Election Year or Fear!

[SithHappens]

I expect moderators on most forums have the ability to edit posts if needs be.

I recall over on dcfcfans when B4 who had learning difficulties used the term Coloured to refer to someone. I flagged it with a moderator who amended it.

Of course it could be altered by the poster but there is a time limit to do so. Editing a post rather than deleting can sometimes be better as the rest of the post may be valid.

Of course a post wouldn't be deleted for a typo, provided said typo doesn't make it inappropriate.

However I don't personally have a problem if I make a glaringly obvious typo and it's corrected by a moderator.

Clearly if the moderator altered the post to make what had been written look bad then that's different, but I guess that's where trust in those moderating comes in. While i might disagree with AF on some things I think he's not going to alter a post inappropriately. IMO.

[ramAnag]

I expect moderators on most forums have the ability to edit posts if needs be.

I recall over on dcfcfans when B4 who had learning difficulties used the term Coloured to refer to someone. I flagged it with a moderator who amended it.

Of course it could be altered by the poster but there is a time limit to do so. Editing a post rather than deleting can sometimes be better as the rest of the post may be valid.

Of course a post wouldn't be deleted for a typo, provided said typo doesn't make it inappropriate.

However I don't personally have a problem if I make a glaringly obvious typo and it's corrected by a moderator.

Clearly if the moderator altered the post to make what had been written look bad then that's different, but I guess that's where trust in those moderating comes in. While i might disagree with AF on some things I think he's not going to alter a post inappropriately. IMO.

We’ll have to agree to differ on many aspects of that Sith.

We used to - before your time I think - have a poster on here called Mista. Bright man, ran his own company I believe and made more sense than many as regards both politics and football, but his written literacy skills were quite poor. I doubt if any moderator would have had the time to correct all his mistakes and it is very questionable that they would have been able to do so without changing his meaning, but he still got his point across.

To me it’s the thin end of the wedge when any moderator starts ‘correcting’. Their job is, imo, to ensure the rules of the forum are adhered to, that the forum works and that no libel laws are broken…nothing more. Be interesting to hear what ex mods like Bloomer or Ramondo have to say if they’re reading.

[Geoff Parkstone]

I remember the Rat and Chris regularly editting posts back in the day much to my annoyance.

But they did edit a spelling error in a post of mine about having a wife who was a nagger which seemed justified

[Andy_Faber]

I expect moderators on most forums have the ability to edit posts if needs be.

I recall over on dcfcfans when B4 who had learning difficulties used the term Coloured to refer to someone. I flagged it with a moderator who amended it.

Of course it could be altered by the poster but there is a time limit to do so. Editing a post rather than deleting can sometimes be better as the rest of the post may be valid.

Of course a post wouldn't be deleted for a typo, provided said typo doesn't make it inappropriate.

However I don't personally have a problem if I make a glaringly obvious typo and it's corrected by a moderator.

Clearly if the moderator altered the post to make what had been written look bad then that's different, but I guess that's where trust in those moderating comes in. While i might disagree with AF on some things I think he's not going to alter a post inappropriately. IMO.

Of course I wouldn?t Sith. Thanks for your trust

[Andy_Faber]

If a Moderator thinks a post should be edited or deleted, IMO, (and it's what I did when being Admin/Mod on a couple of sites) they should message the poster, explaining why they believe it should be amended, for instance, the post opens both the poster and the site to possible lawsuits for the content. If the poster refuses to delete/edit, the Mod should then take the necessary action.

Apparently PMs are not currently working so that's not an option but AF could easily post "please amend/delete because....." in a reply to the offending post.

I probably would do so in most circumstances and have pmd folk in the past, usually when the common error of writing could/ should/ would instead of their opposites makes a point being made totally contrary. In the case of your Chris/Charlie thing you weren?t apparently around and I anticipated it being the start of a deluge of posts. I?ll make best endeavours to let you know next time.

