Homes dilemma (From York Press)

Jezreel wrote:
Well Hugo, they would fit better if you spelt them right

Jezreel wrote:
Matthew writes these letters and then gets his mates to utilise their own address so it does not look like a one man band. He then follows up with online mailings under a variety of names. The Scarlet Pimp is one such. It's just a little disingenuous and I find the self praise cringemakingly embarassing. However theres nothing new about people trying to feather their own nests

jimmy120883 wrote:
I would like to know the views of Scarlet Pimpernel on todays story in the press about the Germany Beck site since he hasn't posted on it yet.

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:

jimmy120883 wrote:
I would like to know the views of Scarlet Pimpernel on todays story in the press about the Germany Beck site since he hasn't posted on it yet.

My view ? Here it is......

Lib-Dem councillor making mischief, and doesn't listen, or take in the detail of the housebuilder's proposals to address the flooding issue.

jimmy120883 wrote:

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:

jimmy120883 wrote:
I would like to know the views of Scarlet Pimpernel on todays story in the press about the Germany Beck site since he hasn't posted on it yet.

My view ? Here it is......

Lib-Dem councillor making mischief, and doesn't listen, or take in the detail of the housebuilder's proposals to address the flooding issue.

Can you elaborate on the house builders proposal to address the flooding issue for us that don't know?

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:

Jezreel wrote: Well Hugo, they would fit better if you spelt them right

Says you, who abbreviates my tag to 'PIMP' in a lame attempt to make me look leud, when all you do is make yourself look bitter and twisted !

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:

Jezreel wrote: Matthew writes these letters and then gets his mates to utilise their own address so it does not look like a one man band. He then follows up with online mailings under a variety of names. The Scarlet Pimp is one such. It's just a little disingenuous and I find the self praise cringemakingly embarassing. However theres nothing new about people trying to feather their own nests

You talk rubbish. I am not Matthew Laverack, neither is Hugohackenbush, mickrick, Ichabod, meme, or numerous others who disagree with you and your like. Matthew Laverack isn't a one-man band, he's part of a growing number of like-minded individuals who disagree with the rank ineptitude of the council and the ramblings of their miserable left-wing supporters, like you.

last of the mandms wrote:

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:

Jezreel wrote: Matthew writes these letters and then gets his mates to utilise their own address so it does not look like a one man band. He then follows up with online mailings under a variety of names. The Scarlet Pimp is one such. It's just a little disingenuous and I find the self praise cringemakingly embarassing. However theres nothing new about people trying to feather their own nests

You talk rubbish. I am not Matthew Laverack, neither is Hugohackenbush, mickrick, Ichabod, meme, or numerous others who disagree with you and your like. Matthew Laverack isn't a one-man band, he's part of a growing number of like-minded individuals who disagree with the rank ineptitude of the council and the ramblings of their miserable left-wing supporters, like you.

In good detective stories suspects are often trapped by a slip of the tongue, refering to someone in the past tense, mentioning a fact they should not know are the most common but there are of course endless variations on the same theme. So I put it to you Mi'lud that when The scarlet pimpernel makes denials as to his real identity and then adds the names of several other anonymous individuals to the list of those who are not Matthew Laverack I smell a rodent. Perhaps in the interest of honesty and clarity they should all post as Spartacus in future. Members of The Jury it over to you.

last of the mandms wrote:
I merely pointed out that you, who I am sure is not Mathew Laverack (his English and grammar is vastly superior to yours) seems very sure who else is not he either.

Buzz Light-year wrote:
Pimp - there's only one bitter band of brothers in action round here. Not everyone who takes you to task on your stylings deserves to have their politics presumed and be called childish names. Show some decorum for once, eh.

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:

last of the mandms wrote:
I merely pointed out that you, who I am sure is not Mathew Laverack (his English and grammar is vastly superior to yours) seems very sure who else is not he either.

Good for you, Columbo.

I know Matthew, and many of the other posters, that's how I know they are all different individuals.

