Jump to content


Lowell discussion ????


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3995 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

So, Bookworm. Lowells were given short shrift, were they? Doesn't seem like it to me from reading this thread, ye specky eyed bint.

 

Perhaps if ye went to Specsavers, you'd be able to see the above Lowells poster, and mebbes actually see the ads that everybody but you has noticed into the bargain.

 

Of course, mebbes all ye need to do is remove yer blinkers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oooh, "fester" indeed. :lol:

 

I do see Lowells being given short thrift by CAG members though, do I not? I don't see their (CAGgers) posts being moderated, since I can clearly read them.:-? As for Lowells, seeing the swishing of skirts that resulted from their last outing, I'm not surprised they would go for a repeat episode, and see if they can get another such row started, on which by the way you seem quite happy to fan the flame. :rolleyes:

 

Cor, that chip on the shoulder must be really slowing you down these days, maybe you should see someone about that. ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

As Bookie says, dont give them the satisfaction!

 

I would prefer it if they werent there but hey, even hedgeborn harlots like them have the right to say what they want. If we give validity to their bile is our choice.

  • Haha 1

Advice given is my opinion only, I am not a legal or financial expert (far from it).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, I see. Simpler to get rid of folks who question the fact that Lowells, and any other grime-ridden vermin that feel they would like to "help" their customers in CAG, than to ban the Lowells rep.

 

Yes, that makes perfect sense. To somebody at least. Certainly not to me. Just as I cannot understand why entire threads questioning the subject have been pulled. You may SAY that posts have not been moderated, but you, and many others, know full well that this has not always been so.

 

It seems that the "right to say what they want" does NOT extend to certain genuine posters. So why should it be any different for "James"?

 

It's a reasonable question. But I doubt I'll get a reasonable answer. Heck, I'll more than likely just get flamed again, since there IS no reasonable answer. Far easier just to sidestep questions, than to confront them, eh Bookie?

 

Have you seen the ads yet, Bookie? You seemed happy to tell folks they were talking nonsense in MSE when the subject was brought up, but I accept that at the time you were denied all the information that you required to be able to have an informed opinion. I trust that has now been rectified. Nothing worse than having an opinion based on ignorance after all, although as has oft been said; Ignorance is no excuse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because "James", as far as I can see, apart from being his inept "self" (selves? One rather suspects a team, but one could be wrong) hasn't actually broken any of the forum rules? He hasn't insulted other users, hasn't heaped abuse on them, flamed them or anything like that.

 

Because freedom of speech (which doesn't exist on private forums, btw, that's a fallacy) as granted to us as guests on any forum, should apply to ANYONE who won't resort to insults?

 

Yes, you're right, I am personally aware of many threads/posts which have been moderated in the past. Your point being? I don't think that I have said that this forum wasn't being moderated, I know for a fact it is. However, the very fact that people like Monx and Bazooka and others are posting precisely to advise people NOT to contact Lowest clearly proves that Lowells are NOT being given the free run of the forum, otherwise ALL adverse comments would be removed and they're not. So, if not every adverse comment is being removed, maybe one needs to wonder whether it wasn't the message, but the FORM in which the message was written that needed removing?

 

You see, you lot are all making these outraged noises, but you're not even being original. We've had the same outrage when bank workers posted, when bailiffs posted, when private parking companies posted (my goodness, you should have heard the howls then!), etc, etc... Point is, if you want "freedom of speech", then it does apply equally to all, as long as they respect the minimum of social rules. In other words, disagree all you like, but there's no need to get personal about it. Ultimately, he who resorts to mere abuse fast loses all credibility (see #13 for example ;-)).

 

So: side-stepping issues? Not at all, I have made it very clear from the start, both here and on MSE, where I stand. I don't feel threatened by Lowell's presence on here, I don't give a toss what they post as I trust CAGgers to put them back in their place, and I'd rather see them posting as themselves as pretending to be innocent bystanders who could muddy the waters a lot faster.

