This site uses cookies Learn More

General Discussion

Annother46
Annother46
14 Dec 2014 01:24

Are you are fed up with Judith Chalmer bringing disrepute to Dawlish?

then why not show your view here

if you would like her ip address barred agree with post

if not disagree

15 Agrees
roberta
roberta
14 Dec 2014 05:29

JC is no worse than certain other posters on here, she speaks her mind which I dont disagree with. I dont always agree with her comments but I think sometimes she likes to have a bit of fun with certain people. How does she bring disrepute to Dawlish? We are supposed to be adults on a public forum , most of us not using our real names and to be honest we could be living anywhere in the www. I think if other people stopped rising to the bait ............

15 Agrees
Dorian
Dorian
14 Dec 2014 09:06

If you're talking about bringing Dawlish into disrepute, look no further than Councillor Margaret Swift.

 

Annother46 - aren't you the one who not long ago made one family's life a misery with your poison pen posts?   

 

15 Agrees
Likeablerat
Likeablerat
14 Dec 2014 09:55

I have always enjoyed reading Judith Chalmers’ posts, and have never felt the need to respond unfavourably. However, on occasions I have genuinely thought that this website has been bought into disrepute by a small number of individuals who have used it as a platform from which to make vile comments about other members. If I mention them by name they will doubtless complain to the webmaster and request that my post is removed. I guess that by now you will know to whom I refer; it is shameful that mature adults can behave in such a vicious manner, perhaps, in their defence, some individuals, through no fault of their own are born with nasty genes.

Hang on in there Judith

13 Agrees
Judith Chalmers
Judith Chalmers
14 Dec 2014 10:14

This post has been removed due to too many reports.

7 Agrees
webmaster
webmaster
14 Dec 2014 11:51

Most IP addresses are not static and are shared by many different unrelated people and devices. Therefore, banning an IP address will only stop someone posting for a few hours or perhaps a day or two at most.

4 Agrees
webmaster
webmaster
14 Dec 2014 12:23

@OLD FART, yes, that's correct.

1 Agree
elvis presley
elvis presley
14 Dec 2014 12:38

Webmaster . a day or two would be a bonus and you did say on the other thread that that was your intention. 

3 Agrees
Judith Chalmers
Judith Chalmers
14 Dec 2014 12:39

This post has been removed due to too many reports.

4 Agrees
SoulofDawlish
SoulofDawlish
14 Dec 2014 12:59

Looks like you've hit a nerve there, OF.

My own view is publish - and be damned. It would appear from the postings above that others are of a similar disposition.

1 Agree
Annother46
Annother46
14 Dec 2014 13:15

Dorian I don't belive my posts were  "poison pen posts?" as you put it  I was simply supporting some other poster regarding the cause of a fire which  misquoted the facts both on this site and on the gofundme site and a buiness site  I do not think is good for Dawlish to be leading people to belive a fire was arson when in fact it isnt and let people know where to find out the facts and because of this  I also voiced my concerns about the spending of public funds on private enterprise

It was requested by the webmaster that the Discussion cease and I followed his request    

 

2 Agrees
burneside
burneside
14 Dec 2014 13:40

Come on likeablerat, put your money where your mouth is, instead of all the inference.  Provide evidence!

Judith Chalmers
Judith Chalmers
14 Dec 2014 13:52

Thanks SoD, I'm glad that you agree that I shouldn't be censored or gagged (cue "hilarious" jokes from Elvis, etc).  

6 Agrees
Likeablerat
Likeablerat
14 Dec 2014 15:05

Burnseside have I by any chance touched a nerve? You'll never make an effective politician with such a thin skin. I now fully understand why you criticise our local councillors from a safe distance.

8 Agrees
burneside
burneside
14 Dec 2014 15:07

So you can't offer any evidence then likeablerat?  It was a very simple request.

3 Agrees
Judith Chalmers
Judith Chalmers
14 Dec 2014 15:32

This post has been removed due to too many reports.

7 Agrees
Judith Chalmers
Judith Chalmers
14 Dec 2014 15:42

This post has been removed due to too many reports.