You're right about one thing; Matthew's far more gifted than mere plebs, like me and you.

last of the mandms wrote:

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:

last of the mandms wrote: I merely pointed out that you, who I am sure is not Mathew Laverack (his English and grammar is vastly superior to yours) seems very sure who else is not he either.

Good for you, Columbo. I know Matthew, and many of the other posters, that's how I know they are all different individuals. You're right about one thing; Matthew's far more gifted than mere plebs, like me and you.

Ah thanks for the explanation one minor problem I also know Mathew and sadly as they say "Loose lips sink quips" in vino veritas.

last of the mandms wrote:
Rather arrogant to assume I am refering to your inability to keep quiet there Bro.I was referrring to our mutual Mat(e).

last of the mandms wrote:
Ever the pedant I wonder if you could explain how I am wasting your time there Sparty? After all you could just ignore me and not commen. Touched a nerve by any chance?

desmond tiblets wrote:
What do the labour council actually do for any hard working person from York.what do they actually bring to the table.It really is starting to baffle me.How the hell did they get voted in?

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:

last of the mandms wrote:
Ever the pedant I wonder if you could explain how I am wasting your time there Sparty? After all you could just ignore me and not commen. Touched a nerve by any chance?

How about you not commenting on mine and others comments, unless you have something relevant to contribute ?

Your tactics are to cause distractions, from the valid criticism of the council's Labour leadership's failures on housing. You offer no defence, because basically, there isn't one !

last of the mandms wrote:

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:

last of the mandms wrote:
Ever the pedant I wonder if you could explain how I am wasting your time there Sparty? After all you could just ignore me and not commen. Touched a nerve by any chance?

How about you not commenting on mine and others comments, unless you have something relevant to contribute ?

Your tactics are to cause distractions, from the valid criticism of the council's Labour leadership's failures on housing. You offer no defence, because basically, there isn't one !

I merely asked you explain how you were so sure who wasn't M. Laverack and you responded.If you you regarded this original question as unworthy of reply why did you bother to post a comment? Spartacus it's over to you.

last of the mandms wrote:
I don't accept raising the point that a series of comments that purport to originate from a variety of individuals may be from one source is irrelevant. It is the differance between an individual agenda and a popular movement.

Jezreel wrote:

last of the mandms wrote: I don't accept raising the point that a series of comments that purport to originate from a variety of individuals may be from one source is irrelevant. It is the differance between an individual agenda and a popular movement.

Absolutely right. The reason I go after Matthew/Pimp is the dishonesty of using access to the free media, plus multiple identities, to pretend that there is a popular concern about the councils housing policy. In reality it is all about one or two individuals promoting their own narrow business agenda.

Jezreel wrote:
Matthew says "I don't have the eloquence of Matthew." How can he write this embarassing tosh about himself without cringing? The self deception that believes the lie

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:

Jezreel wrote:
Matthew says "I don't have the eloquence of Matthew." How can he write this embarassing tosh about himself without cringing? The self deception that believes the lie

Calling me a liar is unacceptable.

You have gone too far with this. I have tried to convince you that I am not who you think I am, but, you persist in these personal attacks/accusations, so I have no choice than to report you to the moderator, who will decide if your behaviour (constant harrassment) has breached site rules.

Jezreel wrote:

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:

Jezreel wrote: Matthew says "I don't have the eloquence of Matthew." How can he write this embarassing tosh about himself without cringing? The self deception that believes the lie

Calling me a liar is unacceptable. You have gone too far with this. I have tried to convince you that I am not who you think I am, but, you persist in these personal attacks/accusations, so I have no choice than to report you to the moderator, who will decide if your behaviour (constant harrassment) has breached site rules.

This is ridiculous. Re-read what I wrote I was referring to Matthew, by name. You say you are not Matthew, so how could I possibly be calling you a liar? Not a bad try though, several out of ten for imagination

Jezreel wrote:
Matthew, This is getting into bizarre territory. You want to get me banned for accusing you of being Matthew. However you are always accusing me of being Liz Edge, and sometimes Dave Horton.
Am I not entitled to take offense?

