Missed appointments by patients cost NHS millions

Why don't my patients turn up?

Why don't my patients turn up?

First published in News Daily Echo: Photograph of the Author by , Crime Reporter

A Southampton GP has revealed the massive impact missed appointments have on his surgery.

Sitting in his GP surgery in Shirley, Dr Daniel Tongue can see with a click of a mouse just how costly Do Not Attends (DNA's) are in both NHS time and money.


Within the last six months Victor Street Surgery, which has around 13,000 registered patients, has seen 3,273 appointments missed by patients - a total of 41,000 wasted minutes.

With the average cost of a ten minute GP appointment estimated at £25, this means that £102,500 was lost by patients not turning up and not bothering to call.


Multiply this by the number of surgeries within the Southampton City Clinical Commissioning Group - 37 - that's an estimated loss of £3.8m in just six months being drained from the cash-strapped NHS.

Dr Tongue, who is also planned care lead for Southampton City Clinical Commissioning Group, said: “It's really frustrating and the nurses certainly find it frustrating.


“Just yesterday one of my nurses who runs a diabetic clinic was telling me how much of an effect DNA's have on the practice.


“On Tuesday only three of her six appointments turned up, leaving her twiddling her thumbs for each of the 30 minute appointments, but yesterday she was running on empty because she had so many extra patients to deal with.

“It does seem to be a growing trend. When I started in the profession eight years ago, the government had introduced the system of booking appointments within 48 hours and back then it didn't seem quite so prevalent.

“But as we move towards booking appointments six weeks in advance, DNA's seem to be rising, despite the whole point of moving back to the advanced system being to make it easier for people to fit in appointments around their daily lives.

“But it is not just a case of those who book in advance forgetting about their appointments. We have some patients who fail to turn up for appointments which they only booked two hours previously, through our emergency booking system.”

As reported by the Daily Echo more than 35,000 patients failed to attend scheduled appointments last year at Southampton General Hospital with 10,000 appointments missed at the Royal Hampshire County Hospital in Winchester.

Two years ago the problem was so bad - more than 60,000 appointments missed in Hampshire at a cost of £6.1m - that the Daily Echo launched its Turn Up or Tell 'Em campaign, to urge patients to ring up and tell hospitals and GP practices f they are unable to make their appointment.

Dr Tongue believes this is a vital message that patients need to take notice of and says that while hospitals will need sufficient notice to fill slots, GP surgeries have the capabilities of being much more flexible with even a ten minute warning enough time to make use of the time.

He added: “People just seem to have other priorities and don't see their doctor's appointments as one of them.

“Even if they called to let us know ten minutes before, there's a chance someone might fill that appointment, because appointments are in such demand.

“People are walking in all the time looking for an appointment, and if we get a call to say a patient cannot make it because they are stuck in traffic, we know we can offer that slot to someone else, instead of waiting around for someone who just isn't going to turn up.”

Solving the problem isn't an easy one and while modern technology is being used in hospitals and GP's practices to make it easier for patients to cancel their appointments, doctors are still left wondering why many still insist on simply not turning up without having the courtesy to call.

“It does seem that because a patient is getting the appointment for free they don't value the service as much”, said Dr Tongue.

“When money is not being exchanged some people forget that it is costing the NHS and the taxpayer is paying for it. They may not be physically paying for it, but someone else is on their behalf and people need to understand that.

“We have to encourage people to value the service we are offering. To have ten per cent of appointments missed is costing the NHS a lot of money.

“I think we do need to understand better the reasons why people simply don't turn up, learn how we can do things to improve it, using technology for example and of course encouraging patients to let us know if they cannot turn up.

“As a practice we have been looking at ways of how we can reduce this problem and help patients to help us. We understand that some people do find it hard to contact their GP surgery so we are doing what we can to improve the system.

“We have the software here to run a text messaging service to remind patients so we are looking to get that up and running smoothly.

“We have also recently introduced online forms and an automated service so that patients don't even need to speak to a person to cancel an appointment. So if someone remembers on a Sunday that they can't make it, they can let the surgery know even when it's closed.

“I am not a believer in imposing financial fines on those who miss appointments. I don't think it would work and it would just create another layer of bureaucracy that would cost just as much.

“I think any form of penalty would be difficult because the ethos of the NHS is based on need and you cannot start turning people away if they need treatment.

“If a surgery notices that a patient regularly misses appointments then they have the power to de-list the patient, forcing them the inconvenience of having to find another practice but that really is the last resort.”

Comments (115)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:37pm Sat 1 Sep 12

BillyTheKid says...

Some people are just forgetful. Others are irresponsible, and their lives consist of living from one crisis to the next. And many others find it difficult to get everything done at the right time against the backdrop of a modern and complex society.

Many doctor's and dentist's surgeries have little or no parking on the premises, and are surrounded by "double yellows" stretching for miles in all directions. Factor in road works, and you have the perfect recipe for patient delay. Bitterne Health Centre have lots of parking facilities, with a fair-sized car park opposite, and a lot of nearby road parking. I wonder if they have as many missed appointments - it would be interesting to know.

"Out of town" has been the solution for businesses, with plenty of parking and ease of access away from town centre traffic congestion. Perhaps that ought to be investigated.

Another interesting "missed appointments" comparison might be between those who live within walking distance of their surgery, and those who have to use public or private transport.

I'm not claiming to have the answers !
Just making a few suggestions is all.
Some people are just forgetful. Others are irresponsible, and their lives consist of living from one crisis to the next. And many others find it difficult to get everything done at the right time against the backdrop of a modern and complex society. Many doctor's and dentist's surgeries have little or no parking on the premises, and are surrounded by "double yellows" stretching for miles in all directions. Factor in road works, and you have the perfect recipe for patient delay. Bitterne Health Centre have lots of parking facilities, with a fair-sized car park opposite, and a lot of nearby road parking. I wonder if they have as many missed appointments - it would be interesting to know. "Out of town" has been the solution for businesses, with plenty of parking and ease of access away from town centre traffic congestion. Perhaps that ought to be investigated. Another interesting "missed appointments" comparison might be between those who live within walking distance of their surgery, and those who have to use public or private transport. I'm not claiming to have the answers ! Just making a few suggestions is all. BillyTheKid
  • Score: 0

1:58pm Sat 1 Sep 12

chapelsaint says...

Another reason could be that when you can only get an appointment at some date in the future, by the time that date arrives three possible scenarios could be presented 1-forgotten 2-got better and 3-dead.
Another reason could be that when you can only get an appointment at some date in the future, by the time that date arrives three possible scenarios could be presented 1-forgotten 2-got better and 3-dead. chapelsaint
  • Score: 0

2:22pm Sat 1 Sep 12

loosehead says...

Sorry but I know that I've had to wait weeks for an appointment & when I got to see my doctor she asked me why I hadn't gone to see her in the week she had asked to see me.
I told her she was fully booked but she said she would talk to reception as she had been sat there with nothing to do.
If people don't turn up they should only get 10min emergency appointments or get fined
Sorry but I know that I've had to wait weeks for an appointment & when I got to see my doctor she asked me why I hadn't gone to see her in the week she had asked to see me. I told her she was fully booked but she said she would talk to reception as she had been sat there with nothing to do. If people don't turn up they should only get 10min emergency appointments or get fined loosehead
  • Score: 0

2:38pm Sat 1 Sep 12

KA says...

Maybe if it was not so expensive to phone and cancel then more ppl would.!
Maybe if it was not so expensive to phone and cancel then more ppl would.! KA
  • Score: 0

2:47pm Sat 1 Sep 12

loosehead says...

KA wrote:
Maybe if it was not so expensive to phone and cancel then more ppl would.!
If it cost more in fines than phone calls maybe people would call?
[quote][p][bold]KA[/bold] wrote: Maybe if it was not so expensive to phone and cancel then more ppl would.![/p][/quote]If it cost more in fines than phone calls maybe people would call? loosehead
  • Score: 0

2:48pm Sat 1 Sep 12

arthur dalyrimple says...

just a rubbish service ,simple as that.
just a rubbish service ,simple as that. arthur dalyrimple
  • Score: 0

2:50pm Sat 1 Sep 12

G0Rf says...

Maybe if victor street surgery didn't have an 0844 premium rate phone number then people would bother to phone and cancel their appointments!
Doesn't take a genius to work out that most people local to this surgery only have mobile phones and are not prepared to pay to phone an 0844!
They should do a 3 strike rule, 3 DNA's and u get a fine!
Maybe if victor street surgery didn't have an 0844 premium rate phone number then people would bother to phone and cancel their appointments! Doesn't take a genius to work out that most people local to this surgery only have mobile phones and are not prepared to pay to phone an 0844! They should do a 3 strike rule, 3 DNA's and u get a fine! G0Rf
  • Score: 0

2:53pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Sir Ad E Noid says...

BillyTheKid wrote:
Some people are just forgetful. Others are irresponsible, and their lives consist of living from one crisis to the next. And many others find it difficult to get everything done at the right time against the backdrop of a modern and complex society.

Many doctor's and dentist's surgeries have little or no parking on the premises, and are surrounded by "double yellows" stretching for miles in all directions. Factor in road works, and you have the perfect recipe for patient delay. Bitterne Health Centre have lots of parking facilities, with a fair-sized car park opposite, and a lot of nearby road parking. I wonder if they have as many missed appointments - it would be interesting to know.

"Out of town" has been the solution for businesses, with plenty of parking and ease of access away from town centre traffic congestion. Perhaps that ought to be investigated.

Another interesting "missed appointments" comparison might be between those who live within walking distance of their surgery, and those who have to use public or private transport.

