BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Nov 17 - 07:33 AM

My sole point to make concerning brownfield sites is that until redevelopment is complete there is infinite scope for encountering nasty surprises that can add cost and time to a project.

There is indeed but that is not what you said. There is similar scope on any site, including greenfield. The nasty surprises may differ but the scope to encounter them is equal.

My mistake for simply highlighting contamination

Apology accepted.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Iains
Date: 24 Nov 17 - 07:28 AM

Even something as simple as a road realignment can give rise to contaminated ground due to the use of coal tar as a binder before bitumen. My sole point to make concerning brownfield sites is that until redevelopment is complete there is infinite scope for encountering nasty surprises that can add cost and time to a project. My mistake for simply highlighting contamination-many other potential headaches can be encountered as you are no doubt well aware.

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Nov 17 - 07:05 AM

Nothing arrogant in stating facts. Your position of arguing from ignorance on the other hand is. I have never said hold all the answers. I merely stated that I know the sites I am referring to are not contaminated by anything that would prevent their redevelopment.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Iains
Date: 24 Nov 17 - 06:04 AM

If you wish to maintain your arrogant posture and divulge no details what response do you expect. Having had a considerable period of time involved in geotechnical investigations on brownfield sites I know that desk studies and preliminary investigations do not necessarily uncover all the risks on a potential site. It is either a brave or foolhardy man says he holds all the answers.
Hubris could be an expensive character defect.

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Nov 17 - 05:46 AM

You have no idea which sites I am referring to, not a clue whether any investigations have been carried out and not the faintest idea what my source of information is yet you still insist on arguing the toss.

Good to see that you have learned from others on this site and changed your argument from Have you considered the fact that brownfield sites are likely contaminated to Contamination would be only one of a number of potential concerns though.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Iains
Date: 24 Nov 17 - 05:33 AM

No doubt time will tell if your supreme confidence is misplaced. Anyone that feels they have possession of all the facts on a brownfield site before any exploratory work begins is almost certainly heading for disappointment.Contamination would be only one of a number of potential concerns. Been a lot of coal mining in the area and maps of underground workings are not 100% accurate.

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Nov 17 - 02:58 AM

You are uniquely qualified to know this for a fact are you?


Yes, I am.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Iains
Date: 23 Nov 17 - 08:30 AM

"Yes. The ones I mentioned are not"
You are uniquely qualified to know this for a fact are you?


From a recent government report:"A study of 5000 industrial constructi
on projects revealed that half were delayed by more than a
month, and all developments on redevelopment land had encountered unforeseen ground conditons although, only 2-3% of the total cost of a typical construction project is spent on site investigation to assess the geology and soil conditions

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Nov 17 - 07:54 AM

Have you considered the fact that brownfield sites are likely contaminated

Yes. The ones I mentioned are not.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Iains
Date: 23 Nov 17 - 07:28 AM

Below is an example of a brownfield site that was remediated successfully. I had an extremely minor role in the orginal geotechnical investigation both on land and over water.

http://citiscope.org/story/2016/how-cardiff-turned-polluted-bay-one-europes-best-waterfronts

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Iains
Date: 23 Nov 17 - 07:16 AM

". A little further afield, in Bradford for instance, there are swathes of derelict industrial land and massive empty mills surrounded by boarded up shops, empty health centres and closed schools. Why is this? Dare I say that the land is not profitable enough for the landowners to sell to housing companies yet? That they are sitting on areas perfect for urban redevelopment until they can make more money out of it?

Just my 2p"

Have you considered the fact that brownfield sites are likely contaminated, and that can extend to underlying aquifers. They require investigation, evaluation and probably remediation before any construction can occur. Greenfield sites present far less of a headache. Old gas works, chemical works and decommissioned power stations offer unique expensive remediation problems and any sort of 'made ground' can create subsidence problems. Having spent a period of time on such projects I know the solutions can come with a hefty price tag, and without government funding, it ain't going to happen.

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Nov 17 - 06:15 AM

Steve once again describes as xenophobic anyone who refers to the disadvantages as well as the advantages of an influx of people into an area.

When it came to his town he detailed only the disadvantages, but it is OK when he does it.

I think that makes him a hypocrite.

Steve, will you acknowledge that it is not xenophobic for others to make such observations too?

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Nov 17 - 05:31 AM

It would be an excellent idea to move on from that line of enquiry now.