5 Agrees
Judith Chalmers
Judith Chalmers
14 Dec 2014 15:55

This post has been removed due to too many reports.

4 Agrees
roberta
roberta
14 Dec 2014 15:55

not that JC needs it but I think you all need to get off her back, your all bordering on cyber bullying, the reporting of her posts are nonsense save the reports for more serious matters

11 Agrees
SoulofDawlish
SoulofDawlish
14 Dec 2014 17:36

Not so fast, JC.

While I am a supporter of free speech, I find the sniping and unfair criticism levelled on this website at unpaid public servants, quite reprehensible. When such behaviour is carried out from beneath a cloak of anonymity, I consider it also cowardly.

Bravo to those public figures in Dawlish who post here under their own names - they alone are prepared to stand and be counted. It is a model others may wish to follow.

6 Agrees
Likeablerat
Likeablerat
14 Dec 2014 17:55

Presumably your 'Bravo' embraces the public figure who has ruthlessly and relentlessly attacked other public figures?

 

11 Agrees
Judith Chalmers
Judith Chalmers
14 Dec 2014 18:19

This post has been removed due to too many reports.

9 Agrees
Mcjrpc
Mcjrpc
14 Dec 2014 19:23
I'm thinking Annother46's rather grandiose 'let the public decide' hasn't resulted in the landslide victory he/she expected.   That's because decent people don't like lynch mobs.
 
8 Agrees
SoulofDawlish
SoulofDawlish
14 Dec 2014 20:20

Actually JC, it was your sidekick Dorian that I had more in mind when I remarked about unfair criticism. Still, if the cap fits...

4 Agrees
Judith Chalmers
Judith Chalmers
14 Dec 2014 20:47

This post has been removed due to too many reports.

4 Agrees
Annother46
Annother46
14 Dec 2014 22:37

grandiose

 
[gran-dee-ohs]
  • Synonyms
  • Examples
  • Word Origin
adjective
1.
affectedly grand or important; pompous:
grandiose words.
2.
more complicated or elaborate than necessary; overblown:
a grandiose scheme.
3.
grand in an imposing or impressive way.
4.
Psychiatry. having an exaggerated belief in one's importance, sometimes reaching delusional proportions, and occurring as a common symptom of mental illnesses, as manic disorder.
 
Mcjrpc for your information I don't think I have posed as being over important in fact I didnt voice my thoughts on the first post of this thread I didnt make it complicated or elaborate 
I asked one question and I would agree that there has been no landslide but it is clear that most people that have posted or agreed today are fed-up with J C to the point so many have reported one of her posts has been hidden and the thread by old fart  has been closed by the webmaster
 
 The webmaster has explained why there is no point in barring an IP address so I will try to think about
 
4.
Psychiatry. having an exaggerated belief in one's importance, sometimes reaching delusional proportions, and occurring as a common symptom of mental illnesses, as manic disorder.
 

When reading posts from J C I have no more to say on this

Likeablerat
Likeablerat
14 Dec 2014 22:55

Another 46.

I think there are quite distinct similarities that you appear to have in common with another member, you both use the same terminology, the other member I am referring to has been much maligned of late and is doubtless very ashamed.

MMMmmmmmmmm?

6 Agrees
Judith Chalmers
Judith Chalmers
14 Dec 2014 22:56

This post has been removed due to too many reports.

6 Agrees
wilfordlad
wilfordlad
15 Dec 2014 00:10

 

All of you for gods sake GROW UP

11 Agrees
Judith Chalmers
Judith Chalmers
15 Dec 2014 09:33

This post has been removed due to too many reports.

1 Agree
Judith Chalmers
Judith Chalmers
15 Dec 2014 22:38

This post has been removed due to too many reports.

1 Agree
j0c123
j0c123
15 Dec 2014 22:59

image

1 Agree
Mcjrpc
Mcjrpc
15 Dec 2014 23:11

Let it go JC, you survived the public vote. You'll keep people onside if you don't stir it up.   

