"Sort it out yourselves" (PPAG win legal appeal)

[rathbone]

Welcome Miss Moffat. I agree with most of what you said, except you haven't gone back far enough and seen what Porty has been saying about Epykat and others. This is a long running issue.

Just remember the posting guidelines , particularly No 1:
1. Be nice: Personal attacks against forum members will not be tolerated. This includes (but not limited to) attacks on the comments, ideas, language skills, spelling, punctuation, age, gender, sexual orientation, physical appearance, ability/disability, politics and cultural or religious beliefs of other forum members. Your right to freedom of speech has to be balanced with your responsibility not to cause offence. You are free to debate and to disagree, but in a manner that is respectful of the rights and feelings of others.

The rest of us stick scrupulously to them!

[Porty]

You think I've breached that rule in relation to Epykat? Where?

[gillian]

Let's not make this an Epykat/Porty/rathbone thread. We've a school to build.

[Porty]

Valid point.

[rathbone]

I agree Rosa. I’m just sick of all the name-calling.

To answer Porty’s question, and then I’ll stop:

On this thread:

"Epykat ... content to destroy or remove Portobello High School from the heart of our community.... Epykat I assure you It wasn't meant to be funny. You and the above named are content to destroy or remove Portobello High School from the heart of our community - it is a matter of fact and widely recognised to be the truth... I'm not sure whether it's selfishness, ignorance or a combination of the two but it is the truth and I repeat is widely recognised amongst our community." (19 sept)

Back in january when she was complaining about you accusing her of fundraising for PPAG: " I dont believe anyone is suggesting that you didnt know you were doing your bit to delay the school. you're far from daft.....Did you mean to say."you cant just say things without substantiating “Thats got to be the laugh of the millenium....."

However, Epykat gives as good as she gets and is equally to blame. My main concern, however, is the approach you take to others.

Typical is your response to one person who put forward a suggestion in good faith to get the following response: “ I believe that most people, on evaluating your proposal, would describe it as moronic. I'm with them but it doesn't make you an out and out moron, try just a teeny, weanie bit harder. It's within your grasp .... what's Latin for 'moron in an underpass' ?”

That is what I am objecting to when I say that people are being belittled and humiliated by
you and why you have lost my respect.

I was asked by Wangi to substantiate what I was talking about. I referred him to over 25 instances in just one thread and he accepts that “Some may be true, others fair comment (poorly made) and many "vulgar abuse, sarcasm and exaggeration"... And other perhaps defamation.” He will be passing them to you for your comments.

[seashell]

Welcome Miss Moffat. I agree with most of what you said, except you haven't gone back far enough and seen what Porty has been saying about Epykat and others. This is a long running issue.

Be fair, rathbone. MIss Moffat stated exactly which statements of Epykat's she objected too and why. And also said that she is a new poster. You can't expect her to have either the time or inclination to trawl through the archive.

[Scoop]

Welcome Miss Moffat. I agree with most of what you said, except you haven't gone back far enough and seen what Porty has been saying about Epykat and others. This is a long running issue.

Be fair, rathbone. MIss Moffat stated exactly which statements of Epykat's she objected too and why. And also said that she is a new poster. You can't expect her to have either the time or inclination to trawl through the archive.

On the contrary. As a new poster, at the very least Miss Moffat should have familiarised herself fully with what has been said leading up to the comments quotyed. To have made her first post a personal, and very selective attack at another poster is, when not having the courtesy to find out the facts before doing so, at the very best, naive.

[Porty]

Is that it as far as Epykat is concerned Rathbone?

There's only two references to Epykat. Prior to making the "ignorant" statement, I had just attended a meeting, where we were informed that a refurb was out of the question as for one reason the school role would have to reduce to 1000. Which would destroy the 100 years or so history of the school serving Parsons Green to Joppa. The curriculam would be reduced etc. So the idea that the school can be refurbed and remain as is, is ignorant.

I have no idea what you think the problem is with the second issue.

Moronic- if memory serves me correctly, the quote from me was made AFTER some detailed debate. We had established the suggested site (Big W) was smaller than the existing school site, (lets move to a smaller site on the edge of catchment suggested the moron), not in council ownership and not up for sale and on top of those deal breakers, the location is abysmal. And despite all of that, the poster continued to argue how suitable it was. Main reason being it was "blessed" with an underpass.

Moronic was well-justified.

I'm not trying to find a solution for the school, I have one, we all do. After 6 years of observing the blindingly obvious, which also happens to be the truth, I get very,very frustrated by the toxic tactics of the likes of Lashylass and now the Commander. There's been quite a few others.