Why can't I be Tracy Simpson-Laing for a change?

last of the mandms wrote:
Ever the pedant again Spartacus. I haven't accepted that you are not Mathew Laverack,nor have I given any indication that I believe you are a group of individuals. And to be perfectly honest if you are a group of individuals it is pretty obvious that the last thing any of you are doing is acting individualy. I also, note that whenever i have got involved in any of these debates once on the ropes "Faux hurt feelings" is always the internet bullies default position.

Last of the mandms wrote:
"I merely pointed out that you, who I am sure is not Mathew Laverack (his English and grammar is vastly superior to yours) seems very sure who else is not he either.”

last of the mandms wrote:
Ah sarcasm straight over the old head there Sparty was it ?By the way you don't know who I am whats next "I know where you live". I doubt you know one single fact about who I am. Go on Sparty publish and be dammed.

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:
Bust light bulb, If I'm the reason it's (York council's entrenched policy failure on housing) is going nowhere, then those who are responsible for it, have a very valid excuse, don't they ? They are as spiteful, prejudiced and out of touch as you, **** and madmandms. Acting the **** is your artform, matey. Apart from stalking me, and our gang, do you actually contribute anything of any value to society ?

Buzz Light-year wrote:
Reporting and having posts removed is scraping, Pimp.
It's never going to balance being banned from this site at least three times, the last time not just you but "the whole gang".

Jezreel can be equally inappropriate but that point about a minority hijacking the free press to promote their agenda, that's valid.

You repeatedly spam these pages with your one message in different words, post your schtick on unrelated articles ad nauseam, steamroll anyone who even raises the slightest debate, glibly dish out the abuse while using the classic bully/troll tactic of "Oh I'm so hurt, I'm only reacting cos you started it, you naughty people", roll out the childish nicknames and demonisation enough to make Alistair Campbell look like a schoolboy amateur and a quick search of the site will show anyone it's been the norm for years.

At its heart, your campaign may or may not be a just cause but you're winning the battle about as much as you're winning hearts and minds here - no matter how many times you have it pointed out, you still carry on acting the ****.

What if it's best left to the eloquent letter-writer? What if you're the very reason it's going nowhere? Maybe every time a valid point is made on the letters page, along you come in the comments to turn everyone against it?

Actually that would be well funny if you really were the big ML, a kind of Jekyll and Hyde story, an anti-symbiosis :D

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:
Well said Barry ! Please be assured that there are many supporters of Matthew Laverack, and he is not alone in his campaign against York Council's discriminatory and punitive housing policies.

Buzz Light-year wrote:

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote: Well said Barry ! Please be assured that there are many supporters of Matthew Laverack, and he is not alone in his campaign against York Council's discriminatory and punitive housing policies.

Oh boy that's funny! What next? Ashley Cole saying "Yes, well said FA! Don't listen to those sweary twitter users"? Andrew Mitchell donating to the Met Police Benevolent Fund with the message "Don't let them push you around"?

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:
In our dreams, hey ?

Buzz Light-year wrote:

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote: In our dreams, hey ?

Just yours.

Jezreel wrote:
Tories criticise Labour council. Labour council criticises tories. Ho hum! Please send the link so we can examine the article for selective quotations

Jezreel wrote:
Don't bother, I have found the link. The article is from Inside Housing, 10th October issue. Google Poor planning authorities face 'special measures' As I thought, we are in the land of the pork pie. The first two quotes are nothing to do with York Council or any other council for that matter. They are the general musings ot the Tory minister. The only reference to York is the final one which is a rebuke because our council is not doing what Tory minister wants them to do. And why should they? If the people of York wanted tory policies they would vote for a Tory MP and a Tory council. Fortunately we are blessed with better sense.