I'm not claiming to have the answers !
Just making a few suggestions is all.
Billy, well put. Sadly, I don't think you have covered everybody. A proportion of failed appointments are probably covered by your list. How many just can't be bothered to pick up a phone to cancel as their ailment has got better or has cleared up. The waste that this doctor has highlighted is really bad. The possible true bill for this area is probably staggering.
[quote][p][bold]BillyTheKid[/bold] wrote: Some people are just forgetful. Others are irresponsible, and their lives consist of living from one crisis to the next. And many others find it difficult to get everything done at the right time against the backdrop of a modern and complex society. Many doctor's and dentist's surgeries have little or no parking on the premises, and are surrounded by "double yellows" stretching for miles in all directions. Factor in road works, and you have the perfect recipe for patient delay. Bitterne Health Centre have lots of parking facilities, with a fair-sized car park opposite, and a lot of nearby road parking. I wonder if they have as many missed appointments - it would be interesting to know. "Out of town" has been the solution for businesses, with plenty of parking and ease of access away from town centre traffic congestion. Perhaps that ought to be investigated. Another interesting "missed appointments" comparison might be between those who live within walking distance of their surgery, and those who have to use public or private transport. I'm not claiming to have the answers ! Just making a few suggestions is all.[/p][/quote]Billy, well put. Sadly, I don't think you have covered everybody. A proportion of failed appointments are probably covered by your list. How many just can't be bothered to pick up a phone to cancel as their ailment has got better or has cleared up. The waste that this doctor has highlighted is really bad. The possible true bill for this area is probably staggering. Sir Ad E Noid
  • Score: 0

2:55pm Sat 1 Sep 12

erica smith says...

sorry but how expensive is it to 'phone' and cancel?? Also, the parking situation is a nonsense - if you need to see a doctor then you do what is necessary to see them at the appointed time.... if you are more concerned about your car then maybe seeing the doctor is not so important after all!!! There was a time,long ago when the surgery hours were defined and you turned up and waited in line until it was your turn to be seen...... maybe that system should be brought back?
sorry but how expensive is it to 'phone' and cancel?? Also, the parking situation is a nonsense - if you need to see a doctor then you do what is necessary to see them at the appointed time.... if you are more concerned about your car then maybe seeing the doctor is not so important after all!!! There was a time,long ago when the surgery hours were defined and you turned up and waited in line until it was your turn to be seen...... maybe that system should be brought back? erica smith
  • Score: 0

2:56pm Sat 1 Sep 12

sarfhamton says...

It's the beard mate, it scares the kids
It's the beard mate, it scares the kids sarfhamton
  • Score: 0

3:05pm Sat 1 Sep 12

erica smith says...

it makes me sick to hear that the NHS, which is described by most people overseas as the Best In The World is treated so abominably by the people it is there to serve............. they are quick to complain however not prepared to get up early enough or make the time to keep the appointment they have been given to see a fully qualified and dedicted doctor............ such people should maybe consider living in rural Africa or parts of Asia and see how they get on with such stupid attitudes...........
..
it makes me sick to hear that the NHS, which is described by most people overseas as the Best In The World is treated so abominably by the people it is there to serve............. they are quick to complain however not prepared to get up early enough or make the time to keep the appointment they have been given to see a fully qualified and dedicted doctor............ such people should maybe consider living in rural Africa or parts of Asia and see how they get on with such stupid attitudes........... .. erica smith
  • Score: 0

3:06pm Sat 1 Sep 12

sparkster says...

It doesn't take long to make a phone call to cancel an appointment, so that maybe someone else could have the benefit of it, its a matter of courtesy, if you write it down and put it in your diary/calendar you have it there to see, i have a hospital card but i still write it on the calendar when i get home
It doesn't take long to make a phone call to cancel an appointment, so that maybe someone else could have the benefit of it, its a matter of courtesy, if you write it down and put it in your diary/calendar you have it there to see, i have a hospital card but i still write it on the calendar when i get home sparkster
  • Score: 0

3:53pm Sat 1 Sep 12

KA says...

sparkster wrote:
It doesn't take long to make a phone call to cancel an appointment, so that maybe someone else could have the benefit of it, its a matter of courtesy, if you write it down and put it in your diary/calendar you have it there to see, i have a hospital card but i still write it on the calendar when i get home
Yes it does.. you get through and you are kept on hold for ages.! not just to cancel appointments either making them is just as bad..
[quote][p][bold]sparkster[/bold] wrote: It doesn't take long to make a phone call to cancel an appointment, so that maybe someone else could have the benefit of it, its a matter of courtesy, if you write it down and put it in your diary/calendar you have it there to see, i have a hospital card but i still write it on the calendar when i get home[/p][/quote]Yes it does.. you get through and you are kept on hold for ages.! not just to cancel appointments either making them is just as bad.. KA
  • Score: 0

3:57pm Sat 1 Sep 12

southy says...

Go back to the old way where you just turned up at the surgery with out appointment or phoned up for results or a home visit.
Go back to the old way where you just turned up at the surgery with out appointment or phoned up for results or a home visit. southy
  • Score: 0

4:15pm Sat 1 Sep 12

IronLady2010 says...

There are some circumstances whereby you may miss an appointment. If you are really ill for example and cannot get out of bed.

Let us also not forget some people don't have landlines and rely on PAYG mobiles, some may not have credit and are too ill to go to a phone box.

There are also those who simply cannot be bothered.
There are some circumstances whereby you may miss an appointment. If you are really ill for example and cannot get out of bed. Let us also not forget some people don't have landlines and rely on PAYG mobiles, some may not have credit and are too ill to go to a phone box. There are also those who simply cannot be bothered. IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

4:17pm Sat 1 Sep 12

IronLady2010 says...

southy wrote:
Go back to the old way where you just turned up at the surgery with out appointment or phoned up for results or a home visit.
That is actually a good suggestion. Our surgery used to have an open surgery each morning from 8am til 12pm, just turn up and wait. Then the afternoons were for appointments, they stopped it though!
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Go back to the old way where you just turned up at the surgery with out appointment or phoned up for results or a home visit.[/p][/quote]That is actually a good suggestion. Our surgery used to have an open surgery each morning from 8am til 12pm, just turn up and wait. Then the afternoons were for appointments, they stopped it though! IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

4:22pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Solomon's Boot says...

People should be charged a small fee for missing appointments. Simple!

It's common courtesy to make a phone call. Mind you, with the state of manners in today's society, I guess it's not surprising that people just can't be bothered!
People should be charged a small fee for missing appointments. Simple! It's common courtesy to make a phone call. Mind you, with the state of manners in today's society, I guess it's not surprising that people just can't be bothered! Solomon's Boot
  • Score: 0

4:29pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Georgem says...

southy wrote:
Go back to the old way where you just turned up at the surgery with out appointment or phoned up for results or a home visit.
Yes, I'm sure it would be great to have absolutely no idea how long a visit to the doctors will take. We can all just take endless days off work to go to the doctor.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Go back to the old way where you just turned up at the surgery with out appointment or phoned up for results or a home visit.[/p][/quote]Yes, I'm sure it would be great to have absolutely no idea how long a visit to the doctors will take. We can all just take endless days off work to go to the doctor. Georgem
  • Score: 0

4:31pm Sat 1 Sep 12

sparkster says...

I know its annoying when you ring and are put on hold for ages but i'd still rather do that and let someone else have the benefit of my appointment. I agree a small fee is a good idea, dentists charge a fine for missed appointments. Solomon's Boot is right about the state of manner's in today's society in a lot of cases what manners
I know its annoying when you ring and are put on hold for ages but i'd still rather do that and let someone else have the benefit of my appointment. I agree a small fee is a good idea, dentists charge a fine for missed appointments. Solomon's Boot is right about the state of manner's in today's society in a lot of cases what manners sparkster
  • Score: 0

5:00pm Sat 1 Sep 12

IronLady2010 says...

Georgem wrote:
southy wrote:
Go back to the old way where you just turned up at the surgery with out appointment or phoned up for results or a home visit.
Yes, I'm sure it would be great to have absolutely no idea how long a visit to the doctors will take. We can all just take endless days off work to go to the doctor.
It used to work in our old surgery in Oxford Street. The mornings were walk in open surgery and the afternoons were for appointments.

Therefore if it was urgent you could be seen without an appointment, we used to wait for approx 30 minutes, but you could phone up and ask how big the wait was.

They now run a system whereby you have to phone up at 8am and the fasted finger gets an appointment that morning, the same thing at 12pm everyone has to phone and the fastest ones get a pm appointment.

They also have another GP who works the same times but for pre-booked appointments only.

The problem with pre-booked appointments is when you're feeling really ill and are constantly sleeping, it can be easy to miss the appointment.
[quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Go back to the old way where you just turned up at the surgery with out appointment or phoned up for results or a home visit.[/p][/quote]Yes, I'm sure it would be great to have absolutely no idea how long a visit to the doctors will take. We can all just take endless days off work to go to the doctor.[/p][/quote]It used to work in our old surgery in Oxford Street. The mornings were walk in open surgery and the afternoons were for appointments. Therefore if it was urgent you could be seen without an appointment, we used to wait for approx 30 minutes, but you could phone up and ask how big the wait was. They now run a system whereby you have to phone up at 8am and the fasted finger gets an appointment that morning, the same thing at 12pm everyone has to phone and the fastest ones get a pm appointment. They also have another GP who works the same times but for pre-booked appointments only. The problem with pre-booked appointments is when you're feeling really ill and are constantly sleeping, it can be easy to miss the appointment. IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

5:28pm Sat 1 Sep 12

jonnyx says...

SOULJACKER wrote:
Let's face it......

Shirley isn't called the "Mutant mile" for no reason, it is probably all them Polish that hang around drinking "Tyskie" & leaving their cans everywhere!

Just saying :P
xenophobic pr**k.
[quote][p][bold]SOULJACKER[/bold] wrote: Let's face it...... Shirley isn't called the "Mutant mile" for no reason, it is probably all them Polish that hang around drinking "Tyskie" & leaving their cans everywhere! Just saying :P[/p][/quote]xenophobic pr**k. jonnyx
  • Score: 0

5:37pm Sat 1 Sep 12

sotonbusdriver says...

Maybe people are turning up, but find it difficult to locate a parking space,, At times there are no spaces near Victor Street...
By the time they have found somwhere, and walked if they can to the surgery they know they would be late anyway...
Luckily my GP has a large ample FREE car park and I don't think sufferes these problems as much...
Some surgeries are so booked up it can be weeks before you can get an appointment and I expect the ailment has gone, or they have gone to A&E instead, then forget to cancel...
Maybe people are turning up, but find it difficult to locate a parking space,, At times there are no spaces near Victor Street... By the time they have found somwhere, and walked if they can to the surgery they know they would be late anyway... Luckily my GP has a large ample FREE car park and I don't think sufferes these problems as much... Some surgeries are so booked up it can be weeks before you can get an appointment and I expect the ailment has gone, or they have gone to A&E instead, then forget to cancel... sotonbusdriver
  • Score: 0

5:55pm Sat 1 Sep 12

southy says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
Go back to the old way where you just turned up at the surgery with out appointment or phoned up for results or a home visit.
That is actually a good suggestion. Our surgery used to have an open surgery each morning from 8am til 12pm, just turn up and wait. Then the afternoons were for appointments, they stopped it though!
I do remember them also and yes it did work well even if you was working.
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Go back to the old way where you just turned up at the surgery with out appointment or phoned up for results or a home visit.[/p][/quote]That is actually a good suggestion. Our surgery used to have an open surgery each morning from 8am til 12pm, just turn up and wait. Then the afternoons were for appointments, they stopped it though![/p][/quote]I do remember them also and yes it did work well even if you was working. southy
  • Score: 0

5:58pm Sat 1 Sep 12

moocowpoorchick says...

