Town council, shabby goings on Options

[ropey]

The local liberal democrats have shown their true shabby colours, wishing to remove Councillor Edwards after a fair and democratic vote shows that liberal democracy does not thrive in the Newbury liberal party, it seems to me that the former Mayor did the right thing when he cast his vote and for the liberals to suggest that his act was opportunistic is absurd. The Mayor acted quite properly in casting his vote for whom he thought was the better experienced councillor. By the actions of the shabby libs, he has rather proven himself right. If two parties at local level can not work togther at this level what chance have we in sorting Afghanistan, and the Middle East !

Shame on you liberals for being so tiny minded and iliberal.

[Roost]

You might as well say...

Shame on you cats for being so hairy and feline!!

[user23]

The local liberal democrats have shown their true shabby colours, wishing to remove Councillor Edwards after a fair and democratic vote shows that liberal democracy does not thrive in the Newbury liberal party, it seems to me that the former Mayor did the right thing when he cast his vote and for the liberals to suggest that his act was opportunistic is absurd. The Mayor acted quite properly in casting his vote for whom he thought was the better experienced councillor. By the actions of the shabby libs, he has rather proven himself right. If two parties at local level can not work togther at this level what chance have we in sorting Afghanistan, and the Middle East !

You'll have to enlighten me here as I don't understand what you've typed.

It says on the council website that Adrian Edwards is a Conservative councillor, so how can the Liberal Democrats remove him from the council?

[JeffG]

user23 - suggest you read the article and all will become clear.

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article...articleID=13703

[Strafin]

I'm suprised they would do this. I know essentially they are liberals and therefore want power at any cost but this is a bit much.

[Exhausted]

This is so typical of local councillors having delusions of grandeur by pretending that they are in some way joined at the hip with the Westminster parties.

If they, the leaders of our country, can work together in a coalition government, why can't these minor officials work together for the good of Newbury Town. Might save a lot of time at the meetings if they aren't bickering amongst themselves.

Do we need a mayor at all I wonder.

[user23]

user23 - suggest you read the article and all will become clear.

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article...articleID=13703

Thanks, I understand now.

"The drama unfolded in the absence of Gina Houghton (Lib Dem, Northcroft), who had given her apologies for not being able to attend the full council meeting"

I'm uneducated in these things, but this seems a bit underhand of the Conservatives, taking advantage of a rival being unable to attend this meeting.

Is this is what being discussed here? If so I'm glad it was bought to all our attention by the original poster.

[Bofem]

I'm uneducated in these things, but this seems a bit underhand of the Conservatives, taking advantage of a rival being unable to attend this meeting.

Careful what you ay Phil. The Conservatives are your paymasters at WBC. We wouldn't want you to get sacked now, would we eh?

[Iommi]

Using possible real names is a forum no-no.

[Bofem]

Careful what you ay Phil. The Conservatives are your paymasters at WBC. We wouldn't want you to get sacked now, would we eh?

Not when I'm paying his wages and he's on here in work time. (I'm self employed before you ask).

[Bloggo]

Not when I'm paying his wages and he's on here in work time. (I'm self employed before you ask).

Not an unreasonable response in my view. Anymore council workers on the forum?

Isn't this whole sorry argument about party politics and not about what is good for Newbury.
Still along way to go before these people work together for the good of the town.

[Iommi]

Not when I'm paying his wages and he's on here in work time. (I'm self employed before you ask).

Firstly, you don't know that he is on here in work time, or even for sure it is him, second you don't pay his wages, but it is still bad etiquette regardless.

It is a shame that the moderation on this forum is quite poor in this regard.

[Smudgie]

Very poor forum etiquette, Bofem, and, in fact, your statement could be considered to be libelous.

As it happens, I am aware that User23 is on leave this week.

Even if he wasn't, casting aspersions on other forum users' working practices in this currently economic climate, be they public sector workers or not, is totally inappropriate.

[admin]

Let's keep the discussion away from personal attacks please.
Admin.

[Strafin]

You reap what you sow, whilst I do think it is bad etiquette, it's not suprising given the amount of people User winds up. So Phil eh? Must be short for Philomina

[user23]

Careful what you ay Phil. The Conservatives are your paymasters at WBC. We wouldn't want you to get sacked now, would we eh?

Firstly, please don't threaten anyone on here that you'll get them sacked for expressing their views, in fact don't threaten anyone on here with anything, ever.

Secondly since when has 10:05 PM (check the time in the post you quoted) been work time for most? If you're referring to the previous post then half the country including myself had that afternoon off to watch the football, in fact I've never posted on here in work time, not that my personal circumstances are any of your business nor that you have the right to publicly question my professional integrity without good reason.

I'm going to refrain from asking the administrators for your details in this case but if you ever breach 5a or 5b of the conditions to use this site and threaten anyone who posts on this forum in a potentially libellous manner again I shall do so.

I hope I have made myself very clear on this matter but would appreciate a timely reply either in this thread or via a personal message to confirm you understand and agree to these terms.

Very poor forum etiquette, Bofem, and, in fact, your statement could be considered to be libelous.

Yes, the first test case was won by Sheffield Wednesday FC in 2007.

The sad thing about the whole incident is that I said "I'm uneducated in these things", I have no idea how things like this work at the council so he could have just said I was wrong and I didn't understand what was going on, which I would have accepted and we could have moved on.

[Guest_Bill1_*]

Well said User23 and fellow posters who think Bofem's posts were despicable. How people know, or claim to know other posters identity etc, unless they've made it publicly known, is beyond me and the moderators really need to sort this intolerable behaviour out.

[Strafin]

So threatening posts like that are allowed because they come from Loser23? I'm hapy to agree that Bofem's comments weren't in the spirit of anonymous forums but didn't give any real information alledgedly anyway. To start a post with don't threaten anyone and ending it with "if you don't PM me I will take further action" is a prime example of the contraditory nature of most posters who whinge and complain on here about other posters. For example a while back I posted a sweeping generalisation about the welsh and got completely lambasted for it, fair enough, but there is now a thread slagging off the Americans which is seeminlgy OK.

[Strafin]

I just think you're all taking it a bit too seriously.

[Iommi]

Trying to 'out' people on a public forum is below the belt. Would you like it? user23.3's reply hardly compares to the OP that caused it. This forum will only work if it remains anonymous. Otherwise, others will be put off posting. Bofem was out of line. Bofem could have made the same point without an attempt to use the real name. We can only surmise, the comment was ill-meant.