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Raedwulf
Date: 23 Nov 17 - 04:31 AM

I have a good onion... opinion of you & a low one of Keith (because you always meet it, Keith, before you bleat). Is that good enough? ;-)

Enjoyed the Marianne story. Lucky you...

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 07:19 PM

Speaking of this green and pleasant land, and this is somewhat off-topic, there was a lovely programme on Beeb Four last night about Marianne North, a very feisty and independent-minded Victorian lady who travelled the world to paint in oils all the exotic and beautiful plants she could find. I've had a copy of a lovely book called Visions Of Eden, containing many of her paintings, for many years. Kew Gardens has a special little gallery in a detached building dedicated to her work, which contains, wall to wall, cheek by jowl, all her pictures. It's wonderful and overwhelming for a botanist such as meself and I've been several times. Marianne was a dear friend of Charles Darwin and he was a great fan of her work, and she was a great aficionado of his theory of evolution by natural selection (as indeed am I). I have in my possession a book published in 1875 written by Sir John Lubbock which deals with the relationship between flowering plants and insects. Inside the cover, written elegantly in pencil, is Marianne North's name. I'm generally not a sentimental chap, but owning a book that once belonged to a soulmate of Charles Darwin is summat else entirely! Oh, that golden chain...

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 06:15 PM

Seems to me that it's you doing the jumping this last couple of days. But I'll forgive anything as long as you can reassure me that you think that Keith is a bigger twat than me. You seem like a good old boy but with a bit too much haughtiness. I'll stick with naughtiness. Good night, Raedwulf.

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Raedwulf
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 04:12 PM

And if "cometh to pass" is my lot (JoeO may be daft but he ain't daft enough to make me a mod!), then this.

And it came to pass that the Lord(-ish) R?dwulf saith... sedth... "Steve, be thou not a clot, but use thy brain, which I gaveth you, wisely" -ith. And seeing that it was not as he hath commandedeth, sedth (or whatever) "Sod that for a game of soldiers, mine's a pint".

You jump too much, Steve. I don't know whether at shadows or at substance. I'm not here enough, I don't look at enough threads. But those that I do look at... I think you snap at names, rather than content, too easily. That's just my random pixels opinion. But maybe one worth considering?

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Raedwulf
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 03:55 PM

Like I said, Steve, one, I hate having to play Switzerland, and two, I haven't been here a lot in the last... 5 years or so. Which "him" are you referring to. Keith? Nigel / Iain? You seem to have a grouse against all. Him, he, etc is rather imprecise from a former teacher, innit? ;-)

No, I don't think you're a clot. I do think you could pick your fights better, and fight those fights better. If you see what I mean...

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 03:35 PM

So, Raedwulf, old chap, you don't think that a rather rabid anti-immigration stance (did you see all that pro-Farage stuff from him?) that ignores all the great things that immigration has brought to this country, blaming immigrants for driving down wages, putting a strain on housing and the NHS (stop me somebody...), overrunning our towns, not to speak of all that awful stuff about Pakistanis (maybe you missed it...) doesn't, er, betray just a hint of xenophobia? Still, I'm more than happy to think that you think we're both clots. As you seem to have adopted the stance, self-appointed it seems (unless you're a closet good-cop mod, of course), of arbiter of all that cometh to pass here, perhaps you'd like to put us in a league table of clottitudinessitude...

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Raedwulf
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 02:48 PM

Xenophobia. Mmmmm... I'll give you love all on that one Keith. "Please take your silly xenophobic agenda elsewhere" Steve's words, not yourn. But you picked up on the word & repeated it. Silly from the both of you, yes?

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Raedwulf
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 02:33 PM

It used to be considered a badge. It would appear that I, all unknowing, got post 100. Fuck nose wot it woz all abaht... ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 02:32 PM

Raed,
There is absolutely no xenophobia from Steve.

I have never accused Steve of that.

Steve, I made no comment about the origins of your incomers. I did say that the rise in the population led to their arrival.

My point was that it was hypocritical of you to complain about the problems caused by an influx of people into your town, when you have accused others of xenophobia or worse for saying the same things.

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Raedwulf
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 02:29 PM

He din't call 'imself a gobby bugger, I did ! 17,000+ posts & a recent *cough* arrival, the puppy. 'E ought to shurrup in the presence of 'is betters (*ahem* given his own admissions, definitely not elders!).

Thread drift? Oh yes! The staple of below the line... ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 02:20 PM

At least I don't forget the closing speech marks! Heheh...