I was with this surgery most of my adult life but have recently moved as I could not get appointment, the arrogant rude receptionists are beyond belief, I work fulltime and rarely need to visit the gp when I do want an appointment I get told no as I have called to early or the book diary is not open for appointments etc etc, Drs at victor street are great but appointments and reception is the worst I have encountered in any walk of life!
I was with this surgery most of my adult life but have recently moved as I could not get appointment, the arrogant rude receptionists are beyond belief, I work fulltime and rarely need to visit the gp when I do want an appointment I get told no as I have called to early or the book diary is not open for appointments etc etc, Drs at victor street are great but appointments and reception is the worst I have encountered in any walk of life! moocowpoorchick
  • Score: 0

6:04pm Sat 1 Sep 12

southy says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
Georgem wrote:
southy wrote:
Go back to the old way where you just turned up at the surgery with out appointment or phoned up for results or a home visit.
Yes, I'm sure it would be great to have absolutely no idea how long a visit to the doctors will take. We can all just take endless days off work to go to the doctor.
It used to work in our old surgery in Oxford Street. The mornings were walk in open surgery and the afternoons were for appointments.

Therefore if it was urgent you could be seen without an appointment, we used to wait for approx 30 minutes, but you could phone up and ask how big the wait was.

They now run a system whereby you have to phone up at 8am and the fasted finger gets an appointment that morning, the same thing at 12pm everyone has to phone and the fastest ones get a pm appointment.

They also have another GP who works the same times but for pre-booked appointments only.

The problem with pre-booked appointments is when you're feeling really ill and are constantly sleeping, it can be easy to miss the appointment.
Georgem My old doctors surgery there was 2 doctors running 2 surgerys every day and a sunday only one would be open at a time, they had one in Shirley and one in Redbridge in wimpson Lane, and at the Time they was the only Doctors surgery on the then new Millbrook Housing Estate in Redbridge.
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Go back to the old way where you just turned up at the surgery with out appointment or phoned up for results or a home visit.[/p][/quote]Yes, I'm sure it would be great to have absolutely no idea how long a visit to the doctors will take. We can all just take endless days off work to go to the doctor.[/p][/quote]It used to work in our old surgery in Oxford Street. The mornings were walk in open surgery and the afternoons were for appointments. Therefore if it was urgent you could be seen without an appointment, we used to wait for approx 30 minutes, but you could phone up and ask how big the wait was. They now run a system whereby you have to phone up at 8am and the fasted finger gets an appointment that morning, the same thing at 12pm everyone has to phone and the fastest ones get a pm appointment. They also have another GP who works the same times but for pre-booked appointments only. The problem with pre-booked appointments is when you're feeling really ill and are constantly sleeping, it can be easy to miss the appointment.[/p][/quote]Georgem My old doctors surgery there was 2 doctors running 2 surgerys every day and a sunday only one would be open at a time, they had one in Shirley and one in Redbridge in wimpson Lane, and at the Time they was the only Doctors surgery on the then new Millbrook Housing Estate in Redbridge. southy
  • Score: 0

6:06pm Sat 1 Sep 12

southy says...

Tuby open up the post on "No apology from city councillor's wife after offensive remarks"
Tuby open up the post on "No apology from city councillor's wife after offensive remarks" southy
  • Score: 0

6:12pm Sat 1 Sep 12

ohec says...

The other question you have to ask is did they really need the appointment in the first place, also i had an eye problem so i asked the pharmacist who gave me some drops and they worked fine the only trouble is they cost me £4.50 if i had gone to the doctors they would have been free, so that will be my last attempt at helping the system. I would also like to know what percentage of peoples visits do the doctors consider unnecessary. But i do think £5 for a DNA with no more appointments until its paid would be fair.
The other question you have to ask is did they really need the appointment in the first place, also i had an eye problem so i asked the pharmacist who gave me some drops and they worked fine the only trouble is they cost me £4.50 if i had gone to the doctors they would have been free, so that will be my last attempt at helping the system. I would also like to know what percentage of peoples visits do the doctors consider unnecessary. But i do think £5 for a DNA with no more appointments until its paid would be fair. ohec
  • Score: 0

6:29pm Sat 1 Sep 12

jazzi says...

I have lived in Southampton for just over 20 years now and the Cheviot road practice has always been my doctors. I have only the greatest of admiration for their staff and doctors, they go out of their way to be helpful and if my doctor is not available, I can see another. Never have the reception staff been rude yet when calling the above surgery to cancel for a friend who sadly was rushed into hospital, I was kept on hold whilst staff discussed a rude patient, they really need to sort out their phone system and deal with their staff. when I finally got to speak to the receptionist i was told I could of called earlier, it cost me over £4 in call charges and I was told off like a naughty child. I am sooooo not surprised people don't bother calling, Why on earth go to the echo to make a point when your own surgery and reception has the answers beggers belief.
I have lived in Southampton for just over 20 years now and the Cheviot road practice has always been my doctors. I have only the greatest of admiration for their staff and doctors, they go out of their way to be helpful and if my doctor is not available, I can see another. Never have the reception staff been rude yet when calling the above surgery to cancel for a friend who sadly was rushed into hospital, I was kept on hold whilst staff discussed a rude patient, they really need to sort out their phone system and deal with their staff. when I finally got to speak to the receptionist i was told I could of called earlier, it cost me over £4 in call charges and I was told off like a naughty child. I am sooooo not surprised people don't bother calling, Why on earth go to the echo to make a point when your own surgery and reception has the answers beggers belief. jazzi
  • Score: 0

6:38pm Sat 1 Sep 12

peasant says...

Why don't my patients turn up? Maybe these are your high cholesterol/heart patients who are so messed up on statins they can't remember the appointment or where the surgery is? Just a thought!
Why don't my patients turn up? Maybe these are your high cholesterol/heart patients who are so messed up on statins they can't remember the appointment or where the surgery is? Just a thought! peasant
  • Score: 0

6:39pm Sat 1 Sep 12

cliffwalker says...

I notice that this doctor has an 0844 phone number which costs the caller more than a normal landline number. I believe the difference in cost is shared with the owner of the number so the surgery makes a profit every time it is called for any reason.
I notice that this doctor has an 0844 phone number which costs the caller more than a normal landline number. I believe the difference in cost is shared with the owner of the number so the surgery makes a profit every time it is called for any reason. cliffwalker
  • Score: 0

6:46pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Adlof Hilter says...

What a shame people are still peddling the idea that NHS 0844 numbers are "premium rate". They are NOT. They cost about 0.2p yes- POINT 2 p per minute over and above the standard BT rate, and enable NHS bodies to pay for more sophisticated phone systems so you can book your appointment by phone at midnight.
Of course, if you have a Vrgine landline Sir Richard charges you 14p per minute- that is not the NHS's fault.
Meanwhile patients expect the NHS to phone them on mobiles at 10p per minute!
What a shame people are still peddling the idea that NHS 0844 numbers are "premium rate". They are NOT. They cost about 0.2p yes- POINT 2 p per minute over and above the standard BT rate, and enable NHS bodies to pay for more sophisticated phone systems so you can book your appointment by phone at midnight. Of course, if you have a Vrgine landline Sir Richard charges you 14p per minute- that is not the NHS's fault. Meanwhile patients expect the NHS to phone them on mobiles at 10p per minute! Adlof Hilter
  • Score: 0

7:01pm Sat 1 Sep 12

OSPREYSAINT says...

Last time I went to see my quack he said "Haven't seen you for a long time" I said " No I've been ill".
Last time I went to see my quack he said "Haven't seen you for a long time" I said " No I've been ill". OSPREYSAINT
  • Score: 0

7:08pm Sat 1 Sep 12

IronLady2010 says...

Adlof Hilter wrote:
What a shame people are still peddling the idea that NHS 0844 numbers are "premium rate". They are NOT. They cost about 0.2p yes- POINT 2 p per minute over and above the standard BT rate, and enable NHS bodies to pay for more sophisticated phone systems so you can book your appointment by phone at midnight.
Of course, if you have a Vrgine landline Sir Richard charges you 14p per minute- that is not the NHS's fault.
Meanwhile patients expect the NHS to phone them on mobiles at 10p per minute!
You forget many people still have no landline. Calling such numbers from a PAYG mobile cost so much more.

It's very much like when we break down in a car you are given an 0845 number to call, which costs much more than calling a normal landline number which is generally included in free minutes etc. (from a mobile)
[quote][p][bold]Adlof Hilter[/bold] wrote: What a shame people are still peddling the idea that NHS 0844 numbers are "premium rate". They are NOT. They cost about 0.2p yes- POINT 2 p per minute over and above the standard BT rate, and enable NHS bodies to pay for more sophisticated phone systems so you can book your appointment by phone at midnight. Of course, if you have a Vrgine landline Sir Richard charges you 14p per minute- that is not the NHS's fault. Meanwhile patients expect the NHS to phone them on mobiles at 10p per minute![/p][/quote]You forget many people still have no landline. Calling such numbers from a PAYG mobile cost so much more. It's very much like when we break down in a car you are given an 0845 number to call, which costs much more than calling a normal landline number which is generally included in free minutes etc. (from a mobile) IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

7:37pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Scrutinizer says...

I don't care what anyone says on this subject, for me there is no getting away from the simple fact that there is an increasing attitude in modern society, whereby many people just can not be bothered to notify others about their being late for an appointment or having to cancel it - irrespective of whether the excuse is a genuine one or not! It's called having respect for others and using something called common courtesy. There is a similar situation with people turning up late for work, especially - but not exclusively, by any means - amongst the young. I've experienced this, myself, with people time and time again...
I don't care what anyone says on this subject, for me there is no getting away from the simple fact that there is an increasing attitude in modern society, whereby many people just can not be bothered to notify others about their being late for an appointment or having to cancel it - irrespective of whether the excuse is a genuine one or not! It's called having respect for others and using something called common courtesy. There is a similar situation with people turning up late for work, especially - but not exclusively, by any means - amongst the young. I've experienced this, myself, with people time and time again... Scrutinizer
  • Score: 0

7:46pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Lone Ranger. says...

southy wrote:
Tuby open up the post on "No apology from city councillor's wife after offensive remarks"
Quite agree Southy. Could be some interesting comments..... Perhaps the Echo wont like the criticism
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Tuby open up the post on "No apology from city councillor's wife after offensive remarks"[/p][/quote]Quite agree Southy. Could be some interesting comments..... Perhaps the Echo wont like the criticism Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

7:51pm Sat 1 Sep 12

AndyAndrews says...

southy wrote:
Tuby open up the post on "No apology from city councillor's wife after offensive remarks"
Yes, why are we being denied a chance to comment on the Thorpes?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Tuby open up the post on "No apology from city councillor's wife after offensive remarks"[/p][/quote]Yes, why are we being denied a chance to comment on the Thorpes? AndyAndrews
  • Score: 0

8:02pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Scrutinizer says...