 

Now, if you wish to carry on your little diatribes, may I respectfully suggest that you create a thread in the Bear Garden so we can stop hijacking the OP's thread? Thank you. :-)

 

PS: Nope, still not seen ads, and I never said to people they were talking nonsense, I instead asked them to tell me where to find such, as I myself hadn't seen any. To note that no-one has bothered to point me in the right direction yet.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with Bookworm. It gets a bit petty minded when someone responds to Lowell CRT saying to the OP, don't respond to them as you can't trust them. This is then continued on for several more posts which are nothing to do with the OP's post. The OP has in the meantime, run to the hills, without getting the help they were looking for.

 

Suggest that you allow Lowell CRT to post their standard reply and rather than respond with diatribes, that you just ignore them, pointing the OP in the right direction.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Strange then, that I was banned in the past, for breaking the oh-so-important rule of not being allowed to advertise. Except it was on my PERSONAL blog, FFS.

 

Not even ads pointing to Payday loans or ripoff merchants offering credit without checks.

 

But that's OK. So long as nobody thinks there might be double standards at work here.

 

Oh, no. Wait... ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

PS: Nope, still not seen ads, and I never said to people they were talking nonsense, I instead asked them to tell me where to find such, as I myself hadn't seen any. To note that no-one has bothered to point me in the right direction yet.

 

I hope this helps Bookie. Big enough picture for you? Still think there's no reason to get annoyed?

 

Capture.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any possibility you can take your pram and toys to another more personal thread FT?

This is most certainly not the place to be having a tantrum, what the hell has this got to do with helping the OP out??

 

Take up boxing or something if your that angry....go the gym...the bottle bank..the front line somewhere where your anger will be better chanelled.

  • Haha 1

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Play nicely now.

Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is going on here? Why the venim targeted towards Bookie. I think the personal attack is disgraceful, for goodness sake dont forget the hard work that Bookie has put into this forum. If you take the time to look you will see it is Bookie that put together the legal documents, The court bundle, when we were all getting our charges back. It must have taken her ages. Bookie has also done a lot of the ground work to get this site up and running and has given excellent advice. Insults are pure ignorance, personal insults are even worse. Let us have the good grace to be polite to one another at least even if you do not agree with what is being said. Just because the person is not stood in front of you does not mean that the insults do not hurt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, HF, but it's ok. :-)

 

I asked for these posts to be removed from a thread which was being hijacked at OP's detriment. I personally don't care about Fester's opinion one way or another, and if he can't reason by any other way than by insults, I think it says more about him than me, so don't give it another thought.

 

Now, back to the issue at hand, which was, it seems, people putting in the same basket lowells being allowed to post and Google ads. As I said elsewhere, I was confused as I had never seen any. Thankfully, Kenny & Thailand (oh yes, and Fester, although perhaps not quite as kindly :razz:)posted screenshots for me and all became clear.

 

So now I know what I'm talking about, I can comment.

 

See below:

 

Pepipoo, FREE motoring advice etc... If you're just browsing and not logged in, this is what you get:

 

Front page:

 

Capture1-1.jpg

 

Capture2-2.jpg

 

and between posts on the forum:

 

3.jpg

 

4.jpg

 

 

 

or see Afterdawn, a forum giving FREE advice on authoring, IT issues etc... If you're just browsing and not logged in, this is what you get:

 

front page:

 

5.jpg

 

forum:

 

6.jpg

 

 

Anyone sees the pattern yet? FREE forums need to be paid for by someone so they can keep on being free to US. SEO, bots and spiders crawl the forum for relevance and then present ads where the words SEEM relevant, even if it's the opposite of what we'd want to see.

 

Incidentally, MSE are going to start doing that too, presumably because the cost of running such a large site is costing Martin lewis a fortune and so he is looking at subsidising those costs. Shall we boycott him too? :rolleyes:

 

Talk of making mountains out of molehills. :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to point out that although I questioned the actions of some of the mods in banning people as a result of the Lowells argument, I in no way offer anything but my support to Bookie and the valuable work that she has done on these forums.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is the cheque in the post ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Feckitall. I'm outa here. But at least it's my choice this time.

 

If Bookie and everybody else supporting the ad campaign can't see that the businesses advertising go against the whole ethos of what CAG USED to be about, there's no way anybody is going to change their minds. If you can accept that some people are going to be hurt by taking folks up on their kind offers, then you are either without conscience, or imagination.