[swaledale]

lol

lol indeed, but if your capable of making unsubstantiated remarks about myself and RA's apparent dogma, your capable of amending/deleting stuff if the fancy takes you. Its just as likely to be this site which is fast becoming unusable, but I wouldn't put it past you.

In the meantime I'd be interested in what dogma you think RA and I have? I mean I can guess, but your judgement (and indeed understanding of facts) can be a little off beam sometimes and I do believe its important to clear up any misunderstandings that other parties may have on these matters.

As it happens I don't have any particular dogma or ideology, other than I know what fascism looks and sounds like and generally find it something to be resisted, no matter how beguiling the message, or how smart and pleasant the person espousing such views is.

Still as history shows, there were many people who tacitly or otherwise supported both home grown and foreign fascists, why even a supposedly respectable "newspaper" had the memorable headline "Hurrah for the Blackshirts!".

I don't of course expect an answer, you have shown a telling inability, or unwillingness to back up your statements with actual factual evidence in the past and there is no reason to think you've changed your tune.

[swaledale]

I will have to ask them!

It takes time to address the problems, but I dont agree with Swales list of achievements, no. They arent facts. There are a few easy early hits - eg settled train drivers dispute by capitulating to the wage demands. but renatioanlising the railways !! We couldnt afford to buy back Thomas' little corporation on Sodor, and likely couldnt run it anyway given past BR performance. That really is rhetoric and feasibilitystudies. Besides which water is the bigger issue - but again a bit difficult as would need about a 75% average tax rate to fix that one..

I dont think many of the things he has listed have been affectively even started on let alonecclose to approaching completion. Just his particular rose tint of spectacles. And certinly Ive not seen any serious costed plans for dealing with anything. Just a bit of hot air. Anything vaguely controversial has been U turned on or watered down if it impacts likely labour voters. But the grannies, the farmers, the soon to be pensioners who he likely sees as not voting his way all seem to be fair game whilst eg the long needed benefits regime reform seems to have disappeared from the radar because his voters dont like to sacrafice anything to the common good.

And "making asylum easier" which I think was one of the alleged achievements isnt likely to appeal to them, or IMHO anyone!!

If you do your research, you will note that far more knowledgeable people than you or I dispute the supposed costs of renationalising the water companies. In fact as far a Thames water is concerned it would cost virtually nothing, its not a going concern. There will of course be some collateral damage regarding shareholders, but that doesn't seem to be an issue when other large companies collapse.

The railway nationalisation is being done as the franchise contracts end, and indeed the government have been running some franchises for years, LNER on the East Coast being a prime example, Northern, South West Trains and Trans Pennine also and Greater Anglia reverts in October. So you are wrong its being achieved.

As for British Rail, well at the time it was privatised, it was an efficient, well run organisation and had been for over a decade. The fact that public subsidy has increased by over 200% since privatisation is ample demonstration that private is not always better and especially with large monopolies. You really do need to know your facts before making any claims.

I didn't say they made asylum easier, they have, reduced significantly the backlog of claims, reduced the use of hotels to house asylum seekers, put in place a returns agreement pilot with France. Starmer has handled Trump as well as he can under the circumstances.

The WFA needed reform, it was nonsense that people like myself were getting it and in any case, the fuss over it has been overblown, it was introduced when pensions were low, this year the state pension had a ?400 increase and the notion that ?100 person except for those on the lowest incomes is a big issue is laughable. The inheritance tax on Farmers, was absolutely fair, I mean which other family businesses are granted a tax break or given 10 years to pay at 0% interest? Besides which a simple matter of putting it in trust for ones successor children solves the issue.

I see so not settling the disputes in the NHS and railways was a better idea? I rather think the people who now don't suffer the disruption in travelling, or the wait for NHS treatment wouldn't agree with you.

Oh and did I mention that NHS waiting times are down? Did I mention that funding is being put into Dentistry? Did I mention the additional police now being replaced after the 20,000+ reduction in the last government?

