se22 and SE21 🤷‍♂️  The LTN is a minority interest at best. Whilst it’s an obsession for a small number on the transport thread who strongly oppose it, I suspect most locals quietly approve of the improvements made to that junction. …and we still haven’t heard who has supposedly been pressurising the emergency services and how (are we seriously going with the far left / the commies)? Is anyone willing to stand up and support the 'One' claim that people are partially covering their plates and driving through the filters due to inadequate signage? Again, it all sounds a little ridiculous / desperate. Feels like it may be time for them to start coming to terms with the changes.
    • Okay Earl, of those 'consulted' how many voices were in favour of the junction and how many against? Were there more responses in favour or more against? This local junction change is being driven by Southwark Labour Councillors- not as you assert by Central Govt. Also, if consultations are so irrelevant as indicators of meaningful local support in the way you seem to imply, why do organisations like Southwark Cyclists constantly ask their members to respond to all and any consultation on LTN's and CPZ's?  
    • You could apply the same argument to any kind of penalty as an effective deterrent.  Better than doing nothing. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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