 

Before I go, I'll just remind everyone why I have such a downer on Bookie. Here's a venomous wee post from her earlier on, totally unprovoked. And as I have no reason to believe it was written whilst under the influence of alcohol, is in my very humble, and quite probably Festering, opinion simply inexcusable. I can't even see the point of the post apart from being a deliberate attempt to annoy. In which she succeeded admirably.

 

A bit of a childish," My gang is better than your gang" pettiness? Or something rather more sinister. I do wonder what her hidden agenda was there.

 

Smile? No, laugh my head off. I will have to be careful how I word this:

 

Another site, collecting all the rejects who decide to throw out their dummies for one reason or another, unable of an original thought, self-congratulating and backslapping at every newest member, not realising that whenever someone ends there, it's ALWAYS as their last choice (there's a ringing endorsement, not. laugh.gif).

 

These people, arguing they're nothing like the other, larger, better known and oh so much more successful site, then circle and rip the throat out of anyone who dares make the slightest criticism of their precious, thereby much more aggressively and nastily doing exactly what they accused the first site of doing.

 

They have so little membership which hasn't filtered through the first site that they can only recognise one another through using the same nicks and sometimes avatars.

 

It get worse: there is so little to do there that some of them then STILL go to the first site under different guises. Or they go to another site and try to trash the 1st site to a wider public. Well, it must get lonely talking to yourself where they sit, rehashing their bitterness, knowing in their petty little hearts that they had a chance and blew it, out of their own egotism, jealousy, mean behaviours or power trips. It must rankle no end leaving (voluntarily or not) a cruiseship and end up in a raft made of badly fitting branches with a rag saying "help!" in fading pencil at the top. :grin:

 

Still, gives some of us something to laugh at, I suppose. :razz:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Post which, as I pointed out before, named no names. If you feel it was addressed to you and whichever "gang" you feel you belong to, then that is absolutely and purely your outlook. Instead, you chose to go on a mini-trolling campaign as if I were personally responsible for everything that goes on in the forum, rightly or wrongly (but preferable wrongly since you carefully pick your bits) and now throw a tantrum because other people don't like your behaviour and are kind enough to jump to my defence (which is very nice of them and much appreciated, btw).

 

As I said on MSE, which I gather you have been following, I don't like the ads any more than you do, but I am realistic enough to see that in the failure of any other income coming in then the owners have little choice. You don't agree, YOU contact Bankfodder and propose to match the income generated by the ads £ for £ in exchange for pulling out of the Google ads scheme, I can't speak for him, but knowing his previous feelings on the subject, he probably would be quite happy to oblige.

 

if you won't do that and keep on b!tching about it, then instead of being part of the solution, you become part of the problem, as far as I am concerned. You choose to leave? It is your choice too. No doubt you'll be blaming me too for that. :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one will be pleased you are choosing to leave after the extremely rude and distasteful remarks against a person who goes out of her way to help anyone she can. There have been many egotistical people on this site for a number of years now but you take the biscuit. People are allowed their opinion - its is called democracy. Bookie is a breath of fresh air on these forums with her no nonsense approach and I have been grateful for her help on more than one occasion.

 

Byeeeeeee

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. For the first time ever on CAG I've felt that I had to report a post (and I have). I don't care which side of the argument you're on FT, throwing insults around that people would expect in a playground is totally uncalled for. As for Bookie's post, I don't see anything wrong in it as she isn't insulting anyone personally.

Mungy Pup

 

I want to live in a world where chickens are free to cross the road without their intentions being questioned. :razz:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Powerful you have become, the dark side I sense in you.

 

 

 

OMG, thats why I gob choccy xxxx

 

Seriously though yoda try to post on lighthearted threads only unless you genuinely need help on the others otherwise moderators could cagbot you xx

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. For the first time ever on CAG I've felt that I had to report a post (and I have). I don't care which side of the argument you're on FT, throwing insults around that people would expect in a playground is totally uncalled for. As for Bookie's post, I don't see anything wrong in it as she isn't insulting anyone personally.

 

yes MP I agree with you, I was shocked when I read this. I got an angry pm from FT trying to justify his actions, anyhoo he has gone now thank goodness

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...