The Echo is getting like the BBC, far too fussy about receiving comments about 'sensitive' stories. You don't get this to anything like the same extent on the U.S. news web sites.
The Echo is getting like the BBC, far too fussy about receiving comments about 'sensitive' stories. You don't get this to anything like the same extent on the U.S. news web sites. Scrutinizer
  • Score: 0

8:17pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Scrutinizer says...

What's the betting that this story will soon be closed down, for fear of too many critical comments on here about the inability to post comment on other stories - such as...well, we all know which!
What's the betting that this story will soon be closed down, for fear of too many critical comments on here about the inability to post comment on other stories - such as...well, we all know which! Scrutinizer
  • Score: 0

8:21pm Sat 1 Sep 12

freefinker says...

Scrutinizer wrote:
The Echo is getting like the BBC, far too fussy about receiving comments about 'sensitive' stories. You don't get this to anything like the same extent on the U.S. news web sites.
.. oh yes, but when the Echo says: -

"The remarks were posted anonymously under the username “commnurse” – but the Daily Echo can reveal that they were written by Mrs Thorpe. "

they are using the info they have held on her since she first registered to comment in these columns.

We may 'hide' behind our made up names, but remember this story - it is not beyond the Echo to expose you with personal information you thought was confidential.
[quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: The Echo is getting like the BBC, far too fussy about receiving comments about 'sensitive' stories. You don't get this to anything like the same extent on the U.S. news web sites.[/p][/quote].. oh yes, but when the Echo says: - "The remarks were posted anonymously under the username “commnurse” – but the Daily Echo can reveal that they were written by Mrs Thorpe. " they are using the info they have held on her since she first registered to comment in these columns. We may 'hide' behind our made up names, but remember this story - it is not beyond the Echo to expose you with personal information you thought was confidential. freefinker
  • Score: 0

8:24pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
southy wrote:
Tuby open up the post on "No apology from city councillor's wife after offensive remarks"
Quite agree Southy. Could be some interesting comments..... Perhaps the Echo wont like the criticism
Absolutely right.

Having done excellent bit of journalism by exposing this foul mouthed woman and her husband (NuLabour's Cllr. Thorpe who is either arrogant or stupid or combination of both, for failing to condemn the most disgraceful actions of his beloved wife, thus associating with her obnoxious views) why Echo's own website is not allowing us the people of Southampton insulted by her to respond about both in kind.

What happened to rules for fairness, which should provide victims these nasty NuLabourite creatures rights of reply?

Come on Ian Murray; stop your people imposing this most ridiculous censorship.
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Tuby open up the post on "No apology from city councillor's wife after offensive remarks"[/p][/quote]Quite agree Southy. Could be some interesting comments..... Perhaps the Echo wont like the criticism[/p][/quote]Absolutely right. Having done excellent bit of journalism by exposing this foul mouthed woman and her husband (NuLabour's Cllr. Thorpe who is either arrogant or stupid or combination of both, for failing to condemn the most disgraceful actions of his beloved wife, thus associating with her obnoxious views) why Echo's own website is not allowing us the people of Southampton insulted by her to respond about both in kind. What happened to rules for fairness, which should provide victims these nasty NuLabourite creatures rights of reply? Come on Ian Murray; stop your people imposing this most ridiculous censorship. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

8:28pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
There are some circumstances whereby you may miss an appointment. If you are really ill for example and cannot get out of bed.

Let us also not forget some people don't have landlines and rely on PAYG mobiles, some may not have credit and are too ill to go to a phone box.

There are also those who simply cannot be bothered.
Also there could be few who may have over enjoyed few liters of beer or bottles of wine previous evening!
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: There are some circumstances whereby you may miss an appointment. If you are really ill for example and cannot get out of bed. Let us also not forget some people don't have landlines and rely on PAYG mobiles, some may not have credit and are too ill to go to a phone box. There are also those who simply cannot be bothered.[/p][/quote]Also there could be few who may have over enjoyed few liters of beer or bottles of wine previous evening! Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

8:37pm Sat 1 Sep 12

IronLady2010 says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
southy wrote:
Tuby open up the post on "No apology from city councillor's wife after offensive remarks"
Quite agree Southy. Could be some interesting comments..... Perhaps the Echo wont like the criticism
Absolutely right.

Having done excellent bit of journalism by exposing this foul mouthed woman and her husband (NuLabour's Cllr. Thorpe who is either arrogant or stupid or combination of both, for failing to condemn the most disgraceful actions of his beloved wife, thus associating with her obnoxious views) why Echo's own website is not allowing us the people of Southampton insulted by her to respond about both in kind.

What happened to rules for fairness, which should provide victims these nasty NuLabourite creatures rights of reply?

Come on Ian Murray; stop your people imposing this most ridiculous censorship.
She is entitled to an opinion as we all are surely? She is not a Councillor, I assume she is just a normal person like me and you, so why can't she speak her mind?
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Tuby open up the post on "No apology from city councillor's wife after offensive remarks"[/p][/quote]Quite agree Southy. Could be some interesting comments..... Perhaps the Echo wont like the criticism[/p][/quote]Absolutely right. Having done excellent bit of journalism by exposing this foul mouthed woman and her husband (NuLabour's Cllr. Thorpe who is either arrogant or stupid or combination of both, for failing to condemn the most disgraceful actions of his beloved wife, thus associating with her obnoxious views) why Echo's own website is not allowing us the people of Southampton insulted by her to respond about both in kind. What happened to rules for fairness, which should provide victims these nasty NuLabourite creatures rights of reply? Come on Ian Murray; stop your people imposing this most ridiculous censorship.[/p][/quote]She is entitled to an opinion as we all are surely? She is not a Councillor, I assume she is just a normal person like me and you, so why can't she speak her mind? IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

8:38pm Sat 1 Sep 12

freefinker says...

.. well, here we go, we ARE commenting.

I think she is entitled to her views.
She is NOT councillor Thorpe.
Why the indignation now?
She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate.
No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now?

My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.
.. well, here we go, we ARE commenting. I think she is entitled to her views. She is NOT councillor Thorpe. Why the indignation now? She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate. No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now? My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item. freefinker
  • Score: 0

8:38pm Sat 1 Sep 12

bazzeroz says...

I went to the doctors the other day and told him that when I lift my arm up it hurts. He said 'don't lift it up then!' (Rock on Tommy Cooper)
I went to the doctors the other day and told him that when I lift my arm up it hurts. He said 'don't lift it up then!' (Rock on Tommy Cooper) bazzeroz
  • Score: 0

8:39pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

I think most waste of medical staff time is due to people missing the appointments in hospitals, or at least that is impression I am under.

I understand from a GP friend that due to targets in which patients should be seen, most of them were left with no choice but to introduce strictly appointment only system, which can be a good idea for those who can arrange when to get ill.
I think most waste of medical staff time is due to people missing the appointments in hospitals, or at least that is impression I am under. I understand from a GP friend that due to targets in which patients should be seen, most of them were left with no choice but to introduce strictly appointment only system, which can be a good idea for those who can arrange when to get ill. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

8:46pm Sat 1 Sep 12

IronLady2010 says...

freefinker wrote:
.. well, here we go, we ARE commenting.

I think she is entitled to her views.
She is NOT councillor Thorpe.
Why the indignation now?
She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate.
No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now?

My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.
Privacy Policy..............
......
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: .. well, here we go, we ARE commenting. I think she is entitled to her views. She is NOT councillor Thorpe. Why the indignation now? She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate. No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now? My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.[/p][/quote]Privacy Policy.............. ...... IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

8:47pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Lone Ranger. says...

freefinker wrote:
.. well, here we go, we ARE commenting.

I think she is entitled to her views.
She is NOT councillor Thorpe.
Why the indignation now?
She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate.
No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now?

My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.
You are spot on.
.
The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: .. well, here we go, we ARE commenting. I think she is entitled to her views. She is NOT councillor Thorpe. Why the indignation now? She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate. No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now? My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.[/p][/quote]You are spot on. . The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

8:50pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Lone Ranger. says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
freefinker wrote:
.. well, here we go, we ARE commenting.

I think she is entitled to her views.
She is NOT councillor Thorpe.
Why the indignation now?
She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate.
No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now?

My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.
You are spot on.
.
The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages
IMHO the story is not her comments BUT the Echo's actions re her privacy
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: .. well, here we go, we ARE commenting. I think she is entitled to her views. She is NOT councillor Thorpe. Why the indignation now? She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate. No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now? My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.[/p][/quote]You are spot on. . The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages[/p][/quote]IMHO the story is not her comments BUT the Echo's actions re her privacy Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

8:53pm Sat 1 Sep 12

IronLady2010 says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
freefinker wrote:
.. well, here we go, we ARE commenting.

I think she is entitled to her views.
She is NOT councillor Thorpe.
Why the indignation now?
She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate.
No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now?

My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.
You are spot on.
.
The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages
IMHO the story is not her comments BUT the Echo's actions re her privacy
The Echo could not trace her directly, unless they are watching posters from the same IP and guessing.

Unless they have an insider in the Police who are tracing Ip's?
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: .. well, here we go, we ARE commenting. I think she is entitled to her views. She is NOT councillor Thorpe. Why the indignation now? She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate. No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now? My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.[/p][/quote]You are spot on. . The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages[/p][/quote]IMHO the story is not her comments BUT the Echo's actions re her privacy[/p][/quote]The Echo could not trace her directly, unless they are watching posters from the same IP and guessing. Unless they have an insider in the Police who are tracing Ip's? IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

9:07pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

Yes I agree with those who think Mrs. Thorpe is entitled to her individual opinion.

Her views should not have reflected on her husband, BUT Cllr. Thorpe by expressing his appreciation for her support and by failing to condemn her insults thrown at people of Southampton (in his written statement) has made himself part of her offensive remarks.

