Thanks CAG, you are the best

[jeremylongfinger]

Thanks to everyone at this site for such an accommodating and enlightening attitude towards PPCs. It's refreshing to be allowed to post in multiple silly names with as much mischevious and misleading comment as we like with no fear of sanction by the mods. We can advise people to pay up to our hearts content in the sure knowledge that the posting will be allowed and even encouraged. All that happens is that the same people label us trolls but their censorship is clearly not shared by the mods.

Thanks also for banning some of our opponents who dared to challenge us. All in all a great site, unlike Pepipoo where we are banned after about 5 minutes.

[Mossycat]

Originally Posted by jeremylongfinger

It's refreshing to be allowed to post in multiple silly names with as much mischevious and misleading comment as we like with no fear of sanction by the mods.

Wow a PPC who speaks the truth.

Post all the misleading comments you want, there are plenty of members who will post correct and true advice to victims of your scams

Mossycat

[BeauBrummie]

And Jeremylongfinger you reap what you sow ------ be carefull !!!!

[Bookworm]

*Yawn*

[tomterm8]

Hm... why would you need more than one user ID in CAG? the number of times someone has been permanently banned on the parking forums is countable on the number of hands in one finger.

[Bookworm]

... Unless it is someone who would have been moderated for their poor manners, unacceptable insults to other users, been asked to restrain themselves over and over again and failed to do so and therefore action would have to be taken against them, Tom, and instead of getting the hint and controlling their excesses, they would then abandon the previous IDs and choose to start under a different guise.

Terribly sad, don't you think? All they have to do is stop hurling insults at one another and put their legal arguments in a logical and reasonable manner (which I think you'll agree would carry so much more weight to the argument) and they could debate to their heart's contents. Instead, they seem to think that insulting the other side is somehow going to convince anyone reading their posts they must be in the right.

A sad state of affairs, I tell you.

[ThisIsRacket]

@ jeremylongfinger. I, for once, fail to see the point of banning you. As they say - keep your friends close, but enimies... . Once you start telling people that they need to pay up, it becomes clear to them that you are a scam... sorry troll, and don't listen any more. Besides, If your business is so within a law, why do you feel like hanging around these pages. I don't see cops moonlighting at Pepipoo telling people they cannot escape NIPs. So, mate, you an idiot, who has just proven that you HAVE to bully and lie in order to extract money and This Is called Racket.

[Mossycat]

Originally Posted by jeremylongfinger

We are more than prepared to argue the case on its merits.

Yes but you hardly ever try and argue your case in Court, and on the very few times that you do you lose.

Mossycat

[Bookworm]

Dear ThisIsRacket, you have obviously missed the heavy-handed sarcasm handed out by OP. It was quite clear (to me, at least )from his first post that he is one of the many "legal" people who has been put on moderation, not, despite what their buckets of chip on shoulder would make them think, because their advice is incorrect or wrong, but because they were incapable to express it without loading it with venom towards the other side. After they were asked many, many times to keep it civil, there was little option but for mods to do it for them.

Now OP is pretending to be one of the PPCs thanking CAG for its support, when it is in fact anything but, and when the PPCs also resorted to mud-flinging, they were also put on moderation, and guess what? They ALSO complained of unfairness, censorship and one-sidedness by the mods!

In my book, if both sides complain they have been treated unfairly, that means they have both been treated evenly. They might not like it, but that's another story.

I happen to think that we stand more to learn by hearing the other side and being able to refute their arguments in an intelligent manner and learning their weaknesses that way than by having a bunch of nodding dogs all agreeing with one another. And this forum always has had a history of hearing out the other side, whether they be bank workers, debt collectors, bailiffs or PPC employees, as long as people remain civil. I see no reason for this to change, and if the yes-men don't like it, they can go and stay elsewhere where they can agree with one another and congratulate one another on how right they are until the cows come home.

[Bookworm]

*Yawn*.

Again.

[ThisIsRacket]

Argue in the court. You know you cannot. BTW, you are one and the same as Bernard Skintlebinger and Julian Fiddlepot? Otherwise seems like an invasion of people using the same naming conventions. I hope it pays well to go on a triple.

[Barnsley Boy]

Originally Posted by Bookworm

*Yawn*.

Again.

Bookworm,

If Jeremy Longfinger is using the same IP and / or email] as a previously moderated member why can't you simply tell us who it is?

[ThisIsRacket]

Well, like others said it here before: names, dates, court cases - this little niggly bit called supporting evidence for your statements. On the other hand, I have seem few private parking sites with hidden signs as the intention is to extort money NOT to inform the motorist. Not to mention the whole other inconsistent stuff. Until we see here posts from people who have lost their cases in droves (with dates and case numbers; in case you are willing to fabricate), there is no basis in your statements. As I have said, if you feel so strong about your position, what the flop are you doing here, just sit back and wait for the court judgements in your favour to roll in.

[Bookworm]

Originally Posted by Barnsley Boy

Bookworm,

If Jeremy Longfinger is using the same IP and / or email] as a previously moderated member why can't you simply tell us who it is?

I don't think I have said anything of the kind.

What I have said was that it was obvious to me that this was not really a PPC posting. Think about it.

[jasonstickstirrer]

A bit late to be clamping down now when we've enjoyed complete freedom to post all week. Or is it that the regulars here are unable to debate the intricacies of private parking law?

[ThisIsRacket]

jasonstickstirrer, get a life, [edited] . Don't you have like family, boy/girl-friend... PlayStation??? Or is it that the only place where people talk to you is here?

[jasonstickstirrer]

Actually it is "loser". And I have a life and a well paid job as a private parking operative. I'm proud of it. Why cannot you debate properly rather than hurling insults? I was given to believe those hurling insults would be banned but I might have misread that.