If you must swallow the utter bilge that is pushed by the right wing media with a clear agenda, at least get your basic facts right.

There is much that Labour could have done better, there is more Labour might have done and there are areas where lack of action or slow action can be criticised. I wish that Starmer could be a better at presentation, but over 12 months of relatively stable government is not nothing.

The facts of the matter are that most of the issues that will actually change peoples lives for the better are not instant fixes, certainly not after 14 years of austerity and neglect and mismanagement by the last lot. I know many people expect instant results, I rather thought, you were more aware that it would take a time to fix and improve things. Instead it seems you have fallen for the misinformation and false myths that sadly perpetuate society today.

[Geoff Parkstone]

"The railway nationalisation is being done as the franchise contracts end, and indeed the government have been running some franchises for years"

So if they've been running it for years it can't be a Starmer win but a Tory one! Praise indeed from one so critical of that government.

BR "an efficient, well run organisation and had been for over a decade". What utter *******s. You obviously never used it to commute daily. It was ****ing awful.

Facts eh....or your alt-facts again?

[Andy_Faber]

lol indeed, but if your capable of making unsubstantiated remarks about myself and RA's apparent dogma, your capable of amending/deleting stuff if the fancy takes you. Its just as likely to be this site which is fast becoming unusable, but I wouldn't put it past you.

.

?.which just reinforces GP?s comment about paranoia, and you?ve got sad ?previous? in this area including but not limited to Rattea and I being the same person. I think the current in phrase is ?give your head a wobble?.

[MadAmster]

If you do your research, you will note that far more knowledgeable people than you or I dispute the supposed costs of renationalising the water companies. In fact as far a Thames water is concerned it would cost virtually nothing, its not a going concern. There will of course be some collateral damage regarding shareholders, but that doesn't seem to be an issue when other large companies collapse.

The railway nationalisation is being done as the franchise contracts end, and indeed the government have been running some franchises for years, LNER on the East Coast being a prime example, Northern, South West Trains and Trans Pennine also and Greater Anglia reverts in October. So you are wrong its being achieved.

As for British Rail, well at the time it was privatised, it was an efficient, well run organisation and had been for over a decade. The fact that public subsidy has increased by over 200% since privatisation is ample demonstration that private is not always better and especially with large monopolies. You really do need to know your facts before making any claims.

I didn't say they made asylum easier, they have, reduced significantly the backlog of claims, reduced the use of hotels to house asylum seekers, put in place a returns agreement pilot with France. Starmer has handled Trump as well as he can under the circumstances.

The WFA needed reform, it was nonsense that people like myself were getting it and in any case, the fuss over it has been overblown, it was introduced when pensions were low, this year the state pension had a ?400 increase and the notion that ?100 person except for those on the lowest incomes is a big issue is laughable. The inheritance tax on Farmers, was absolutely fair, I mean which other family businesses are granted a tax break or given 10 years to pay at 0% interest? Besides which a simple matter of putting it in trust for ones successor children solves the issue.

I see so not settling the disputes in the NHS and railways was a better idea? I rather think the people who now don't suffer the disruption in travelling, or the wait for NHS treatment wouldn't agree with you.

Oh and did I mention that NHS waiting times are down? Did I mention that funding is being put into Dentistry? Did I mention the additional police now being replaced after the 20,000+ reduction in the last government?

If you must swallow the utter bilge that is pushed by the right wing media with a clear agenda, at least get your basic facts right.

There is much that Labour could have done better, there is more Labour might have done and there are areas where lack of action or slow action can be criticised. I wish that Starmer could be a better at presentation, but over 12 months of relatively stable government is not nothing.

The facts of the matter are that most of the issues that will actually change peoples lives for the better are not instant fixes, certainly not after 14 years of austerity and neglect and mismanagement by the last lot. I know many people expect instant results, I rather thought, you were more aware that it would take a time to fix and improve things. Instead it seems you have fallen for the misinformation and false myths that sadly perpetuate society today.

