General Discussion

I received this email from Carol Vorderman today. Who'd have thought it?

She's a massive Lib Dem these days right?

Or does she just want the Tories out and therefore behind 'tactical' voting?

She's telling me to tactically vote by going to Stop the Tories (see link below) and typing in my postcode to see who to vote for tactically to get rid of the Tory MP Morris.

And guess who's ahead here in our Constituency? It's not the Lib Dems. It's Labour.

So what on earth is that other massive Lib Dem Wrigley banging on and on about? Same goes for @Lynne????

It seems Wrigley is saying something very different to well known Lib Dem Carol Vorderman.

Who would you trust when it comes to Maths? Vorderman or Wrigley?

The Countdown to July 4th is on!

From; carol vorderman. The Movement Forward   hello@forwarddemocracy.com

If you're one of the 180,000 people already signed up for our movement, this won't come as a surprise. Now is the time to spread the word.

We DON'T have big backers and we need to work together with people power to get the tactically voting message out there.

Please send this to other people you know. Together we are stronger. Tactical voting is easy: Enter your postcode at StopTheTories.Vote which took me to this link; https://stopthetories.vote/?link_id=2&can_id=e233acccf543474a4fc8827a79469143&source=email-how-to-vote-anti-tory&email_referrer=email_2361488&email_subject=how-to-vote-anti-tory

Our system will check which boundary you are within and then reveal what the data is currently telling us about the candidate best placed to stop your local Tory.

Create a plan to vote, we have an election checklist for that Actually vote on July 4th! Find out your local tactical vote We know you know this but the media keeps discussing tactical voting as if it's complicated and requires you doing your own research. We have made it easy and convenient for you and anyone else feeling furious that some of these Tories will retain power and keep doing what their donors want. Let's vote together to get our country back from billionaires, toffs, people who wail about "scrotes & scroungers" and the ideology of secretly funded think tanks. On that note, watch the latest Led by Donkeys video voiced by Carol Vorderman

Thank you Carol

Vorderman is right - our electoral system isn't fit for purpose, but I still wouldn't vote Labour or Lib Dem to get rid of the Tories.

In our area Reform UK, Heritage and the Tories are more likely to vote tactically to stop Lib Dem Wrigley or Labour.

None of the polls reflect local factors. None include the South Devon Alliance. They're flawed.

So if you believe  these polls are  flawed  why are you posting their recommendations?

@Lynne Pretty obviously to undermine any flawed tactical voting arguments for voting Lib Dem in this Constituency. Best to be transparent and open, I don't want the electorate misled.

But I bet you'll post any that advocate voting Labour rather than Lib Dem. 

@Lynne Why would I post anything that supports Lib Dem Wrigley? I've got a moral compass.

Ah! So you admit it at last. What you are totally about is being anti the Lib Dem candidate. Nothing to do at all as to which party (Lib Dems or Labour ) has the best chance of beating the Conservative candidate.

@Lynne Admit what? Why am I anti-Lib Dem? Have you not read anything I've written about the Lib Dems in local and national government? About how they are no better than the Tories, the LGO report last year, the Lib Dem run Council breaching an opposition Cllrs human rights? Lib Dem Gary Taylor assualting an SDA Cllr Liam Mullone simply because Liam Mullone was exposing malpractice, attempts by Planning to defraud the public - Taylor was and still is Planning Officer, You don't mind  violent misconduct then? Then there's the fact Council staff are bullied, harrassed, intimidated by Cllrs under Wrigley's leadership, the Queen St traders in Newton Abbot and the negative impact on their livelihoods, etc, etc, etc..need I go on?

There's a very strong case against the Lib Dems. I'm opposed to Wrigley and the Lib Dems because I actually care what happens to people in this District. the same reason I want Morris out and why I oppose the Tories.

I know where you stand. I'm not communicating with you specifically, but I believe you're taking it all personally.

Why all the effort, if you believe hardly anyone comes on this site?

You just don't get it do you?

Wrigley and the Lib Dems in our District are as bad as the Tories. He's actually worse and as Leader he should take responsibility, the bucks stops with him. Plus I strongly object to Davey over the PO scandal and also the coalition years. Voting out Anne-Marie Morris and replacing her with Wrigley is just screwed up thinking.

You strongly object to the Tories, you write of expressing your anti-Tory sentiment. I don't have a problem with that, I want the Tories out too.. Yet nor should you take issue with another person expressing their anti-Lib dem, anti-Labour or anti-Reform UK feelings or of any other party.

Now back off. I can vote for who I like and I can voice my opposition about whichever party and candidate I like. There's still freedom of speech (for now at least).

I have written about many valid reasons for opposing Wrigley and the Lib Dems, none of which you have ever given a counter-argument for anyone to read.

If you don't like reading different perspectives, especially those you disagree with or so vehemntly object to then consider your options, that's your problem, not mine.

If you continue in the same vain I will report you.

It's not me that's putting in such an effort though is it?  I am not the one that has started various threads over the past few weeks all on  on a pro SDA anti Lib Dem theme and with so many of your posts being oh sooh so very l-o-n-g.