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 02:14 PM

No, the normal evolution of mudchats :-)

Anyway, Steve, should it not be "conspired with you about both those missing bingo balls AND the photocopied bingo cards?

Call yourself a gobby bugger? Can't even talk proper like what I does.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Stu
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 02:11 PM

Thread drift.

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 02:03 PM

"Gobby bugger"

Never mind the width. Feel the quality...

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 02:01 PM

I have it on very good authority that Betty Swollox conspired with you both about those missing bingo balls AND the photocopied bingo cards... Admit it. If only you hadn't tried to carry the balls across the car park in a wet and soggy shoe-box...

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 12:52 PM

It's a lot simpler than you think Raedwulf. Keith may or may not be some of the things you suggest but I am sure my repeating mantra about him explains most of them

Different morality
Different language
Different planet

He will also try to make you jump through hoops that are completely unnecessary and often not even part of the discussion in question if you let him. The trick is to not do it although I must admit it is difficult sometimes.

As for Steve and his alignment to the scousers. Well, we can allow people their foibles but just don't ask him about Lilo Lil and the bingo debacle.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Raedwulf
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 12:40 PM

Steve - if you stop rubbing, maybe Nigel will too. And vice versa. *hurhurhur* As I've already said, I've not been here much in recent years. I had a quick squint at post history. Nigel turned up in Feb '02, me in Aug. You didn't till May '07. Yet your post count dwarfs both of us. Gobby bugger much? ;-) Maybe you & he have just got into the habit of reacting to the name a bit? I enjoy nattering with the both of yez. I am sorry to see yez miserable gits being so hostile to each other! ;-)

P.S. I fucking well hate playing Switzerland. Swallow yer bile, gentlemen! ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Raedwulf
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 12:31 PM

Raggy, he supports Liverpool. That's Scouse enough... ;-)

Keith, the waffle occurs every time you decide to inhabit because you feel the need to minutely adjust your position 46 times, whilst never conceding that you're wrong about anything... Anyway. Thank you for your clarification, but I don't see it. I've done you the courtesy of reading back through the thread. There is absolutely no xenophobia from Steve. Quite the reverse, if anything. In everything I've read from Steve, he is probably less that than I am, and I wouldn't consider myself xeno- at all! You complain that it is his support of immigration policies that lead to your allegations of "uncontrolled immigration", etcetera. But if he supports immigration policies more than you do, he can hardly be xenophobic, now can he! Unless, in fact, it is you that is the xenophobic one...

Keith, you are, as I have already said, a bloody idiot. I could dissect your utterings at greater length, but you wouldn't get it; you never have.

I can call Steve a fool (aren't we all, in some respects?), Raggy too, and several others. They'll accept it, even if they don't agree. They understand that it's an expression that ultimately means that they are being blinkered & narrow-minded about a particular point, rather than some random bunch of internet pixels (which is all we are to each other) being abusive. But you, Keith? I genuinely am sorry to say this, but repeatedly & repetitively, you are both stupid & ignorant. You are incapable of understanding that which you do not wish to understand, and you do not, or will not, listen to facts that contradict what you want to insist IS. I've seen you do it time and again. And again & again & again... It's a real shame. The care you take over making your arguments suggests you aren't actually stupid (incapable of understanding), but you remain wilfully ignorant (I'll ignore facts I don't like & comments I can't answer). I'm an old, old hand on t'internet, I'm afraid, never mind Mudcat. Life too, I suppose. I've run across the generic, cliched "you" many times. I've never found a way of making that 'you' understand what you're doing or how you are repeatedly undermining your own point of view. I really wish I could.

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 12:04 PM

It was a bloody hard watch, I'll give you that.

Nigel has indulged in obsessive stalking behaviour, Raedwulf. He's toned it down following my very public accusations. I say "following" though I remain acutely conscious of the possibility of post hoc ergo propter hoc.. These threads are full of my carefully-constructed opinions and arguments. I only said carefully-constructed, not at all denying the possibility that they could be wrong-headed or biased or deluded. It would be very nice to get the same back from people like Keith and Nigel, whose main concern seems to be point-scoring. You will note that Keith is still at it. The people who have moved to Bude recently are not part of Keith's country-swamping hordes. They were already here. I do defend and celebrate immigration even at current levels. That is not at all incompatible with criticising some very poor planning decisions affecting the town I know best. He knows that but he is the dog with the bone. It's not good enough, old chap. It's demoralising, it's abject and its bloody dishonest. And it's bloody typical of him. I do my best. Only a scumbag would call me a hypocrite.

