Facebook Campaign for my Allotment Options

[Andy Capp]

I'm very sorry for the nuisance Admin, and thank you for cleaning up the thread and posting it back up again. I was aware of the rule and should have asked, I apologise.

I'm not at all convinced that was the reason for the edits. Linking to other sites has been happening for a long time without issue. And like I said, I'm sure the rule was intended to avoid 'commercial' posts and threads.

This smells of a council 'lock-down'.

[Cognosco]

I await with eagerness this weeks NWN to see what information our intrepid reporters have managed to drag forth from the council?

If there is no mention of the allotment crisis and why the council are not publishing the minutes of council meetings I for one will not be buying the paper again!

[Cognosco]

Ask if there are vacant plots in Wash Common and how to apply. Ask for an introduction to the 'managing group'

It would appear there is a considerable waiting list would I like to be entered on it?

[Jayjay]

I'm not at all convinced that was the reason for the edits. Linking to other sites has been happening for a long time without issue. And like I said, I'm sure the rule was intended to avoid 'commercial' posts and threads.

This smells of a council 'lock-down'.

There have been various links to newspaper stories recently, hospipe ban is one that readily springs to mind. They are still up and running.

[x2lls]

I await with eagerness this weeks NWN to see what information our intrepid reporters have managed to drag forth from the council?

If there is no mention of the allotment crisis and why the council are not publishing the minutes of council meetings I for one will not be buying the paper again!

I agree, and I have already abandoned the news pages now that they are 'improved'

[x2lls]

Does the FOI act apply to newspapers, or do we have to ask Mr leveson?

[Andy Capp]

Does the FOI act apply to newspapers, or do we have to ask Mr leveson?

It is for public bodies, e.g. government and councils.

[NWNREADER]

So often the reason given for an unpopular action does not stand scrutiny - but that is usually politicians.

Mr/Mrs/Miss/Miss Admin has set mpre hares running now than if no action had been taken, especially as the entries commented on are fairly old.
Strikes me there has been a complaint, but I cannot imagine who from.

At very least Herr NWN should be in contact with the relevant authors to clarify their error. That can be done privately as 'they know who we are'. Authors can then (if not banned from discussing) explain their wrongdoing so we all learn what we mustn't do......

[NWNREADER]

So often the reason given for an unpopular action does not stand scrutiny - but that is usually politicians.
Mr/Mrs/Miss/Miss Admin has set more hares running now than if no action had been taken, especially as the entries commented on are fairly old.
Strikes me there has been a complaint, but I cannot imagine who from.

At very least Herr NWN should be in contact with the relevant authors to clarify their error. That can be done privately as 'they know who we are'. Authors can then (if not banned from discussing) explain their wrongdoing so we all learn what we mustn't do......

[Nothing Much]

Well NWN, even Frank got it right."New York , so good they named it twice."
Not sure about Newbury though,
I am planning a jaunt. Later in the year. Ball Hill, Kintbury, The gallows ,Stargroves,
Greenfinch Bottom even.
I won't be doing it by bike this time.

[NWNREADER]

Stargroves? You know Mr Jagger has moved out?

[user23]

You know Mr Jagger has moved out?

Didn't Maroon 5 write a song about that?

[Nothing Much]

Yes,I did know that, but I do have the history of The Parish of East Woodhay to hand.
ce

[Nothing Much]

And I think I have the album in the loft.
ce

[Dodgys smarter b...]

I'm sure that NTC would like the thread pulled totally.

Seems to me that they have been casting around for reasons to stop the flow of information into the public domain.

Looking at what's gone and what's stayed there seems to have been a removal of the following 'observations'.

A person, who may, or may not, be a Councillor, has a spouse who also may, or may not, be a Councillor, or, who may, or may not, have been a Councillor in the past. Said spouse may or may not have indulged in behaviour either in the past, or in the present (or both) that has helped bring opprobrium down upon the heads of other Councillors, and possibly, by extension, brought their actions into disrepute. Possibly.

Rather than spend time and effort trying to stifle free speech on the internet, and further blackening the name of the Council that they may, or may not, be a member of, and were the above scenario to be remotely true, it might just have been less time-consuming and embarrassing if one spouse told the other just to "wind their neck in a bit" and "try smiling at the electorate a bit more".

I guess it just depends on who wears the trousers.

Just a thought.

[Nothing Much]

Having gone to skool with all the Pythons younger brothers,
I couldn't have put it better. Dodgy.
ce

[NWNREADER]

Didn't Maroon 5 write a song about that?

Look, if I remember Mick at Stargroves am I really going to have a scoobie who Maroon 5 are? Even after a Google I'm barely better informed!!!

[Guest_jaycakes_*]

It's indeed correct my post that was modified did not contain links.

People are not stupid and there is clearly a load of hush hush going on here. Linking to other sites has long been accepted and without being rude the admins should properly explain their position or/and leave the discussion alone without interference.

Sorry if that sounds rude (I'm not i'm just being polite) but that's how I see it.

Hide behind rule 5c section 3 point 12 all you like. We know da troofz

[Andy Capp]

I think the thread had clearly touched a nerve with some councillors, or former councillors, but it seems they feel they are entitled to 'bad mouth' an allotmenteer, but they are unhappy about taking it - or at least allowing for a right to reply.

My feeling is their legal position regards the rent issue isn't as secure as they say.

[John C]

I think the thread had clearly touched a nerve with some councillors, or former councillors, but it seems they feel they are entitled to 'bad mouth' an allotmenteer, but they are unhappy about taking it - or at least allowing for a right to reply.

My feeling is their legal position regards the rent issue isn't as secure as they say.

I think you could be right on all counts there