Hardly surprising, considering arrogance and hypocrisy have become strong attributes of NuLabourites.

While I have always respected others right to hide behind assumed IDs on Internet, I have also made my position clear; I do not believe in hiding so have always posted stuff under my own name. So I can hardly share the view that Echo has behaved badly. Wish they expose few others, so we know who are posting one thing on this site and are behaving very differently in public.

If during election campaign she as strong supporter of her hubby had said the same in public, how may do anybody think would have still voted for him?

If partner of any Tory or Lib-Dem or some real socailist had behaved in this manner woule traitors of Labour the NuLabourites still be silent? I do not think so.

People should not be applying one set of standrads for likes of Southy and other for NuLabour's own miscrants. If it was wife of Southy many on this site would have made his life hell. I rest my case
Yes I agree with those who think Mrs. Thorpe is entitled to her individual opinion. Her views should not have reflected on her husband, BUT Cllr. Thorpe by expressing his appreciation for her support and by failing to condemn her insults thrown at people of Southampton (in his written statement) has made himself part of her offensive remarks. Hardly surprising, considering arrogance and hypocrisy have become strong attributes of NuLabourites. While I have always respected others right to hide behind assumed IDs on Internet, I have also made my position clear; I do not believe in hiding so have always posted stuff under my own name. So I can hardly share the view that Echo has behaved badly. Wish they expose few others, so we know who are posting one thing on this site and are behaving very differently in public. If during election campaign she as strong supporter of her hubby had said the same in public, how may do anybody think would have still voted for him? If partner of any Tory or Lib-Dem or some real socailist had behaved in this manner woule traitors of Labour the NuLabourites still be silent? I do not think so. People should not be applying one set of standrads for likes of Southy and other for NuLabour's own miscrants. If it was wife of Southy many on this site would have made his life hell. I rest my case Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

9:09pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Maine Lobster says...

Looking at it on a positive basis, as G.P. appointments always seem to run at least 15-30 minutes late, if everybody turned up,that waiting time would be likely to go through the roof
Looking at it on a positive basis, as G.P. appointments always seem to run at least 15-30 minutes late, if everybody turned up,that waiting time would be likely to go through the roof Maine Lobster
  • Score: 0

9:15pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Inform Al says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
southy wrote:
Tuby open up the post on "No apology from city councillor's wife after offensive remarks"
Quite agree Southy. Could be some interesting comments..... Perhaps the Echo wont like the criticism
No problem, just google 'press complaints commission'. I did mine 1st thing.
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Tuby open up the post on "No apology from city councillor's wife after offensive remarks"[/p][/quote]Quite agree Southy. Could be some interesting comments..... Perhaps the Echo wont like the criticism[/p][/quote]No problem, just google 'press complaints commission'. I did mine 1st thing. Inform Al
  • Score: 0

9:16pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Lone Ranger. says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Yes I agree with those who think Mrs. Thorpe is entitled to her individual opinion.

Her views should not have reflected on her husband, BUT Cllr. Thorpe by expressing his appreciation for her support and by failing to condemn her insults thrown at people of Southampton (in his written statement) has made himself part of her offensive remarks.

Hardly surprising, considering arrogance and hypocrisy have become strong attributes of NuLabourites.

While I have always respected others right to hide behind assumed IDs on Internet, I have also made my position clear; I do not believe in hiding so have always posted stuff under my own name. So I can hardly share the view that Echo has behaved badly. Wish they expose few others, so we know who are posting one thing on this site and are behaving very differently in public.

If during election campaign she as strong supporter of her hubby had said the same in public, how may do anybody think would have still voted for him?

If partner of any Tory or Lib-Dem or some real socailist had behaved in this manner woule traitors of Labour the NuLabourites still be silent? I do not think so.

People should not be applying one set of standrads for likes of Southy and other for NuLabour's own miscrants. If it was wife of Southy many on this site would have made his life hell. I rest my case
Not interested in the pollitics whatever your colour of party ..... But the fact that she posted under a name that wasnt her own ...... The Echo then traced that and pinpointed her .... and then .... Plastered her identity across three pages of the Echo.
.
And earlier you posted that was good journalism .... I disagree
.
And this is NOT about politics
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: Yes I agree with those who think Mrs. Thorpe is entitled to her individual opinion. Her views should not have reflected on her husband, BUT Cllr. Thorpe by expressing his appreciation for her support and by failing to condemn her insults thrown at people of Southampton (in his written statement) has made himself part of her offensive remarks. Hardly surprising, considering arrogance and hypocrisy have become strong attributes of NuLabourites. While I have always respected others right to hide behind assumed IDs on Internet, I have also made my position clear; I do not believe in hiding so have always posted stuff under my own name. So I can hardly share the view that Echo has behaved badly. Wish they expose few others, so we know who are posting one thing on this site and are behaving very differently in public. If during election campaign she as strong supporter of her hubby had said the same in public, how may do anybody think would have still voted for him? If partner of any Tory or Lib-Dem or some real socailist had behaved in this manner woule traitors of Labour the NuLabourites still be silent? I do not think so. People should not be applying one set of standrads for likes of Southy and other for NuLabour's own miscrants. If it was wife of Southy many on this site would have made his life hell. I rest my case[/p][/quote]Not interested in the pollitics whatever your colour of party ..... But the fact that she posted under a name that wasnt her own ...... The Echo then traced that and pinpointed her .... and then .... Plastered her identity across three pages of the Echo. . And earlier you posted that was good journalism .... I disagree . And this is NOT about politics Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

9:17pm Sat 1 Sep 12

IronLady2010 says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Yes I agree with those who think Mrs. Thorpe is entitled to her individual opinion.

Her views should not have reflected on her husband, BUT Cllr. Thorpe by expressing his appreciation for her support and by failing to condemn her insults thrown at people of Southampton (in his written statement) has made himself part of her offensive remarks.

Hardly surprising, considering arrogance and hypocrisy have become strong attributes of NuLabourites.

While I have always respected others right to hide behind assumed IDs on Internet, I have also made my position clear; I do not believe in hiding so have always posted stuff under my own name. So I can hardly share the view that Echo has behaved badly. Wish they expose few others, so we know who are posting one thing on this site and are behaving very differently in public.

If during election campaign she as strong supporter of her hubby had said the same in public, how may do anybody think would have still voted for him?

If partner of any Tory or Lib-Dem or some real socailist had behaved in this manner woule traitors of Labour the NuLabourites still be silent? I do not think so.

People should not be applying one set of standrads for likes of Southy and other for NuLabour's own miscrants. If it was wife of Southy many on this site would have made his life hell. I rest my case
Many on here actually like Southy, he is a one off. He stands up for what he believes If he could once in a while admit to an error he would get much more respect.

We all hold opinions and that is what this site is all about. Lately for example, you have given some great info and opinions, Southy has gone off on one or two incorrect tangents, but we soon forgive him.

The wonderful world of the web, shame the Echo have ruined the anonymous part, can we ever trust them in the future?
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: Yes I agree with those who think Mrs. Thorpe is entitled to her individual opinion. Her views should not have reflected on her husband, BUT Cllr. Thorpe by expressing his appreciation for her support and by failing to condemn her insults thrown at people of Southampton (in his written statement) has made himself part of her offensive remarks. Hardly surprising, considering arrogance and hypocrisy have become strong attributes of NuLabourites. While I have always respected others right to hide behind assumed IDs on Internet, I have also made my position clear; I do not believe in hiding so have always posted stuff under my own name. So I can hardly share the view that Echo has behaved badly. Wish they expose few others, so we know who are posting one thing on this site and are behaving very differently in public. If during election campaign she as strong supporter of her hubby had said the same in public, how may do anybody think would have still voted for him? If partner of any Tory or Lib-Dem or some real socailist had behaved in this manner woule traitors of Labour the NuLabourites still be silent? I do not think so. People should not be applying one set of standrads for likes of Southy and other for NuLabour's own miscrants. If it was wife of Southy many on this site would have made his life hell. I rest my case[/p][/quote]Many on here actually like Southy, he is a one off. He stands up for what he believes If he could once in a while admit to an error he would get much more respect. We all hold opinions and that is what this site is all about. Lately for example, you have given some great info and opinions, Southy has gone off on one or two incorrect tangents, but we soon forgive him. The wonderful world of the web, shame the Echo have ruined the anonymous part, can we ever trust them in the future? IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

9:19pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Lone Ranger. says...

I apologise to all for hijacking this article re appontments .... but feel that the Echo are well out of order on their Thorpe "news"
I apologise to all for hijacking this article re appontments .... but feel that the Echo are well out of order on their Thorpe "news" Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

9:19pm Sat 1 Sep 12

loosehead says...

G0Rf wrote:
Maybe if victor street surgery didn't have an 0844 premium rate phone number then people would bother to phone and cancel their appointments!
Doesn't take a genius to work out that most people local to this surgery only have mobile phones and are not prepared to pay to phone an 0844!
They should do a 3 strike rule, 3 DNA's and u get a fine!
I was a patient at Victor street but I'm now in Lordshill & I'm sure they both have a 02380 number & a 084? number.
you can phone either but the latter usually get's answered whilst the 80 number you're usually waiting for a reply.
with Victor street as Well as Lordshill if you know you can't make the appointment you can park in sainsbury's car park or in shirley in one of the car p[arks & cancel or rearrange the appointment.
if a call is thought of being too dear then the appointment wasn't that necessary was it?
if you really need to see a doctor you will get there even if you had to pay a taxi you'd get there
[quote][p][bold]G0Rf[/bold] wrote: Maybe if victor street surgery didn't have an 0844 premium rate phone number then people would bother to phone and cancel their appointments! Doesn't take a genius to work out that most people local to this surgery only have mobile phones and are not prepared to pay to phone an 0844! They should do a 3 strike rule, 3 DNA's and u get a fine![/p][/quote]I was a patient at Victor street but I'm now in Lordshill & I'm sure they both have a 02380 number & a 084? number. you can phone either but the latter usually get's answered whilst the 80 number you're usually waiting for a reply. with Victor street as Well as Lordshill if you know you can't make the appointment you can park in sainsbury's car park or in shirley in one of the car p[arks & cancel or rearrange the appointment. if a call is thought of being too dear then the appointment wasn't that necessary was it? if you really need to see a doctor you will get there even if you had to pay a taxi you'd get there loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:20pm Sat 1 Sep 12

IronLady2010 says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
I apologise to all for hijacking this article re appontments .... but feel that the Echo are well out of order on their Thorpe "news"
Agree!
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: I apologise to all for hijacking this article re appontments .... but feel that the Echo are well out of order on their Thorpe "news"[/p][/quote]Agree! IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

9:21pm Sat 1 Sep 12

loosehead says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
There are some circumstances whereby you may miss an appointment. If you are really ill for example and cannot get out of bed.