I do accept that my delivery can be sarcastic and brutal, which no doubt breaches the "nice" guideline.

I console myself with the fact that when I am asked a question, I generally do my best to respond with a substantive answer. I don't resort to simple ignorance, which is common from Epykat, Betty and almost all the PPAG sympathisers who have passed this way.

[little miss moffat]

Welcome Miss Moffat. I agree with most of what you said, except you haven't gone back far enough and seen what Porty has been saying about Epykat and others. This is a long running issue.

I understand Rathbone, I did not have time to go back to the beginning and read all the various posts - there are far too many posts and it would be too time consuming. I would rather spend my time working on a way forward as opposed to reading all the past bickering. I am just happy that you agreed with most of what I said. It was not my intention to start a new debate with regards to who was at fault. I note that it is a long running issue. My point was, that as a new poster, I was put off joining talk porty due to those recent comments. The same could apply to any future "new" posters/members. Surely we want as many people as possible to join the forum with their input. Banter can be a comical way (without offending) when someone disagrees with a suggestion/comment. Anyone new, looking at the site could also be put off with the recent bickering comments, whereas constructive discussions and banter could encourage them to join the forum with their input.

[rathbone]

Moronic was well-justified.... After 6 years of observing the blindingly obvious, which also happens to be the truth.... I do accept that my delivery can be sarcastic and brutal, which no doubt breaches the "nice" guideline... I console myself with the fact that when I am asked a question, I generally do my best to respond with a substantive answer. I don't resort to simple ignorance.

I know there was previous debate, that still does not justify dismissing someone as a moron because you do not agree with them.

You are referring to what you believe is the truth. Not everyone agrees with you that it is. You do not respect thsat they might have a different point of view.

Yes you are often sarcastic and brutal. In my view frequently arrogant and dismissive as well.

Which takes me to the second point re. Epykat. When asked to justify the comments made about her you don't respond with a substantive answer. You dismiss it with a sarcastic comment. Much the same when she challenged you to cite the source of your claim about expert reports on the state of the tower. There has yet to be a substantive response from you on that.

I did say to Rosa that I wouldn't prolong this and hence waste more of people's time. Lets leave it that you have one view about what you are posting. I have a different perception.

[Porty]

Which takes me to the second point re. Epykat. When asked to justify the comments made about her you don't respond with a substantive answer. You dismiss it with a sarcastic comment.

No, no sarcasm, i genuinely don't grasp what the issue is with this. I can't remember the discourse either. We can agree to differ?

Much the same when she challenged you to cite the source of your claim about expert reports on the state of the tower. There has yet to be a substantive response from you on that.

Accepted and I did not claim to always give a substantive answer. The condition reports are in the public domain but I'm not sure how much they would influence Epykat, so I didn't see the point-. Let me explain why:

My reasoning goes back to when the plans for the school on the park were revealed. Epykat applied her experience and expertise and conducted a critical analysis, then donated her interpretation to the audience here at TP.

She focussed on the "open plan" design and all of the negatives she knew of. And was stupefied that a new school for 1400 pupils was being built without a dining hall. - the inference being the designers had made a horse's ass of it and she knew better. A near identical position to the one she is now adopting with her refurbishment idea.

Then Sean, an architect who has worked on the design of numerous schools, pointed out in some detail, why it was not an open plan design and that Epykat had failed to notice the substantial dining hall, at the heart of the school.

So how did Epykat react to the facts?

If my memory is correct, it made not a blind bit of difference to her.

Did she acknowledge that she clearly struggles to fathom a school design, NO. Did she take stock and decide that maybe she wasn't as well equipped to advise others on school design as she thought she was,NO.

Instead Epykat continued putting herself forward as having the know how to advise everyone else that a refurbishment is an option. Does she think we forgot?

I took a decision that condition reports would make no difference to Epykat and I'm afraid track record indicates that I'm not mistaken

[Paxetamor]

I was the one the that was called moron x 2, foolish, stupid and, no doubt, others that I've forgotten. All very brave, hiding behind the anonymity of this forum, for daring to suggest (2nd hand) the Big W site, along with using the golfie as playing fields. I'm still not sure why it was dismissed with such ferocity as it is only 5 minutes walk from one to the other, so surely if one is on the edge of the catchment area then so is the other. I would much prefer my child to cross a road underground via underpasses than to take their chances with Milton Road. I live next to it in Magdalene (I don't know whether that has me tagged as a NIMBY) and I can't believe the lack of concern regarding this. If people think that their children are all still going to go down to Porty for their lunch and that there won't be an increase of children crossing the road to come over to the shops in Magdalene then, I'm afraid, they are mistaken . We have a fantastic baker, an excellent chippy and several convenience stores.
Another reason that was cited was that it was in private ownership. The owners have been knocked back for a retail license again and I don't think it's unreasonable to think that they would want to sell it. I have no proof, evidence or anything else you apparently need to express an idea (even 2nd hand ones) on here if you're not on the school on the park side, but I did it anyway, I didn't expect to be called names because of it.
As a lot of us have now been outed on this forum, I invite any of them to say what they've got to say and call me whatever they wish to my face, much more civilized, much less cowardly.