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Raggytash
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 11:16 AM

No Steve is not a manky scouce git. He may be a git, he is a Manky (ie comes from Manchester) but he is NOT a scouce.

I admit he's a bit odd supporting Liverpool FC who almost snatched defeat from the jaws of victory last night. Woeful come to mind.

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 11:07 AM

Raed.
Remind what the one single point that you made was, please, Keith? I must have missed it in the inordinate amount of waffle that occurs in every thread you decide to inhabit.

The waffle came after I made my point, as I responded to all the points put to me.

My only point is that Steve complained about the problems caused by an influx of people into his town, but when others have said exactly the same he accused them of xenophobia or worse.

Steve, you could have silenced me at once had you said something along these lines,
"Of course it is legitimate and acceptable to discuss the deleterious effects as well as the benefits of a large influx of people into an area. I am sorry if I ever seemed to suggest otherwise."

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Raedwulf
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 06:47 AM

Remind what the one single point that you made was, please, Keith? I must have missed it in the inordinate amount of waffle that occurs in every thread you decide to inhabit.

Shaw - reign in the vitriol please, sir (Please, Sir! ;-) ). I will happily state that my opinion of Keith is that he is a bloody idiot (ignored everything I said, I note, Keith; typical Keith, can't answer so pretend it doesn't exist, but everyone else can see you doing it, Mr Ostrich). A scumbag he is not.

As for Nigel... Nigel has his opinions, same as you do. Except, seemingly, he has opposite opinions. Unless Nigel has changed vastly in the last few years, he always used to make his point in a reasonable manner (plus he sets interesting quizzes!). Quite why you two feel the need to be at each other's throats... Agree to disagree & knock off the name-calling, chaps. You don't, either of you, smell of roses in exchanges of this sort. And no, I'm not immune from sinning occasionally either! ;-) But it is only occasionally in my case.

As for hypocrite, there are many words I might use to describe Steve. Manky Scouse git for a start.. ;-) Hypocrite would never be one of them. You'd have to be wilfully misunderstanding / cheap point-scoring to twist any two things he's said into hypocrisy.

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 06:11 AM

Well here's one of your points that I'm responding to right now. Do not call me a hypocrite again.

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Stu
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 06:08 AM

Oh Keith mate.

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 05:20 AM

I have responded as best I can to every point put to me, and have been rebuked and attacked for doing so.

No-one has responded to the one single point that I have made.

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 04:37 AM

Troll x2

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 04:26 AM

I have made no point about immigration or ethnic origins.
That came entirely from Steve and Stu.

My only point is that Steve complained about the problems caused by an influx of people into his town, but when others have said exactly the same he accused them of xenophobia or worse.
He is a hypocrite.

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Iains
Date: 22 Nov 17 - 03:18 AM

"just try to put your point of view without resort to personal attack"

"Have another pint, Nige. Best leave it 'til morning, eh? ?????? "

" We can be a bit too quick to react to these scumbags I suppose"

you are leading by example I presume. You continue to treat Mudcat as your personal fiefdom. You try to dictate one standard of behaviour while your own falls woefully short of what a reasonable person would expect. You are a sad obsessive and need to find another pastime to see out your dotage. You have outstayed your welcome here.

Nigel."Trying to make a serious argument against what you say is like trying to knit fog!"

You summarize the problem the most eloquently.

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Nov 17 - 08:52 PM

People don't misrepresent what you say. They quote what you say. Then you claim that what you said was just "whimsy"

Well, Nigel, you are one of the problem posters here. Why? Because you have little interest in arguing the toss (as a Tory, you secretly feel that you're on a hiding to nothing there, obviously, poor thing) and every interest in bitterly pursuing your perceived adversaries rather obsessively with a view to following Keith's "you lose" philosophy. Let's see if you can follow up the above quote from your post, in both its elements, with a chapter and verse example. And I'm not saying that to try to make a point. I'm saying it in order to keep you occupied for as long as possible so that the decent people here will have at least a few hours' respite from your rather snarky, stalking, distempered nastiness.

As I said to Iains, your partner in crime/soulmate/clone, just try to put your point of view without resort to personal attack. No need to presage it every time with a big quote from someone else. We'd love to hear from you. Just you.