Let us also not forget some people don't have landlines and rely on PAYG mobiles, some may not have credit and are too ill to go to a phone box.

There are also those who simply cannot be bothered.
Ironlady if you're that ill surely you or a family member will have booked a home visit?
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: There are some circumstances whereby you may miss an appointment. If you are really ill for example and cannot get out of bed. Let us also not forget some people don't have landlines and rely on PAYG mobiles, some may not have credit and are too ill to go to a phone box. There are also those who simply cannot be bothered.[/p][/quote]Ironlady if you're that ill surely you or a family member will have booked a home visit? loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:23pm Sat 1 Sep 12

loosehead says...

sotonbusdriver wrote:
Maybe people are turning up, but find it difficult to locate a parking space,, At times there are no spaces near Victor Street...
By the time they have found somwhere, and walked if they can to the surgery they know they would be late anyway...
Luckily my GP has a large ample FREE car park and I don't think sufferes these problems as much...
Some surgeries are so booked up it can be weeks before you can get an appointment and I expect the ailment has gone, or they have gone to A&E instead, then forget to cancel...
Funny that I park behind Oswald Baileys & never have a problem finding a place?
[quote][p][bold]sotonbusdriver[/bold] wrote: Maybe people are turning up, but find it difficult to locate a parking space,, At times there are no spaces near Victor Street... By the time they have found somwhere, and walked if they can to the surgery they know they would be late anyway... Luckily my GP has a large ample FREE car park and I don't think sufferes these problems as much... Some surgeries are so booked up it can be weeks before you can get an appointment and I expect the ailment has gone, or they have gone to A&E instead, then forget to cancel...[/p][/quote]Funny that I park behind Oswald Baileys & never have a problem finding a place? loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:24pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Inform Al says...

My Doctor, not the nearest by far will always offer an appointment same day after surgery or usually next day. Because of this I will not change to a nearer surgery as I know both the local ones work on about a weeks time. I suspect that my own doctor has far fewer missed appointments than those that do not offer an appointment within a couple of days.
My Doctor, not the nearest by far will always offer an appointment same day after surgery or usually next day. Because of this I will not change to a nearer surgery as I know both the local ones work on about a weeks time. I suspect that my own doctor has far fewer missed appointments than those that do not offer an appointment within a couple of days. Inform Al
  • Score: 0

9:28pm Sat 1 Sep 12

IronLady2010 says...

loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
There are some circumstances whereby you may miss an appointment. If you are really ill for example and cannot get out of bed.

Let us also not forget some people don't have landlines and rely on PAYG mobiles, some may not have credit and are too ill to go to a phone box.

There are also those who simply cannot be bothered.
Ironlady if you're that ill surely you or a family member will have booked a home visit?
I must admit I have missed an appointment once. I was so ill I couldn't do anything, the last thing on my mind was phoning the surgery. It happens.....
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: There are some circumstances whereby you may miss an appointment. If you are really ill for example and cannot get out of bed. Let us also not forget some people don't have landlines and rely on PAYG mobiles, some may not have credit and are too ill to go to a phone box. There are also those who simply cannot be bothered.[/p][/quote]Ironlady if you're that ill surely you or a family member will have booked a home visit?[/p][/quote]I must admit I have missed an appointment once. I was so ill I couldn't do anything, the last thing on my mind was phoning the surgery. It happens..... IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

9:30pm Sat 1 Sep 12

IronLady2010 says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
There are some circumstances whereby you may miss an appointment. If you are really ill for example and cannot get out of bed.

Let us also not forget some people don't have landlines and rely on PAYG mobiles, some may not have credit and are too ill to go to a phone box.

There are also those who simply cannot be bothered.
Ironlady if you're that ill surely you or a family member will have booked a home visit?
I must admit I have missed an appointment once. I was so ill I couldn't do anything, the last thing on my mind was phoning the surgery. It happens.....
I would never request a home visit as I always feel there are others far worse off than me.
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: There are some circumstances whereby you may miss an appointment. If you are really ill for example and cannot get out of bed. Let us also not forget some people don't have landlines and rely on PAYG mobiles, some may not have credit and are too ill to go to a phone box. There are also those who simply cannot be bothered.[/p][/quote]Ironlady if you're that ill surely you or a family member will have booked a home visit?[/p][/quote]I must admit I have missed an appointment once. I was so ill I couldn't do anything, the last thing on my mind was phoning the surgery. It happens.....[/p][/quote]I would never request a home visit as I always feel there are others far worse off than me. IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

9:31pm Sat 1 Sep 12

loosehead says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
southy wrote:
Tuby open up the post on "No apology from city councillor's wife after offensive remarks"
Quite agree Southy. Could be some interesting comments..... Perhaps the Echo wont like the criticism
Absolutely right.

Having done excellent bit of journalism by exposing this foul mouthed woman and her husband (NuLabour's Cllr. Thorpe who is either arrogant or stupid or combination of both, for failing to condemn the most disgraceful actions of his beloved wife, thus associating with her obnoxious views) why Echo's own website is not allowing us the people of Southampton insulted by her to respond about both in kind.

What happened to rules for fairness, which should provide victims these nasty NuLabourite creatures rights of reply?

Come on Ian Murray; stop your people imposing this most ridiculous censorship.
She is entitled to an opinion as we all are surely? She is not a Councillor, I assume she is just a normal person like me and you, so why can't she speak her mind?
Ironlady firstly if the doctors adopted Southy's way the A&E department would be inundated with minor cases of people who couldn't get to see their doctors.
As for Mr's Thorpe she is the wife of a guy who wanted to be a councillor & she printed/posted remarks insulting the very people her husband wanted to represent?
then when elected she still carried on?
he's standing by her? or is it because he actually agrees with her & was party to the posts?
how many politicians have had to resign over their partners actions?
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Tuby open up the post on "No apology from city councillor's wife after offensive remarks"[/p][/quote]Quite agree Southy. Could be some interesting comments..... Perhaps the Echo wont like the criticism[/p][/quote]Absolutely right. Having done excellent bit of journalism by exposing this foul mouthed woman and her husband (NuLabour's Cllr. Thorpe who is either arrogant or stupid or combination of both, for failing to condemn the most disgraceful actions of his beloved wife, thus associating with her obnoxious views) why Echo's own website is not allowing us the people of Southampton insulted by her to respond about both in kind. What happened to rules for fairness, which should provide victims these nasty NuLabourite creatures rights of reply? Come on Ian Murray; stop your people imposing this most ridiculous censorship.[/p][/quote]She is entitled to an opinion as we all are surely? She is not a Councillor, I assume she is just a normal person like me and you, so why can't she speak her mind?[/p][/quote]Ironlady firstly if the doctors adopted Southy's way the A&E department would be inundated with minor cases of people who couldn't get to see their doctors. As for Mr's Thorpe she is the wife of a guy who wanted to be a councillor & she printed/posted remarks insulting the very people her husband wanted to represent? then when elected she still carried on? he's standing by her? or is it because he actually agrees with her & was party to the posts? how many politicians have had to resign over their partners actions? loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:32pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Inform Al says...

OMG, I mentioned the press complaints commission in a post immediately before my latest one and it had disappeared when I next looked, wonder how long this one will last
OMG, I mentioned the press complaints commission in a post immediately before my latest one and it had disappeared when I next looked, wonder how long this one will last Inform Al
  • Score: 0

9:36pm Sat 1 Sep 12

IronLady2010 says...

loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
southy wrote:
Tuby open up the post on "No apology from city councillor's wife after offensive remarks"
Quite agree Southy. Could be some interesting comments..... Perhaps the Echo wont like the criticism
Absolutely right.

Having done excellent bit of journalism by exposing this foul mouthed woman and her husband (NuLabour's Cllr. Thorpe who is either arrogant or stupid or combination of both, for failing to condemn the most disgraceful actions of his beloved wife, thus associating with her obnoxious views) why Echo's own website is not allowing us the people of Southampton insulted by her to respond about both in kind.

What happened to rules for fairness, which should provide victims these nasty NuLabourite creatures rights of reply?

Come on Ian Murray; stop your people imposing this most ridiculous censorship.
She is entitled to an opinion as we all are surely? She is not a Councillor, I assume she is just a normal person like me and you, so why can't she speak her mind?
Ironlady firstly if the doctors adopted Southy's way the A&E department would be inundated with minor cases of people who couldn't get to see their doctors.
As for Mr's Thorpe she is the wife of a guy who wanted to be a councillor & she printed/posted remarks insulting the very people her husband wanted to represent?
then when elected she still carried on?
he's standing by her? or is it because he actually agrees with her & was party to the posts?
how many politicians have had to resign over their partners actions?
She isn't a Councillor though, fair play to her husband for standing up for his wife though ;-)
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Tuby open up the post on "No apology from city councillor's wife after offensive remarks"[/p][/quote]Quite agree Southy. Could be some interesting comments..... Perhaps the Echo wont like the criticism[/p][/quote]Absolutely right. Having done excellent bit of journalism by exposing this foul mouthed woman and her husband (NuLabour's Cllr. Thorpe who is either arrogant or stupid or combination of both, for failing to condemn the most disgraceful actions of his beloved wife, thus associating with her obnoxious views) why Echo's own website is not allowing us the people of Southampton insulted by her to respond about both in kind. What happened to rules for fairness, which should provide victims these nasty NuLabourite creatures rights of reply? Come on Ian Murray; stop your people imposing this most ridiculous censorship.[/p][/quote]She is entitled to an opinion as we all are surely? She is not a Councillor, I assume she is just a normal person like me and you, so why can't she speak her mind?[/p][/quote]Ironlady firstly if the doctors adopted Southy's way the A&E department would be inundated with minor cases of people who couldn't get to see their doctors. As for Mr's Thorpe she is the wife of a guy who wanted to be a councillor & she printed/posted remarks insulting the very people her husband wanted to represent? then when elected she still carried on? he's standing by her? or is it because he actually agrees with her & was party to the posts? how many politicians have had to resign over their partners actions?[/p][/quote]She isn't a Councillor though, fair play to her husband for standing up for his wife though ;-) IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

9:44pm Sat 1 Sep 12

loosehead says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
southy wrote:
Tuby open up the post on "No apology from city councillor's wife after offensive remarks"
Quite agree Southy. Could be some interesting comments..... Perhaps the Echo wont like the criticism
Absolutely right.

