showboat

I'm sorry...you're going accuse others of making personal comments, without noticing how guilty you've been? Of course you are. See you later troll boy, don't hurry back.

As I said, conversation over. No debate possible with someone like you.

No one likes a show off... :-) Look, I'm not impressed by that statement - if you can't see how you've been rude then that conversation is over - and I think you're pretty aggresive frankly, but hey - it's your problem if you want to be like that. I just think you make yourself look bad. I think it's a shame when you have good points.

antantant Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Personally, I appreciate UDT standing up for the > side of the arguement that I believe is correct. Fair enough that he's standing up for it, but he descends into insults and condescension of the type he accuses others of and then says "who, me?". Takes some big brass ones to be that arrogant and hypocritical.

UDT - you may well be right (on this issue at least) but my God you're pretty unpleasant with it.

And it's gypo, not jippo. If you're going to be incredibly insulting at least spell it right. Have you considered talking to them, rather than venting on here? Might have a better result, just saying.

That's unusual in my experience. Been with them all my life, and I've never known it be like that. Hope things aren't changing there. I've usually been able to get seen within a day or two, sometimes even with a specific doctor.

You're not even worth it Fox...

Once again Fox you're being obtuse and you know it. Pubs like those being described certainly did exist, and you know full well that one up side to the legislation of recent years surrounding H+S and so on has been to makes to make pubs safer. The era you describe was one of the landlord answering to no one, which can make for problems. HOWEVER...I agree that the corporatisation of the pub industry has overall been very bad. Hey, when you're right you're right. The big chains took away the soul of many places, and the tenanted side of things? Don't get me started on how evil the pubcos can be *coughEnterpriseInnsareabunchofevilwankerscough*. That's why I left that industry. But I'm not sure changing the old opening times in itself a bad thing. The continent has later hours and nowhere near the late night drinking issues we do (I generalise, but the point is mostly accurate). Perhaps that speaks to more of a cultural issue. FWIW I don't think TGE should have those hours. LL causes enough issues.

David A. Greatest. Post. Ever.

"I do think that Admin is possibly being overly cautious by adhering to the instructions meted out by one or two businesses. But then I don't know the possible ramifications either. We supposedly live in a world of free speech. If someone on a forum writes something that's untrue then surely it's that person who could be sued for libel. Am I wrong?" This whole thing piqued my interest, and from what I can gather BOTH the poster and forum are liable. Most likely the rules governing the rest of the media would apply. If someone doesn't like what a journalist writes thru can sue both the journalist and the paper, and do so quite easily in the UK, where our appallingly relaxed laws allow for the worst kind of 'libel tourism' - but that's another matter, although it's no doubt a factor in Admins mind. However, I also think it's worrying that businesses are able to be 'blocked' from any discussion, good or bad, if they want. In a recent case the involvement of the police merits the action (as it should), but if they weren't called in, there would be less grounds to cease all discussion. I've lost track of how many businesses get trashed to one extent or another on here. I hope they recognise the value of community interaction and the benefits it can bring (as some have) and don't play hard (as others have). I also hope Admin knows where to draw the line on this, otherwise there will be nothing left if any business can delete negative feedback placed in the public domain by spitting their dummy.

"William Rose sre actually very good value butchers and well worth the queue" You see, the other stuff could be true but this one is just too far fetched!

Fabric is the other. No idea why.

Fair point!

Aren't those posts contradictory? Are we allowed to say anything about Le Chandelier so long as its not illegal or libellous, or is it totally off limits? (not trying to be difficult,I'm genuinely confused)

I don't know how Admin can be forced to remove posts which are not libellous or illegal. Everything else is free speech.

But there is a business which has asked not to be mentioned AT ALL. And Admin seems to have agreed to this. Is that correct? Is there a list of businesses which cannot be mentioned under any circumstances?

Wow, you really are an arrogant person. You feel happy to make a blanket generalisation and when someone asks you to back it up you say you don't have to. Isn't it easy to be like that from behind a keyboard.

Whatever dude, I mean you've missed the point but whatever. All I asked was for some examples to back up your point, which right now doesn't extend beyond you saying you are right and I'm wrong. Not hugely persuasive. You may of course feel that you don't need to justify it to me - and you're of course right - but it's a pretty simple question. What about TCC earns it the status of mediocre? I'm no associated with them in any way, I just think people shouldn't say something us crap and leave it at that. If you're going to slate something the least you can do is back it up. For example, Sue described small portions. Fair enough. She also posted that back in 2010 when I remember it went bad for a while. But I think they've raised their game since. Portions are better, seasoning is better and the food has th flavour I remember. I'll agree the salads aren't much cop, and most of the starters the same. Anyway, it's up to you if you want to see this as some kind of attack - which it's not. Just honest and serious questions.

Ok, I'll accept that statement when you provide more than just a three word opinion. Warranted why? How? What should they be doing better or differently?

Calling the Thai Corner Cafe 'mediocre' is harsh, and I feel unwarranted. This kind of thing is all subjective of course, but let's be honest - it's not Nahm or Royal Thai, and it's not trying to be. I'll agree they do some stuff better than others, but for the prices asked I think it's alright. What I want to see round here is good Vietnamese, so I don't have to trek to Dalston for that.

The weather in Singapore is about 30 Celsius and cloudy, with thunderstorms on the way for the next few days. Average, in other words. But that has nothing to do with this thread, which seems to be dissolving into the usual EDF flame war.

the-e-dealer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Do you ever say anything useful nob ? Wow, there's a highbrow argument and no mistake. Pass the popcorn...this is getting good!

I don't think you're Pissing people off - they just find you ridiculous.' Personally I think you're either certifiably crazy or some kind of ?ber troll. Either way you're making a fool of yourself.

Jaime3, If you're going to criticise his grammar better make sure yours is spot on! Which it isn't... But you do make a valid point.