[Porty]

I was the one the that was called moron x 2, foolish, stupid and, no doubt, others that I've forgotten. All very brave, hiding behind the anonymity of this forum, for daring to suggest (2nd hand) the Big W site, along with using the golfie as playing fields..

I'm not sure you were called a moron, the idea was called moronic. The main grounds being the Big W site is smaller than the exiisting school site and it is in private ownership. Take a look at the site option consultation report (s) and learn what it says about sites that are in private ownership.

Serious question; Why would we want to move the school (the huge school on a small space) from the heart of the catchment to a smaller site on the edge of catchment?

Maybe it's me that's being moronic.

The word that sprung to my mind was moronic, so i said it. Had the word been awesome, I would have said that. It is nothing personal.

[Epykat]

I was the one the that was called moron x 2, foolish, stupid and, no doubt, others that I've forgotten.

I hope you're not moaning Pax! I've committed crimes against the community on a par with those of a mass murderer and they will never be forgotten or forgiven apparently.

New posters - you'll be fine on here and made very welcome as long as you're compliant. Welcome Miss Moffat.

(by compliant I mean if you don't disagree with anything pertaining to a school going on a 'park')

[rathbone]

But apart from the above, you came up with a splendid idea.

Can't you, just for once, cut out the sarcasm, stop putting people down and just make the point without the nastiness?

And Porty, the quote I gave was cut and pasted from your post of 22 April : “ I believe that most people, on evaluating your proposal, would describe it as moronic. I'm with them but it doesn't make you an out and out moron, try just a teeny, weanie bit harder. It's within your grasp .... what's Latin for 'moron in an underpass' ?”

I think that's two uses of moron and one of moronic.

It might not be personal to you, but it is to the person on the receiving end.

[seanie]

FFS, can this not be taken elsewhere?

[Epykat]

FFS, can this not be taken elsewhere?

Depends if the elsewhere is Common Good or not.....

[gillian]

Yes Wangi, have a "sort it out yourselves" page and leave them all to it.

[seashell]

[quote="rathbone Can't you, just for once, cut out the sarcasm, stop putting people down and just make the point without the nastiness?
[/quote]


People who live in glass houses etc.

And I note you didn't say that to Epykat.

[seashell]

Thank you Epykat.

I think it is important to have people for and against the various ideas. Everyone should be able to post their ideas/views, it's how debates work. It may draw attention to something that has been overlooked. I appreciate some may have covered the various issues many times and become fed up discussing the same thing, but they could just ignore the posts they don't want to respond to. Banter is surely the best option when not agreeing with someone.

In response to Paxetamor, the paperwork (don't know who produced this) at last Fridays meeting said the Big W site was slightly smaller than the existing site so too small, poor location and access, not owned by the Council and would be expensive to acquire. Even if it could be acquired the process would start from scratch, so 4-5 years minimum.

So pretty much the points that I made nad which had bed made before as paxetamor was well aware of and yet rathbone felt the need to slam me while trying to assume a higher moral position.

[gillian]

We use to have this word in our family when our children were VERY young, "stoppiting." Mum he's not stoppiting.......

[Epykat]

Thank you Epykat.

I think it is important to have people for and against the various ideas. Everyone should be able to post their ideas/views, it's how debates work.

You're welcome.

Have you been sent here by Relate?

[rathbone]

People who live in glass houses etc.

Absolutely, and if you go back a few posts you will see that I said I thought Epykat was as bad as Porty.

Last saturday I posted that:
"I am perfectly aware that some people reading this will turn it back on me. Yes, I know my tone is sanctimonious, yes I know that it is hypocritical and yes I am aware of La Rochefoucald’s maxim that : “The surest way to be deceived is to consider oneself cleverer than others.”

What I hope comes over is how profoundly sad I am that I have lost respect for people whose contributions to this site I used to value and that what used to be an inclusive forum where people managed to disagree with each other without being offensive (well, at least not much) has turned into a bear pit where people are afraid to post in case they are savaged."