Having done excellent bit of journalism by exposing this foul mouthed woman and her husband (NuLabour's Cllr. Thorpe who is either arrogant or stupid or combination of both, for failing to condemn the most disgraceful actions of his beloved wife, thus associating with her obnoxious views) why Echo's own website is not allowing us the people of Southampton insulted by her to respond about both in kind.

What happened to rules for fairness, which should provide victims these nasty NuLabourite creatures rights of reply?

Come on Ian Murray; stop your people imposing this most ridiculous censorship.
She is entitled to an opinion as we all are surely? She is not a Councillor, I assume she is just a normal person like me and you, so why can't she speak her mind?
Ironlady firstly if the doctors adopted Southy's way the A&E department would be inundated with minor cases of people who couldn't get to see their doctors.
As for Mr's Thorpe she is the wife of a guy who wanted to be a councillor & she printed/posted remarks insulting the very people her husband wanted to represent?
then when elected she still carried on?
he's standing by her? or is it because he actually agrees with her & was party to the posts?
how many politicians have had to resign over their partners actions?
She isn't a Councillor though, fair play to her husband for standing up for his wife though ;-)
So if David Camerons wife said send back all non whites or single mums should be made to work or have their children taken away.
Or people on welfare should be put into chain gangs & forced to work this shouldn't have any reflection on him?
I usually agree with you but get real will you.
Have you seen the picture of his wife?
how she has the nerve to slate us is unbelievable. she ought to get of her arse & burn of that ugly fat & maybe stop taking the ugly pills.
I hope she doesn't live in Millbrook Green Park Estate & for her sake she lives in original Millbrook ( Freshfield Rd,Victory Street etc;) as if she lives in the estate I can't see them being to happy with her or her husband
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Tuby open up the post on "No apology from city councillor's wife after offensive remarks"[/p][/quote]Quite agree Southy. Could be some interesting comments..... Perhaps the Echo wont like the criticism[/p][/quote]Absolutely right. Having done excellent bit of journalism by exposing this foul mouthed woman and her husband (NuLabour's Cllr. Thorpe who is either arrogant or stupid or combination of both, for failing to condemn the most disgraceful actions of his beloved wife, thus associating with her obnoxious views) why Echo's own website is not allowing us the people of Southampton insulted by her to respond about both in kind. What happened to rules for fairness, which should provide victims these nasty NuLabourite creatures rights of reply? Come on Ian Murray; stop your people imposing this most ridiculous censorship.[/p][/quote]She is entitled to an opinion as we all are surely? She is not a Councillor, I assume she is just a normal person like me and you, so why can't she speak her mind?[/p][/quote]Ironlady firstly if the doctors adopted Southy's way the A&E department would be inundated with minor cases of people who couldn't get to see their doctors. As for Mr's Thorpe she is the wife of a guy who wanted to be a councillor & she printed/posted remarks insulting the very people her husband wanted to represent? then when elected she still carried on? he's standing by her? or is it because he actually agrees with her & was party to the posts? how many politicians have had to resign over their partners actions?[/p][/quote]She isn't a Councillor though, fair play to her husband for standing up for his wife though ;-)[/p][/quote]So if David Camerons wife said send back all non whites or single mums should be made to work or have their children taken away. Or people on welfare should be put into chain gangs & forced to work this shouldn't have any reflection on him? I usually agree with you but get real will you. Have you seen the picture of his wife? how she has the nerve to slate us is unbelievable. she ought to get of her arse & burn of that ugly fat & maybe stop taking the ugly pills. I hope she doesn't live in Millbrook Green Park Estate & for her sake she lives in original Millbrook ( Freshfield Rd,Victory Street etc;) as if she lives in the estate I can't see them being to happy with her or her husband loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:46pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Des Olated says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
freefinker wrote:
.. well, here we go, we ARE commenting.

I think she is entitled to her views.
She is NOT councillor Thorpe.
Why the indignation now?
She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate.
No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now?

My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.
You are spot on.
.
The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages
IMHO the story is not her comments BUT the Echo's actions re her privacy
Agree with the comments; I suspect there are many posters who do so because of the anonymity of usernames and the Echo exposing her is unsettling.
I suspect it may also be motivated by DE's very pro Emery stand in reporting that particular story.
I'd be interested in how they found out it was Mrs Thorpe posting and why they felt it OK to reveal the information.
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: .. well, here we go, we ARE commenting. I think she is entitled to her views. She is NOT councillor Thorpe. Why the indignation now? She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate. No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now? My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.[/p][/quote]You are spot on. . The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages[/p][/quote]IMHO the story is not her comments BUT the Echo's actions re her privacy[/p][/quote]Agree with the comments; I suspect there are many posters who do so because of the anonymity of usernames and the Echo exposing her is unsettling. I suspect it may also be motivated by DE's very pro Emery stand in reporting that particular story. I'd be interested in how they found out it was Mrs Thorpe posting and why they felt it OK to reveal the information. Des Olated
  • Score: 0

9:50pm Sat 1 Sep 12

freefinker says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
freefinker wrote:
.. well, here we go, we ARE commenting.

I think she is entitled to her views.
She is NOT councillor Thorpe.
Why the indignation now?
She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate.
No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now?

My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.
You are spot on.
.
The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages
IMHO the story is not her comments BUT the Echo's actions re her privacy
The Echo could not trace her directly, unless they are watching posters from the same IP and guessing.

Unless they have an insider in the Police who are tracing Ip's?
I seem to remember when I first registered to comment on this site I had to give my full personal details.

If I'm not wrong, then the ECHO has used her given personal info to perform a character assassination on an ordinary member of the public.

'Ordinary'? - yes, most certainly. None of us deserve to be judged and publically humiliated by the position or reputation of our spouses, family, relatives or, indeed, friends.
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: .. well, here we go, we ARE commenting. I think she is entitled to her views. She is NOT councillor Thorpe. Why the indignation now? She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate. No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now? My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.[/p][/quote]You are spot on. . The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages[/p][/quote]IMHO the story is not her comments BUT the Echo's actions re her privacy[/p][/quote]The Echo could not trace her directly, unless they are watching posters from the same IP and guessing. Unless they have an insider in the Police who are tracing Ip's?[/p][/quote]I seem to remember when I first registered to comment on this site I had to give my full personal details. If I'm not wrong, then the ECHO has used her given personal info to perform a character assassination on an ordinary member of the public. 'Ordinary'? - yes, most certainly. None of us deserve to be judged and publically humiliated by the position or reputation of our spouses, family, relatives or, indeed, friends. freefinker
  • Score: 0

9:50pm Sat 1 Sep 12

loosehead says...

Si if it was Moulton writing incognito slagging his electorate or a partner of a Tory or Liberal councillor doing it with the councillors blessing none of you would want to know?
Si if it was Moulton writing incognito slagging his electorate or a partner of a Tory or Liberal councillor doing it with the councillors blessing none of you would want to know? loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:52pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Lone Ranger. says...

loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
southy wrote:
Tuby open up the post on "No apology from city councillor's wife after offensive remarks"
Quite agree Southy. Could be some interesting comments..... Perhaps the Echo wont like the criticism
Absolutely right.

Having done excellent bit of journalism by exposing this foul mouthed woman and her husband (NuLabour's Cllr. Thorpe who is either arrogant or stupid or combination of both, for failing to condemn the most disgraceful actions of his beloved wife, thus associating with her obnoxious views) why Echo's own website is not allowing us the people of Southampton insulted by her to respond about both in kind.

What happened to rules for fairness, which should provide victims these nasty NuLabourite creatures rights of reply?

Come on Ian Murray; stop your people imposing this most ridiculous censorship.
She is entitled to an opinion as we all are surely? She is not a Councillor, I assume she is just a normal person like me and you, so why can't she speak her mind?
Ironlady firstly if the doctors adopted Southy's way the A&E department would be inundated with minor cases of people who couldn't get to see their doctors.
As for Mr's Thorpe she is the wife of a guy who wanted to be a councillor & she printed/posted remarks insulting the very people her husband wanted to represent?
then when elected she still carried on?
he's standing by her? or is it because he actually agrees with her & was party to the posts?
how many politicians have had to resign over their partners actions?
She isn't a Councillor though, fair play to her husband for standing up for his wife though ;-)
So if David Camerons wife said send back all non whites or single mums should be made to work or have their children taken away.
Or people on welfare should be put into chain gangs & forced to work this shouldn't have any reflection on him?
I usually agree with you but get real will you.
Have you seen the picture of his wife?
how she has the nerve to slate us is unbelievable. she ought to get of her arse & burn of that ugly fat & maybe stop taking the ugly pills.
I hope she doesn't live in Millbrook Green Park Estate & for her sake she lives in original Millbrook ( Freshfield Rd,Victory Street etc;) as if she lives in the estate I can't see them being to happy with her or her husband
You and your comments are a disgrace.
.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Tuby open up the post on "No apology from city councillor's wife after offensive remarks"[/p][/quote]Quite agree Southy. Could be some interesting comments..... Perhaps the Echo wont like the criticism[/p][/quote]Absolutely right. Having done excellent bit of journalism by exposing this foul mouthed woman and her husband (NuLabour's Cllr. Thorpe who is either arrogant or stupid or combination of both, for failing to condemn the most disgraceful actions of his beloved wife, thus associating with her obnoxious views) why Echo's own website is not allowing us the people of Southampton insulted by her to respond about both in kind. What happened to rules for fairness, which should provide victims these nasty NuLabourite creatures rights of reply? Come on Ian Murray; stop your people imposing this most ridiculous censorship.[/p][/quote]She is entitled to an opinion as we all are surely? She is not a Councillor, I assume she is just a normal person like me and you, so why can't she speak her mind?[/p][/quote]Ironlady firstly if the doctors adopted Southy's way the A&E department would be inundated with minor cases of people who couldn't get to see their doctors. As for Mr's Thorpe she is the wife of a guy who wanted to be a councillor & she printed/posted remarks insulting the very people her husband wanted to represent? then when elected she still carried on? he's standing by her? or is it because he actually agrees with her & was party to the posts? how many politicians have had to resign over their partners actions?[/p][/quote]She isn't a Councillor though, fair play to her husband for standing up for his wife though ;-)[/p][/quote]So if David Camerons wife said send back all non whites or single mums should be made to work or have their children taken away. Or people on welfare should be put into chain gangs & forced to work this shouldn't have any reflection on him? I usually agree with you but get real will you. Have you seen the picture of his wife? how she has the nerve to slate us is unbelievable. she ought to get of her arse & burn of that ugly fat & maybe stop taking the ugly pills. I hope she doesn't live in Millbrook Green Park Estate & for her sake she lives in original Millbrook ( Freshfield Rd,Victory Street etc;) as if she lives in the estate I can't see them being to happy with her or her husband[/p][/quote]You and your comments are a disgrace. . Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

9:54pm Sat 1 Sep 12

loosehead says...

freefinker wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
freefinker wrote:
.. well, here we go, we ARE commenting.