Seems to me that it is you who doesn't like reading different perspectives.

Report me about what exactly?

@webmaster can you tell me please what I am in breach of?

As I type this there will be 9 posts with78 recorded views. I believe it to be the case that each time this thread is looked at/posted on it is clocked up as another view even if it is the same persons doing the viewings/postings @webmaster is that correct?  

So the reason I still post on here is very simple - to give an alternative point of view to your own. (Even if it is a quite low number of persons who read the threads).

I note that you tell me to "Now back off. I can vote for who I like and I can voice my opposition about whichever party and candidate I like. There's still freedom of speech (for now at least)".

Well,I could say exactly the same to you.

Must go now -seems reponding with long answers might be catching.

@Lynne you aren't in breach of anything, and yes, you are right about views. It would be useful to have that metric but it isn't easily obtainable at the moment.

But from the daily overall page views (summarised below for the last 3 days), the ratio of views to users is around 6 if that helps.

Note: my user, admin users and search engine bots are excluded from the statistics.

@Lynne I reported you for Irrelevance, your comment was nothing to do with the topic. You have no intention in engaging in any discussion about the topic in the title namely Carol Vorderman being the face of tactical voting site Stop The Tories and how that site favours Labour now locally.

You've not given an alternative view to the many reasons I have written about for not voting for Lib Dem Wrigley and also the Lib Dem party itself anywhere on this website, you have not given one counter-argument apart from tactical voting. Now you tell me I admit what exactly? And now you're telling me what I'm 'totally about'? Who the hell do you think you are? It is not relevant to the thread. If that is what is so important to you I suggest you start a new thread of your own on that topic and then see how that goes. That's why I'd like you to back off.

So let me turn this back on you; If you were only voting tactically you wouldn’t be so personally committed to defending a politician and a party who I and many others see as severely flawed and a candidate so ill suited to being a public representative based on the evidence before us. I don’t believe you are just a tactical voter and I doubt others believe it either. Therefore I can only assume that you are either a Lib Dem party member or a personal friend of Wrigley or perhaps even a relation. And I really don't care. However political parties do have people to do exactly what you're doing when any opposition voices are vocal and I've every right to call you out and make a complaint for irrelevance, it borders on trolling. It also comes a few weeks after a complaint made by Lib Dem Wrigley himself (which he could not substantiate either) - I see both as attempts to intimidate and control the narrative.

@TRB, just because you don't like what Lynne has to say doesn't mean her comments are irrelevant. She has every right to comment here as it is a public forum.

So which is it? Do you want Lynne to back off or do you want her to answer the question you just asked her after telling her to back off?

Also, please do not tell other users to back off. That is not acceptable on here.

@Webmaster Which question are you referring to?

Other people on this website have written far worse than 'back off'.

I would've preferred as Webmaster, if you had replied to my message privately rather than on this thread.

I asked the webmaster publicly on this thread to adjudicate.

Thank you webmaster for doing so. 

@TRB, the final paragraph. It's not a question as such, but it is addressed to Lynne.

@Webmaster That's not a question and I wasn't awaiting any response. So in answer to your question it's clearly the former. I have no intention of continuing any communication with @Lynne or on any matter that isn't relevant to the thread subject with anyone else.

@TRB, when you address someone they have a right to respond.

Also, as this is a public forum, anyone can respond to your posts, and you don't get to choose who. If you want a restricted discussion where you can choose who posts, you can create a group. This site still has this functionality.

@Webmaster

"when you address someone they have a right to respond" I have never disputed this.

"Also, as this is a public forum, anyone can respond to your posts, and you don't get to choose who." Again I have never disputed this.

"If you want a restricted discussion where you can choose who posts, you can create a group. This site still has this functionality.

The opposite is true, I'd like an open discussion with contributors who are willing to engage in the thread subject and not subvert it, otherwise what is the point in having rules relating to irrelevance?

@TRB, If what Lynne posted was irrelevant, it wouldn't have needed a two-paragraph response.

@Webmaster, irrelevant to the subject thread. Are there rules concerning the length of posts now?

@TRB, I never said there were rules about the length of posts.

The fact that you had to post 2 paragraphs in response to Lynne's post shows what she wrote was clearly relevant.

@Webmaster I disagree. It was not relevant to the thread subject and the same applies to her other posts elsewhere, where rather than engage in discussion, she chooses to defend the Lib Dem party and their election candidate no matter what, obstructing open debate - and it seems she is taking it personally and making it about me personally. Which is strange given she claims not to be a Lib Dem supporter. I've never encountered any die-hard political party activist as emotionally charged and as deeply invested in in a party and candidate as this person. There's more to it than mere tactical voting.

My two paragraphs represent my right to respond to her personal attacks and general rudeness and bitchiness toward me over many weeks as well as her attempts to subvert open discussion on matters which alarm her, which is controlling behaviour.