2 Agrees
Carer
Carer
16 Dec 2014 07:42

Sorry JC but you are the first one to call someone a racist, homophobe etc. etc. etc. especially if someone disagrees with you or they write something that you disagree with, but when someone turns the tables on you, you don't like it.

 

Take what you dish out.

 

End Of.

10 Agrees
Dorian
Dorian
16 Dec 2014 10:33
2 Agrees
Judith Chalmers
Judith Chalmers
16 Dec 2014 11:25

This post has been removed due to too many reports.

2 Agrees
burneside
burneside
16 Dec 2014 14:29

How ironic that Dorian should be highlighting homophobia, when he/she has previously posted something which could be described as homophobic innuendo:

 
Dorian
18 Nov 2014 00:16

Oh don't worry Emopitt, normal people know what the normal route into Paddington is.   These folk are queer. 

 

2 Agrees
Mcjrpc
Mcjrpc
16 Dec 2014 15:28

Scraping the barrel there Burneside! 

5 Agrees
Judith Chalmers
Judith Chalmers
16 Dec 2014 15:31

This thread has certainly highlighted that there's nowt as queer as folk. As you well know Burneside, "queer" in this context has nothing to do with the vile homophobia exhibited by Carer.  I hope my sidekick doesn't mind me responding on his/her behalf. 

3 Agrees
burneside
burneside
16 Dec 2014 15:47

Dorian's post stinks of homophobia to me.  

1 Agree
Emopitt
Emopitt
16 Dec 2014 15:55

I think your nose must be too near your backside Burneside.  The meaning was quite clear to me and I'm guessing everyone else.  

4 Agrees
Likeablerat
Likeablerat
16 Dec 2014 15:59

On the 14th I became suspicious about the similarities of terminology and style used by Annother 46 and deduced that Annother 46 was possibly a clone of a regular poster who has apparently become somewhat distant of late.

 Yesterday I received a private message from ‘Eugmauran’;  the message advised that Eugmauran and Annother 46 were one of the same?

Yet another clone? how odd? 

2 Agrees
michaelclayson
michaelclayson
16 Dec 2014 16:16

Please everyone, this is going too far.

 

That was an old message from Carer and since then he has written many polite and encouraging messages to me.  You all know that Robert Vickery and I are partners, and I am more than happy to think that Carer's opinions have changed over the past couple of years.

 

I do think that queer is an ugly word best consigned to history, whether intended to be used to signify strange or homosexual.

There are so many better ways to express opinions. 

 

I know this is a confusing issue as many gay people like to "reclaim the language" and describe themselves as queers or fags in an ironic sense.  Just to be clear that I personally would be very offended if anyone called me by either word.

 

Now please can we discuss something else? 

 

 

 

14 Agrees
roberta
roberta
16 Dec 2014 16:27

I agree Michael and think quite a few of us have become enlightened over the years

3 Agrees
Likeablerat
Likeablerat
16 Dec 2014 16:43

Have just received this from Annother 46.

From:
To:
16 Dec 2014 16:15

If you do not delete your last message I will report you to the Police and persue through the courts

 

roberta
roberta
16 Dec 2014 16:52

This is really going too far now

3 Agrees
Judith Chalmers
Judith Chalmers
16 Dec 2014 18:33

One thing's for sure, nobody would want to be a clone of me!

 

I would love to hear a recording of the above conversation with the police!  

"Hello officer, I wish to report a pseudonym for claiming that my pseudonym is not my only pseudonym and that I also have another pseudonym. I demand that you arrest that pseudonym now!"

"If I may take some details please. Your name, first of all."

"Which one?"

"Good evening sir..."

2 Agrees
Carer
Carer
16 Dec 2014 18:45

@ Michael.

 

Thank you for your support.

Have a great Christmas.

3 Agrees
Lynne
Lynne
16 Dec 2014 19:23

Oh JC that is sooooo funny. I burst out laughing when I first read it and everytime I read it I still do.     

6 Agrees
Comment Please sign in or sign up to post