Phew

Graham_Devon

Boy, am I glad I came to see what was going on in this thread.:rolleyes:

Harry_Powell

wageslave wrote: »

For me, it is about how personal the insults to Carolt sometimes become. I have read posts that have jeered at her income, her occupation, her family and her sexuality. That seriously isn't acceptable.

I equally dont like some of the nastier attacks on Hamish or a few other posters and have said so.

I couldn't give a tinkers damn whether someone thinks house prices are falling or rising. No one should be attacked here on a personal level.

Not you, not me, not Carolt

I tend to leave a thread when it descends into arguing, it's too much like hard work to sift through the insults to find any decent posts. Besides, usually once the arguing starts, the decent posts generally stop. I've not seen much of the stuff you described, apart from some comments about carolt's household arrangements that started out light-hearted (I made a joke about her hubby wearing a pinny and she remarked that she found it v. funny). I left that particular thread when it took a 'turn for the worse' and descended into the personal insults you mentioned.

I did mention to carolt though that if she didn't want people making negative comments about her life (income, family, occupation or otherwise) then she shouldn't put so much of herself onto a public forum. No one can mock me for my income or career because no one knows anything about it. Simple really.

JonnyBravo

chucky wrote: »

and it's colouring book doophus!!

mewbie wrote: »

Do you let your kids use your log in? It's like wit from a six year old. Plus the grammar of a seven year old. What did you say you did? Docker, was it?

In all seriousness - who on earth would spell doofus as doophus? What level of brain dead would make that connection?

mewbie wrote: »

So what do you do that requires no wit, no intelligence, and no basic English?

Do you think Munchkin should be capitalized? Should sentences start with a capital? Is there any point in basic punctuation?

Blimey it all got a bit heated last night!
Lots of good ol' grammar and spelling corrections. Disappointed chucky didn't pick up on this one......

mewbie wrote: »

chucky wrote: »

you're a good women Sinead

Five words. One mistake. Stick with emoticons Chucky, the colour in book is so much more your level.

Ermm .....

Six words??

HTH.

Or should that be

HTS - Happy to stir.

chucky

JonnyBravo wrote: »

HTS - Happy to stir.

you're welcome to be involved anytime

poor old mewbie doesn't like it up him much... get's a bit agitated and sweaty...

he'll be back on in his lunch break - i canny wait!! :T

IveSeenTheLight

Just an update on Cavendish Avenue.
I notice that no 42 sold in April this year for £599,950 whilst it previously sold in July 2000 for £249,750
No 17 sold in Jun this year for £575,000 whilst previously sold in Mar 2000 for £136,000
No 93 sold in Feb this year for £5250,000 whilst previously sold in July 2003 for £215,000

http://www.nethouseprices.com/index.php?con=sold_prices_street_detail&locality=LONDON&town=LONDON&street=CAVENDISH+AVENUE&year=All&house_style=All&house_age=All&house_type=All&search_radius=&northingToSearch=&eastingToSearch=&cCode=EW&outcode=W13&incode=0JG&order=streetASC&start_limit=120&curPage=7

chucky

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Just an update on Cavendish Avenue.
I notice that no 42 sold in April this year for £599,950 whilst it previously sold in July 2000 for £249,750
No 17 sold in Jun this year for £575,000 whilst previously sold in Mar 2000 for £136,000
No 93 sold in Feb this year for £5250,000 whilst previously sold in July 2003 for £215,000

http://www.nethouseprices.com/index.php?con=sold_prices_street_detail&locality=LONDON&town=LONDON&street=CAVENDISH+AVENUE&year=All&house_style=All&house_age=All&house_type=All&search_radius=&northingToSearch=&eastingToSearch=&cCode=EW&outcode=W13&incode=0JG&order=streetASC&start_limit=120&curPage=7

so quite the opposite of what the usual suspects were trying to tell us all...

and there she was telling us that the properties in that road were crashing... but they weren't

IveSeenTheLight

chucky wrote: »

so quite the opposite of what the usual suspects were trying to tell us all...

and there she was telling us that the properties in that road were crashing... but they weren't

As you know, I like to deal with facts and back them up.
I even had a report from a business test that stated the same today.

I just listed the three properties that sold on that road this year and had previous sales recorded on nethouseprices.

chucky

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

As you know, I like to deal with facts and back them up.
I even had a report from a business test that stated the same today.

I just listed the three properties that sold on that road this year and had previous sales recorded on nethouseprices.

i like this post talking about Carol's posts - shows what kind of person he is...

mewbie wrote: »

I'm quite happy with anecdotal when it comes from people I trust as genuine.