General Chat

Kay

I think you have summed up perfectly, some readers point of view

The monologue concerning. -- the following
One book I read about management was by Robert Townsend, who made such a success of Avis. Townsend, Robert L. (1970). Up the Organization; How to Stop the Corporation from Stifling People and Strangling. New York: Alfred A. Knop .......

A long half page post .... .. Instantly followed by a another. .. Of point post .....

does seem like ......... (What you said Kay .. Beginning with H ....)

I better not use the word coz I is cowardly .......

John, I am also FOR pensioner protest, and NON pensioner protest done effectively and with due 'integrity' ( which I don't feel is the case here as the lady in question accepted someone else's money to pay her last debt) ...but i am also FOR, NOT being taken for a mug!

I added my opinions and arguments in good faith John, on the TOPIC not the OP ( and then only after some thought ) .

AnnC,,,as John entered from the left it was a forgone conclusion the thread would be hijacked. and needed no pointers who the un-named person would be :-D :-D as described above,,,,, ;-).

so enlighten us John - in which posting has Errol accused you of hijacking this thread cos I've just gone through it again and can't find it

John are you able to ever give a direct opinion in less than 50 words,long drawn out monologues are seen as hijacking--------.just stick to the basics.

also I belive CC from the OP finds it disgraceful,,,,,no payments will have to be made while other pensioners are making payments due some which they can ill afford and scrimping along with no savings at all without being taken to court.-again.

If I answer a leading question like Renes has asked, I get reported. If I don't answer, I get reported. But at least there is little chance of report being upheld. Actually rolling OFL.

Personally, I am fed up of being baited. And I am sure one or two others are really fed up too. Why cannot people stick to the millions of threads where people they actually respect contribute? And ignore posters who they have no respect at all for?

My personal opinion is that most posters assumed CupCakes was pro this protestor. So one or two decided to take the side of the Council, and they do not normally do that in their posts. Posters who normally have a real go at the "powers that be" suddenly become so pro Norfolk Council that I felt they must work there. My feeling is that some of the opposition to this pensioner was veiled opposition to CupCakes.

I am pro the pensioner protestor because I had a lot of respect for my old Vicar in Northants when he took on the Council. I have tried to do it myself by taking an appeal against a speeding fine to as high a level as I could. Of course, we lose even though our moral case (and even legal case) may be correct. You just cannot beat the system, but you can have a bit of fun challenging the pompous ones.

I have no problem at all with any poster who says this lady should pay up like everyone else and she should dip into her savings and play the system or whatever. I am certain that Jax (as an example) holds that view sincerely and I respect her opinion very much on this topic as on many others. I don't agree, but I know it is a genuine opinion as is mine.

As one of life's rebels myself, I much admire this lady for pushing them in the way she has. She has hardly any money and resources, they have loads. And I would hope my opinion would also be respected without all this flouncing off the thread.

The only two posters who were posting a lot at that particular time were myself and Rose. I do not believe for a moment OFITG and eRRolSheep were referring to Rose as a hijacker :-)

And that certain point was when 'Highjacking' was mentioned. Prior to that it had been a very interesting discussion.

I have reported the post ...

Having rechecked again ...
The first mention of the OP was on page three . ( 3 ). ... Was indeed by Cynthia and Marie Celeste ..... Neither derogatory ... - and i will not have it said otherwise -

In fact the general census of opinion was ...It was a good post...
Worded in such a way to promote good discussion ....

which it did up to a certain point .....

This thread is another one full of annoying ambiguity - no wonder some have got annoyed.

First we have the OP leaving us to decide whether they support a single person paying less or no council tax or do they find that a Lien or Charge on a property ( to be collected on sale or death) is out of order.

Many of us are home owners or children of homeowners and are well aware of how good local councils are in doing this (elderly care).

Secondly, we have someone complaining of the thread being highjacked, naturally the author of the previous posts assumes this is him, but the complainant denies this - so why doesn't the complainant now give us an indication of who did do the highjacking.

So then now lets get back to the issue - who do we agree is in the right, the lady not paying her taxes or the council, working on behalf of the ratepayers, putting a Lien on her property?

Sorry John - but I have no idea what "laying bait" means but I do understand your comment of

"Only reason I came on this thread was because I was so fed up of seeing post after post having a go at the Opening Poster and not the subject matter."

Which is blatantly not so ...

I too read the thread ... And saw the opening posters name mentioned a couple of times - from memory by Cynthia - who wondered what the OP view was and Marie Celeste .. who it seemed misread the OP .... Confusing the quote from the article with the poster comments - i think ¿ - neither of whom were and I quote " having a go "

This was a good OP ... And a good thread ........

Please retract you comment .. As I feel it it antagonistic, and untrue ...

back to the subject in hand :-D

Just as a matter of interest, I am all for people of whatever age to stand up for themselves and their opionion to be counted, however having read through this thread I am asking myself, who empties the protestors bins? Would they not complain if they fell down a pot hole in the pavement on their way home one evening from a protest meeting and couldn't see it in the dark as there was no street lights, so who do they expect to contribute to the system that will pay for their medical treatment?

As for the wanting the opinion of the author of this thread I thought she gave her opinion in her OP but maybe thats just me ;-)

Sorry, Renes. I think you are laying bait. If I list details I know exactly what will happen to my post. So will decline your kind invitation and let you make up your own mind on evidence of thread.

Have re-read thread carefully this morning. There are some excellent posts and interesting opinions. And plenty of same old same old also. It is the two who decided to flounce off when I made my posts that have really upset me. Not that they flounced off, but the disrespectful way they did it.

OFITG - the posting you quote -

"Another good thread hijacked so I am out of here"

where exactly does it say YOU hijacked the thread :-S


and where did Errol say you hijacked the thread?

John

Cn you please post the times of the posts you saw ...

Ie the post after post - Having a go at the opening poster and not the subject matter

Or is this one your "jokes "

AnnC 19 July 11.46

It would be interesting to hear what CupCakes thinks of their antics. I claim the thread was hijacked early on by OFITG and others, and have asked OFITG for his definition of hijacking. Only reason I came on this thread was because I was so fed up of seeing post after post having a go at the Opening Poster and not the subject matter.

where did they say you were hijacking the thread?

Can I just make a point this morning about this risible request for an apology. No, you will most certainly not get one from me.

I made some points on this thread - some I admit were off topic. But I have sympathy for older people (rich and poor) on fairly fixed incomes when bills skyrocket - usually through poor management imo. We can go out and get a second or third job, or try to get some overtime. They usually cannot increase their income at all. And a large tranche of elderly people (yes, I do know that as an absolute fact before someone tries to bait me) prefer not to go down the route of being means tested to get their dues under this ridiculously complicated welfare system.

To have OFITG and Errol both then coming on to say - not that they disagree - but that I am hijacking this thread was deeply insulting and rude. And to claim I owe an apology to them is also, imo, deeply insulting and rude. They both said they would not contribute any more - so why did they? and why have they since? Baiting comes to mind :-(

If any poster does not want to contribute to a thread that I or any other poster has made a comment about, why don't they just retire gracefully. Why make a public flourish of leaving a thread? :-S Rose, myself and a couple of others were having a dialogue, trialogue. No one was hijacking and changing the subject - only OFITG early on in thread by suggesting the lady was bunged money by the Daily Mail.

Still no apology or retraction?
Beggars belief!

Liz I ws not having a go at you at all and thank you for your info

I am not defending her actions, just adding info altho I must say I didn't read right through the thread, it's too long. I just know I have seen a lot about this lady in our local papers and news for years now. She doesn't live that far from me.

Lizx