I have already stated that; I have no intention of continuing any communication with her or on any matter that isn't relevant to the thread subject with anyone else.

So what outcome are you seeking here @Webmaster?

Are you giving me a public warning because my posts are too lengthy in your opinion? Why is the length of my posts relevant?

@TRM, as I already said, you don't get to decide who can respond to your posts on here because it is a public forum.

If you'd read my last post then you would already know I'm not giving you a public warning about the lengths of your posts.

@Webmaster

"@TRM, as I already said, you don't get to decide who can respond to your posts on here because it is a public forum."

Why are you telling me this again? I already wrote that I have never disputed this, what are you alleging?

"If you'd read my last post then you would already know I'm not giving you a public warning about the lengths of your posts."

Again so what outcome are you seeking here?

You chose to deal with my complaint about irrelevance here in a public forum on the request of the person I made the complaint about. It seems Over The Top in my opinion. as well as biased.

Are you simply making an example of me in public because you also object to what I've written about local politics and the General Election campaign?

@TRB 

As someone who is consistently in agreement with a lot of the posts you have raised i believe you are now taking this too personal.Lynne has every right to respond OR not to questions about her beliefs regarding political parties or candidates. As the saying goes " I dont like what you say but will defend your right to say it."  Time for cool heads.......lets try and keep it civil.

@1263 Thanks I appreciate your comment. I have never disputed that Lynne or anyone else doesn't have every right to respond  or not. That's not the issue here.

Lets be honest both Lynne and I are attempting to exert some influence on however many people view Dawlish.com in the run in to the election. I feel I am doing it from a position of raising awareness about certain reports, videos, parties, candidates, tactics that are all in the public domain. I have never claimed to be neutral and I will be voting SDA in the election. I have however also shared information about Volt UK and a list candidates and Tactical voting validity and faults, polls, etc and I have presented a strong argument based on evidence before us that Wrigley and the Liib dems are not the antidote to Anne-marie Morris and the Tories. This is a view shared by many in our areas. I'm not writing anything new, but I am possibly making some people aware of it for the first time. And that is what Lynne objects to. I'll of course make a few enemies along the way. This is one example.

I object to Lynne going for the player and not the ball to use a footballing analogy, in that she does not engage in the actual converstion but tries to subvert it or denigrate it something petty and childish in order to be obstructive. I believe this to defend Wrigley and the Lib Dems, a candidate and party who are indefensible because in truth she cannot defend his actions and those of his party and their Tory allies in local government. A tactical voter simply would not be so emotionally charged and invested in one particular party. Of course she may be friends or a relative of Wrigley or of some other Lib Dem... who knows?

I have written elsewhere about people who comment on posts on the discussion section, but those comments aren't related to the discussion subject itself, they are irrelevant comments, or personal, vindictive, petty, etc. I see this time and time again. So my complaint relates to irrelevance in the first instance, why have rules about this if they're not applicable?

I have never come across anyone who is so emotionally invested in a candidate and a party she claims not to be a member of, so I assume she is a Lib dem member and or a friend of Wrigley or some other Lib Dem Cllr.

And there's nothing wrong with that. I'd welcome a discussion where she is willing to converse about Queen St or the LGO report, Gary taylor and the assault - which I've referred to time and time again but she is unable/unwilling to do so. Her tactic is just to be a nuisance and to obstruct/undermine, obsessively looking for faults to expolit. I hope the Lib dems appreciate her tenacity. 

There is a lot riding on this election. I know people in Queen St whose takings are down by up to 70%, I know  Council workers have to work under  the impact of all the bullying, intimidation and harassment from Cllrs on staff members in Teignbridge District Council under Wrigley's Leadership. I've met Cllr Daws, I've seen how the breaches of his human rights over a 3 year period at the hands of the Lib Dem run District Council had a toll on him and his family, yet he fought to clear his name and the Council was found guilty. I condemn violence so I object to Cllr Taylor still standing and being on the Executive.

So I have good reason to take all the above including how the Webmaster dealt with a complaint that was simply about irrelevance however I wish. There is no civility in the District Council overseen by Wrigley, it's gone beyond the point where we should all act a certain way based on certain social norms. maybe people in Dawlish are largely unaware of it all, how severe the problems have become and how unsuitable Wrigley is as our MP, not just Morris.

@TRB.   

I suppose a donation to the Wriggley election campaign fund is a non-starter.

@TRB,

1) Lynne's posts are not irrelevant.

2) I'm not giving you a public warning about the lengths of your posts.

I hope this clarifies things for you.

@Webmaster

1) Lynnes posts are not irrelevant. I completely disagree.

2) I'm not giving you a public warning about the lengths of your posts. I hope this clarifies things for you.

I wouldn't acknowledge or accept one anyway if you had, best to be truthful.

But thanks for clarifying.

Are we done?

I don't feel this public and blatant show trial has been beneficial for Dawlish.com. Lynne 'local campaigner' or the Lib Dems - if any sizeable number of people do actually view this site.

@1263 haha no chance, it'd be a waste of money in any case.