Aldi Facebook Page Kicking Off after Parking Eye LBAs

RicRus

Hovite wrote: »

Weber Shandwick seem to be getting quite upset this evening !

I note that our exchange on Tuesday has been removed which is a shame as I was going to apologise for using the term 'power phrase' in situ of 'paraphrase' which was picked up by Claire (?) as opposed to Sarah. It was a shame that an otherwise interesting and grown up exchange with a clear and concise use of language from both sides was tarnished by the petty nature of one of your own and it is also a shame that the exchange has been removed with the only record being the minimal copy/paste by Umkomaas.

Umkomaas

Hovite wrote: »

Give the man a chocolate bar :money:

Pleeeeease, not one of them fakey, fakey lookalikes (but far from tastealikes).

Hovite_2

RicRus wrote: »

I note that our exchange on Tuesday has been removed which is a shame as I was going to apologise for using the term 'power phrase' in situ of 'paraphrase' which was picked up by Claire (?) as opposed to Sarah. It was a shame that an otherwise interesting and grown up exchange with a clear and concise use of language from both sides was tarnished by the petty nature of one of your own and it is also a shame that the exchange has been removed with the only record being the minimal copy/paste by Umkomaas.

Indeed - I'm quite happy to debate the subject matter in a mature and civilised way as we did. I just don't understand why Aldi / Weber Shandwick make that so difficult !

Hovite_2

Umkomaas wrote: »

Pleeeeease, not one of them fakey, fakey lookalikes (but far from tastealikes).

When I get my free Aldi one I'll forward it to you

Umkomaas

RicRus wrote: »

I note that our exchange on Tuesday has been removed which is a shame as I was going to apologise for using the term 'power phrase' in situ of 'paraphrase' which was picked up by Claire (?) as opposed to Sarah. It was a shame that an otherwise interesting and grown up exchange with a clear and concise use of language from both sides was tarnished by the petty nature of one of your own and it is also a shame that the exchange has been removed with the only record being the minimal copy/paste by Umkomaas.

Welcome to the forum RicRus. The 'power phrasing' was primarily to draw attention to the developing exchange. To have copied and pasted the entire (and subsequent ongoing) debate would have flooded the thread page. Regulars on here are well aware of the continuing Aldi/PE debate, but do not always follow the day-to-day 'skirmishes'.

Hope you too can get involved in helping motorists with the problems they are facing with unenforceable and, more often than not, unlawful penalties. Because that is what we do on MSE.

PS - you won't find many spellchecker fanatics on here - not that you need any, your posts have been highly articulate and grammatically sound . Glad to have you joining us in the fight.

RicRus

PenFindley wrote: »

I think it was myself who picked up on the power phrase mistake. Whats wrong with that? If Sarah Smith can do it why can't I? I really hate Sarah Smith. And why do you lot never like any of my comments when I have a go at her?

Well, whilst I'm happy to admit that I was 'schooled' by your post and as such I'm more than willing to thank you for it (I've never had to type or indeed write the term before and no one had pulled me up when using it vocally - every day truly is a school day!!), it does somewhat negate an otherwise good debate by throwing in a petty remark which seems to be a common complaint by 'your' side about Sarah Smith.

If her grammar policing (note. not grammar Nazi) is the cause for complaint by the PE opposition, why would you 'lower' yourself to do the same thing?

Umkomaas, I appreciate that. For future reference though, I've never been a '!!!!!!' or indeed a 'Rick', Rich is perfectly acceptable though!!

Umkomaas

PenFindley wrote: »

I think it was myself who picked up on the power phrase mistake. Whats wrong with that? If Sarah Smith can do it why can't I? I really hate Sarah Smith. And why do you lot never like any of my comments when I have a go at her?

Pen - my comments were never directed at you, SS has been the perpetrator of the minutiae checking and the reason for my comments. I'm sorry if any inadvertent offence has been caused.

And reference to 'SS' is purely coincidental.

tykesi

And why do you lot never like any of my comments when I have a go at her?

Is this for real? Are you one of those people so desperate for acceptance you see 'Likes' as something to be proud of?

Umkomaas

RicRus wrote: »

Well, whilst I'm happy to admit that I was 'schooled' by your post and as such I'm more than willing to thank you for it (I've never had to type or indeed write the term before and no one had pulled me up when using it vocally - every day truly is a school day!!), it does somewhat negate an otherwise good debate by throwing in a petty remark which seems to be a common complaint by 'your' side about Sarah Smith.

If her grammar policing (note. not grammar Nazi) is the cause for complaint by the PE opposition, why would you 'lower' yourself to do the same thing?

Umkomaas, I appreciate that. For future reference though, I've never been a '!!!!!!' or indeed a 'Rick', Rich is perfectly acceptable though!!

Apologies Rich, you will know it was a play on words; sometimes we need to break the intensity of the ongoing, daily onslaught of dealing with, often, repetitive queries and answers, as well as getting into some of the more complex categories of parking charges.

Whilst it can be a nice motivating experience to have helped a highly worried and intimidated individual through their problem and to a successful conclusion, many times it's Groundhog Day here and a little light relief does help keep up spirits (certainly mine ).

RicRus

Ah, PenFindley - it wasn't you, it was Sarah Graber.