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 21 Nov 17 - 07:41 PM

From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 21 Nov 17 - 05:07 PM
It is awful. It's impossible to try to make honest points without being rounded on by one or two people (it used to be three or four...) who are absolutely determined to score points by misrepresenting what you say..

People don't misrepresent what you say. They quote what you say. Then you claim that what you said was just "whimsy"

Trying to make a serious argument against what you say is like trying to knit fog!

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Nov 17 - 05:07 PM

It is awful. It's impossible to try to make honest points without being rounded on by one or two people (it used to be three or four...) who are absolutely determined to score points by misrepresenting what you say.. For all my bloody flaws, it's ridiculous that I can be called a hypocrite for simply describing accurately the situation in my town and being told that I'm stupid and know nothing, etc., by someone who is scarcely capable of making a debating point, who is virtually illiterate and who posts completely inane links. But I'm not bitter (as the Murphy's ad used to say). I suppose most discussion forums are infested by people with agendas. We can be a bit too quick to react to these scumbags I suppose. I'm trying hard to not do things like calling people scumbags, but Jaysus it can be hard...

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Raedwulf
Date: 21 Nov 17 - 03:34 PM

Mmmm... I see that nothing's changed much in the years where I've been largely inactive. I look at this thread... No appearance in the first 24 posts, then 17 in the next 52. Yep. That seems about par for the course. Plus never conceding a point, admitting to an error... Gentles! We do not have an SI unit of internet forum debate! I think we should. The question is what we should call it. The Weasel seems very obvious - always wriggling & slippery, always trying to bite... But it's rather pejorative, never mind being unfair to weasels who are, after all, only trying to make a living.

I propose the KAH. In homage to our very own Keith Acheson, Hertford (of). Never wrong (not least because any point challenged that can't be refuted can be ignored). But not only that, the thread in question must also be flooded with responses from the same poster, thus demonstrating how inarguably right he is!!! How the heck you define that scientifically, I would not care to suggest, but it's the starting point for debate.

Yes, Keith, this is sarcasm. It also possibly amounts to a personal attack. But since it is also a statement of the blindingly obvious, I don't expect the mod's to take exception to it. If I did, I wouldn't waste their time in posting it. This is what you are. This is what you do. You will see no humour in it, but others will. Hard luck. I could compare you with one or two other 'Catters'. Roger springs to mind particularly. Do you never stop to wonder why so few people agree with you, whether it's you that's making a poor argument, rather than everyone else just being thick?

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Stu
Date: 21 Nov 17 - 02:26 PM

" but I was only posting about population growth, not specifically migration"

This is why I don't debate with you Keith. It's like trying to herd cats as you twist and wriggle and leave crap all over the place.

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Nov 17 - 02:11 PM

Stu,
The figures I posted related to Net migration alone, not variations in the number of births and deaths.

Most of the births were to mothers born elsewhere, but I was only posting about population growth, not specifically migration.

Steve,
Keith, only half the immigration to this country, up to the referendum, came from the EU.

I made no comment about origins. Why do you?

Because you have persistently linked Bude's population increase to mass immigration, when in fact it has nothing to do with it.

Of course it has. The population of the whole country is mushrooming and now the effects are being felt in Bude you don't like it.

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Nov 17 - 12:35 PM

And for the second time today let me request that you desist from being so gratuitously rude. Your link was extremely poor, unintelligible in fact as it stands and certainly not demonstrating whatever it was you were hoping it would, as well as being out of date and written by an anonymous someone who doesn't live in the area, and you didn't check before posting it. I'm sure that the others here won't find it too hard to decide which of the two of us is a better target for the nasty invective in your post.

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Nov 17 - 12:28 PM

"Please remember that it was not me who complained of the problems caused by our ballooning population.
That was Steve.
I just pointed out his hypocrisy in doing so."

Please remember that I did no such thing. I commented about the rotten planning decisions in one small, remote seaside town that happens to contain very few recent immigrants, the latter, what's more, being completely irrelevant to my point about planning and infrastructure. We are in Keith's silly games territory again here, aren't we? It's no wonder, what with the Keith 'n' Iains comedy duo in full swing, that these threads turn sour.

Subject: RE: BS: Englands Green & Pleasant Land
From: Iains
Date: 21 Nov 17 - 12:24 PM

The national census records quoted are however accurate. Try reading an understanding before gibbering, you stupid boy!