Ever thought some posters might just post stuff to rattle cages rather than actually believing the drivel they sometimes post?

[swaledale]

"The railway nationalisation is being done as the franchise contracts end, and indeed the government have been running some franchises for years"

So if they've been running it for years it can't be a Starmer win but a Tory one! Praise indeed from one so critical of that government.

BR "an efficient, well run organisation and had been for over a decade". What utter *******s. You obviously never used it to commute daily. It was ****ing awful.

Facts eh....or your alt-facts again?

I do wish you would check you know what your talking about, BR in the deacde up to privatisation was very efficient and well run, if your going to call something I post as *******s please provide soem evidence to back up your claim. I did point out that since privatisation, government subsidy has risen 200%, which suggests that BR were actually operating well.

There is a tendency amongst the media to denigrate BR, and indeed in the 70's it was not exactly a shining example of a well run organisation. There are facts and there are urban myths one of which is that people ignore things when they run well and focus only on the times they have an issue. Its not surprising that on a busy commuter network, there will be issues, often ones outside the railways control. I travelled by train extensively in the decade from 1980 for business and leisure, including many London commuter journeys and overall didn't have many issues. I asked my brother who commuted by train from Surrey into Waterloo for over 30 years and his view was that it was a good reliable service for most of that time.

Its all about perceptions isn't it?

The LNER (East Coast) franchise has been government run because successive companies Virgin, national Express, for two, failed to make it pay and walked away. The Tories repeatedly tried to re let the contract but no realistic bids emerged, it wasn't a Tory win.

Since Labour took office, they ahve picked up the franchises as they come to an end, a realistic and cost effective way of nationalising the railways and so they have delivered on what they said they would.

[Trickytreesreds]

Sith: why did Trump get reelected?''Why did the Tories keep getting reelected. Sentiment here says they were incompetent. Khan getting reelected and being incompetent isn't in the least been inconsistent when viewed in the light of those precedents....just because you are reelected doesn't mean you're good at the job - I'd say possibly more a case of people voting parties not performance. The adage of a Tory/Labour voter electing a pug if it wore a Blue/Red rosette...

The answer lies with the silent majorities. Khans elections have been on the piss poor turn outs of Londoners, but boosted by the ethnic vote.
That is changing. The silent majority are angry now and their stance has changed Reform is the classic example of it. Labour and the Tories according to Sky are going to get obliterated. Funnily though, Labours last outpost will be London, which speaks volumes. So, sorry RA,Sith your leanings may be all lovey dovey with Khan/Labour, but the majority have had enough of the shenanigans and want something different. Khan himself, if the trend continues will get the boot.

[Trickytreesreds]

I see Farage has claimed today migrants are eating swans.

Hes also tacitly supported Trumps claims about paracetamol and autism.

I see you?ve jumped in feet first because of the name mentioned. Youve obviously not looked into this. It?s been going on for years and the denial you?re clinging to is gas lighting.
I?ll give you a bit of help, go on twitter, and see your female equivalent, Narinda Kaur. She posted the same and the evidence has flooded in from folks ****ed off with hearing denials. Even the RSPCA.

[Trickytreesreds]

I didn't say they made asylum easier, they have, reduced significantly the backlog of claims, reduced the use of hotels to house asylum seekers, put in place a returns agreement pilot with France.


Reduced the backlog- translation rubber stamped approvals to get rid
Reduced the number of hotels- translation, moved them into the HMO’s and put the burden on councils
Returns agreement with France - translation, we swap one of ours, for one of yours even though it does nothing to reduce the total, in fact probably increases it. They will be fast tracked and multiple dependents following very soon, for the gravy train.
The reality is a few dozen deals a year, whilst hundreds cross every day.

All sounds like. Bull**** and a massive gas lighting fail to me.

[Trickytreesreds]

Yep. Folks have had enough of these tossers

https://news.sky.com/story/nigel-farage-on-course-to-be-next-prime-minister-mega-poll-projects-13438143