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:

Buzz Light-year wrote:

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote: In our dreams, hey ?

Just yours.

So pleased that you agree that James Alexander puts himself, his CV, and the Labour party, before York and the interests of it's residents. All peas in a pod - the bitter, selfish, left wing brotherhood !

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:

Jezreel wrote:
Don't bother, I have found the link. The article is from Inside Housing, 10th October issue. Google Poor planning authorities face 'special measures' As I thought, we are in the land of the pork pie. The first two quotes are nothing to do with York Council or any other council for that matter. They are the general musings ot the Tory minister. The only reference to York is the final one which is a rebuke because our council is not doing what Tory minister wants them to do. And why should they? If the people of York wanted tory policies they would vote for a Tory MP and a Tory council. Fortunately we are blessed with better sense.

The LDF was John Prescott's idea and introduced by the Labour Government.

York' Core Strategy for the LDF took eight years to produce, at an estimated costy of £1.1m, which many think was massively underestimated, by the way. Then when the planning inspector found it not fit for purpose and delayed the EIP stage for six-months for York to get it's house in order, what did York do ? They gave a planning consent that invalidated it and withdrew it. They are now spending another two years drawing up another Local Plan at taxpayers expense. The criticism from Nick Boles is long overdue. York Council have flown under the radar with their avoidance tactics for 40 years, and are a disgrace.

Jezreel is a disgrace to portray this as party politics, it is not. York Council failed to put in place their LDF which was required by the Labour government, and just because they have a Labour MP and a Labour council, they should not escape criticism and punishment anly longer !,

Jezreel wrote:
Don't bother, I have found the link. The article is from Inside Housing, 10th October issue. Google Poor planning authorities face 'special measures'

As I thought, we are in the land of the pork pie.

The first two quotes are nothing to do with York Council or any other council for that matter. They are the general musings ot the Tory minister.
The only reference to York is the final one which is a rebuke because our council is not doing what Tory minister wants them to do.

And why should they?

If the people of York wanted tory policies they would vote for a Tory MP and a Tory council.
Fortunately we are blessed with better sense.

Mr Boles cited the example of York Council, which he said has not had an adopted local plan for 40 years.

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:
Better still, than Jezreel's heads up, see the Inside Housing article where Planning Minister Nick Boles has criticised York Council.

Here's an extract,

‘We don’t believe in local authorities abdicating that responsibility, failing to have a local plan or failing to make decisions in accordance with the local plan.

‘Local authorities have a responsibility to do the job even when that involves difficult decisions.’

Mr Boles cited the example of York Council, which he said has not had an adopted local plan for 40 years.

‘It is not acceptable, what we are going to do is put in place something which we hope will be shot across laggards’ bows,’ he said. ‘You cannot go on taking the mickey and if you do, developers will have the option of going to the Planning Inspectorate direct.’

Jezreel wrote:

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote: Better still, than Jezreel's heads up, see the Inside Housing article where Planning Minister Nick Boles has criticised York Council. Here's an extract, ‘We don’t believe in local authorities abdicating that responsibility, failing to have a local plan or failing to make decisions in accordance with the local plan. ‘Local authorities have a responsibility to do the job even when that involves difficult decisions.’ Mr Boles cited the example of York Council, which he said has not had an adopted local plan for 40 years. ‘It is not acceptable, what we are going to do is put in place something which we hope will be shot across laggards’ bows,’ he said. ‘You cannot go on taking the mickey and if you do, developers will have the option of going to the Planning Inspectorate direct.’

Yes my little diddums, that bit is true. The same can't be said for everything from the start down to line 8 (see above) which you claim to be an extracted from where Boles is speaking about York. But he's not is he? This is just him thinking aloud. He never mentions York until later. You are trying to pull the wool over peoples eyes. Is this tactics of the upstanding knight in shining armour (with room for a paunch) who is going to save York from the labour demon? Thin and shabby stuff. And I used to think the the best maker of porky pies was Nearys.