You might have read it.

Anyway, now that I've made my point I'm retiring to the moral high ground and won't darken this thread again.

[little miss moffat]

Thank you Epykat.


You're welcome.

Have you been sent here by Relate?

Lol, no, it will only be a matter of time before I put my foot in it, unintentionally of course!

[Porty]

As I thought :I didn't actually call them a moron. As for them taking it personally: I can only confirm how I meant it, which was impersonal. How they take it is surely down to them?

If an idea is debated, proved to be moronic beyond any reasonable doubt, and someone continues to suggest it , over and over again. They run the risk of being called Dux.........that's so much nicer.

[Paxetamor]

you came up with a splendid idea.
Thanks Seashell, but, as I already said twice in my post, it wasn't my idea.

[Epykat]

They run the risk of being called Dux.........that's so much nicer.

How about not calling them anything derogatory.........that's so much nicer.

[Porty]

I used to think of you as Annie Hall.

[Epykat]

I used to think of you as Annie Hall.

I take it it's now more Dining Hall?

(supposing that was aimed at me that is................)

[commander114]

I think that the one thing that trolls and bullies have in common is that they want to make others feel as miserable and powerless as they do. Those of us who heard about the bullying, the egg-throwing and the ‘get the champers on’ complacency sympathise with you to an extent. I do sympathise, but only to an extent. It would have been very convenient to take an unspoiled and set-aside parcel of land and build on it. It would have been very convenient to be able to argue that this should be done because the ‘majority’ want it. But the majority are not just the largest group who expressed a preference in what was a small local opinion poll in this matter of local interest.

It was very inconvenient to find that the real majority, the generations of people in this country who helped evolve laws and statutes and systems to protect the small guy and his or her wishes in the longer term had taken the trouble to protect this small parcel of land that seemed so inconsequential and so easy to take for ‘the common good’. The majority are the people who want to allow laws like this, the British and the Scots don’t like bullies. The majority are those who understand that it is sometimes inconvenient to have laws that protect others from those of us who’d prefer to have things our own way all the time. The majority have a balanced view of the world. It’s inconvenient to find that the law wasn’t really on your side in the case of the Golfie. But instead of accepting the position of the real majority you want to change the law while pretending to be the majority or ignore it to justify yourselves. Otherwise you’ll continue to feel more miserable, more sad, more petty and increasingly vindictive.

It was particularly sad to see one of the regular posters on this site being singled out and having an itemised and completely polarised list of reactions to taunting criticised. Rather than accept that there are rules and checks in the adult world it was easier to make a blinkered personal attack. I hasten to add that I’m not referring exclusively to any one person. I don’t think that Epykat deserved to be singled out in the way that he/she was. And this is someone many of you actually know??? Did Epykat deserve to be singled out? Should we construct an unhelpful league table of personal slights one way and another rather than discuss alternatives?

So why not offer some potential plan or idea that might be developed into a solution for a new school. Why not recognise that it may not be possible to build on this inalienable land? The House of Lords or the EU Court of Human Rights may agree that inalienable mean, …well inalienable. Maybe the miserable Trolls and powerless Bullies are needing a re-think. That may be inconvenient for them as well. But eggs throw in haste are a waste, especially when they end up dribbling down your own chins.

[Scoop]

Welcome back Commander. I've missed you.

[Makaveli]

Commander114 - you know the only person that is trolling on here is YOU!!!

You are the one that keeps trying to drag this thread off track and you are the only one that mentions bullying and egg throwing. I admit that when I read the post about the champagne I did cringe but I don't see why you make such a big deal out of it? A lot of the people on here have invested a lot of time, money and effort so I am sure a small piece of misplaced exhuberance can be forgiven.

I don't recall seeing much of you here before the last court decision - wonder why that is?

[Pal of Porty]

Brilliant post Commander but you missed out the bit about fight them on the beaches..... etc., and Welcome to the waccy baccy club!

[Porty]

Are you a friutcake? i really hope you are. You approach things in a quirky, obtuse way. Which I like, in fact, i prefer it to the hum drum norm.

[Scoop]

Got 2nd year tracking report home tonight, youngest Tufty has achieved straight Excellents. Now he may be a bit of a clever clogs, but he needed the teachers to do it.
Yet again the staff at Porty have delivered exactly "what it said on the tin", even though it's badly bashed from over use.

I've always said. " if you're thick, you're thick". The fabric of a building unfortunately cannot change that. Young tufty's results confirms my belief.