I think she is entitled to her views.
She is NOT councillor Thorpe.
Why the indignation now?
She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate.
No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now?

My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.
You are spot on.
.
The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages
IMHO the story is not her comments BUT the Echo's actions re her privacy
The Echo could not trace her directly, unless they are watching posters from the same IP and guessing.

Unless they have an insider in the Police who are tracing Ip's?
I seem to remember when I first registered to comment on this site I had to give my full personal details.

If I'm not wrong, then the ECHO has used her given personal info to perform a character assassination on an ordinary member of the public.

'Ordinary'? - yes, most certainly. None of us deserve to be judged and publically humiliated by the position or reputation of our spouses, family, relatives or, indeed, friends.
What? she has a position of responsibility doesn't she?
isn't it hypocritical of her husband standing to represent people if his wife & possibly him feel like this about us the people of this city?
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: .. well, here we go, we ARE commenting. I think she is entitled to her views. She is NOT councillor Thorpe. Why the indignation now? She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate. No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now? My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.[/p][/quote]You are spot on. . The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages[/p][/quote]IMHO the story is not her comments BUT the Echo's actions re her privacy[/p][/quote]The Echo could not trace her directly, unless they are watching posters from the same IP and guessing. Unless they have an insider in the Police who are tracing Ip's?[/p][/quote]I seem to remember when I first registered to comment on this site I had to give my full personal details. If I'm not wrong, then the ECHO has used her given personal info to perform a character assassination on an ordinary member of the public. 'Ordinary'? - yes, most certainly. None of us deserve to be judged and publically humiliated by the position or reputation of our spouses, family, relatives or, indeed, friends.[/p][/quote]What? she has a position of responsibility doesn't she? isn't it hypocritical of her husband standing to represent people if his wife & possibly him feel like this about us the people of this city? loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:59pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Stillness says...

That works out at £150.00 per hour!! I could get a plumber for that, almost.
That works out at £150.00 per hour!! I could get a plumber for that, almost. Stillness
  • Score: 0

10:00pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Des Olated says...

loosehead wrote:
Si if it was Moulton writing incognito slagging his electorate or a partner of a Tory or Liberal councillor doing it with the councillors blessing none of you would want to know?
No, part of the "fun" of website anonymity is complete freedom of expression. The poster's identity should remain anonymous unless they choose to reveal it themselves (Paramjit).
There is a poster who uses Southy's first name all the time, this IMHO is rude as they choose to remain anonymous yet reveal the other poster's name?
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: Si if it was Moulton writing incognito slagging his electorate or a partner of a Tory or Liberal councillor doing it with the councillors blessing none of you would want to know?[/p][/quote]No, part of the "fun" of website anonymity is complete freedom of expression. The poster's identity should remain anonymous unless they choose to reveal it themselves (Paramjit). There is a poster who uses Southy's first name all the time, this IMHO is rude as they choose to remain anonymous yet reveal the other poster's name? Des Olated
  • Score: 0

10:02pm Sat 1 Sep 12

IronLady2010 says...

loosehead wrote:
freefinker wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
freefinker wrote:
.. well, here we go, we ARE commenting.

I think she is entitled to her views.
She is NOT councillor Thorpe.
Why the indignation now?
She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate.
No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now?

My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.
You are spot on.
.
The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages
IMHO the story is not her comments BUT the Echo's actions re her privacy
The Echo could not trace her directly, unless they are watching posters from the same IP and guessing.

Unless they have an insider in the Police who are tracing Ip's?
I seem to remember when I first registered to comment on this site I had to give my full personal details.

If I'm not wrong, then the ECHO has used her given personal info to perform a character assassination on an ordinary member of the public.

'Ordinary'? - yes, most certainly. None of us deserve to be judged and publically humiliated by the position or reputation of our spouses, family, relatives or, indeed, friends.
What? she has a position of responsibility doesn't she?
isn't it hypocritical of her husband standing to represent people if his wife & possibly him feel like this about us the people of this city?
SHE is a normal person, she isn't a Councillor.

Surely she is entitled to her own opinion unless she is under the thumb from the hubby?

Do you control your wife? Do you make sure she doesn't say things you don't want others to hear?

Be fair Loosehead :-)
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: .. well, here we go, we ARE commenting. I think she is entitled to her views. She is NOT councillor Thorpe. Why the indignation now? She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate. No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now? My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.[/p][/quote]You are spot on. . The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages[/p][/quote]IMHO the story is not her comments BUT the Echo's actions re her privacy[/p][/quote]The Echo could not trace her directly, unless they are watching posters from the same IP and guessing. Unless they have an insider in the Police who are tracing Ip's?[/p][/quote]I seem to remember when I first registered to comment on this site I had to give my full personal details. If I'm not wrong, then the ECHO has used her given personal info to perform a character assassination on an ordinary member of the public. 'Ordinary'? - yes, most certainly. None of us deserve to be judged and publically humiliated by the position or reputation of our spouses, family, relatives or, indeed, friends.[/p][/quote]What? she has a position of responsibility doesn't she? isn't it hypocritical of her husband standing to represent people if his wife & possibly him feel like this about us the people of this city?[/p][/quote]SHE is a normal person, she isn't a Councillor. Surely she is entitled to her own opinion unless she is under the thumb from the hubby? Do you control your wife? Do you make sure she doesn't say things you don't want others to hear? Be fair Loosehead :-) IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

10:12pm Sat 1 Sep 12

loosehead says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
freefinker wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
freefinker wrote:
.. well, here we go, we ARE commenting.

I think she is entitled to her views.
She is NOT councillor Thorpe.
Why the indignation now?
She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate.
No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now?

My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.
You are spot on.
.
The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages
IMHO the story is not her comments BUT the Echo's actions re her privacy
The Echo could not trace her directly, unless they are watching posters from the same IP and guessing.

Unless they have an insider in the Police who are tracing Ip's?
I seem to remember when I first registered to comment on this site I had to give my full personal details.

If I'm not wrong, then the ECHO has used her given personal info to perform a character assassination on an ordinary member of the public.

'Ordinary'? - yes, most certainly. None of us deserve to be judged and publically humiliated by the position or reputation of our spouses, family, relatives or, indeed, friends.
What? she has a position of responsibility doesn't she?
isn't it hypocritical of her husband standing to represent people if his wife & possibly him feel like this about us the people of this city?
SHE is a normal person, she isn't a Councillor.

Surely she is entitled to her own opinion unless she is under the thumb from the hubby?

Do you control your wife? Do you make sure she doesn't say things you don't want others to hear?

Be fair Loosehead :-)
In a cutting attack, she wrote: “It’s so amusing to see that the petty-minded, bigoted, inbred of Southampton have decided to have their say on here!

Anger “I only wish that the rest of you led fulfilling and worthwhile lives, but I expect in truth you do not.
I sincerely hope that your working lives are touched with redundancy and then you will truly know how it feels to be abandoned by your colleagues and career that has served you well... this man has given more to society than portrayed in this newspaper, but you cretins who are quick to stand and point will never realise this, get a life.”

And Mrs Thorpe further angered campaigners fighting to save the home and job of long-serving cemetery superintendent Jim Emery.
so you feel this is the right thing for a councillors wife to say?
For her information my father came from Liverpool & my mother came from Southampton how does this make me inbred?
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: .. well, here we go, we ARE commenting. I think she is entitled to her views. She is NOT councillor Thorpe. Why the indignation now? She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate. No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now? My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.[/p][/quote]You are spot on. . The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages[/p][/quote]IMHO the story is not her comments BUT the Echo's actions re her privacy[/p][/quote]The Echo could not trace her directly, unless they are watching posters from the same IP and guessing. Unless they have an insider in the Police who are tracing Ip's?[/p][/quote]I seem to remember when I first registered to comment on this site I had to give my full personal details. If I'm not wrong, then the ECHO has used her given personal info to perform a character assassination on an ordinary member of the public. 'Ordinary'? - yes, most certainly. None of us deserve to be judged and publically humiliated by the position or reputation of our spouses, family, relatives or, indeed, friends.[/p][/quote]What? she has a position of responsibility doesn't she? isn't it hypocritical of her husband standing to represent people if his wife & possibly him feel like this about us the people of this city?[/p][/quote]SHE is a normal person, she isn't a Councillor. Surely she is entitled to her own opinion unless she is under the thumb from the hubby? Do you control your wife? Do you make sure she doesn't say things you don't want others to hear? Be fair Loosehead :-)[/p][/quote]In a cutting attack, she wrote: “It’s so amusing to see that the petty-minded, bigoted, inbred of Southampton have decided to have their say on here! Anger “I only wish that the rest of you led fulfilling and worthwhile lives, but I expect in truth you do not. I sincerely hope that your working lives are touched with redundancy and then you will truly know how it feels to be abandoned by your colleagues and career that has served you well... this man has given more to society than portrayed in this newspaper, but you cretins who are quick to stand and point will never realise this, get a life.” And Mrs Thorpe further angered campaigners fighting to save the home and job of long-serving cemetery superintendent Jim Emery. so you feel this is the right thing for a councillors wife to say? For her information my father came from Liverpool & my mother came from Southampton how does this make me inbred? loosehead
  • Score: 0

10:21pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Inform Al says...

loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
freefinker wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
freefinker wrote:
.. well, here we go, we ARE commenting.

I think she is entitled to her views.
She is NOT councillor Thorpe.
Why the indignation now?
She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate.
No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now?

My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.
You are spot on.
.
The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages
IMHO the story is not her comments BUT the Echo's actions re her privacy
The Echo could not trace her directly, unless they are watching posters from the same IP and guessing.

Unless they have an insider in the Police who are tracing Ip's?
I seem to remember when I first registered to comment on this site I had to give my full personal details.

If I'm not wrong, then the ECHO has used her given personal info to perform a character assassination on an ordinary member of the public.

'Ordinary'? - yes, most certainly. None of us deserve to be judged and publically humiliated by the position or reputation of our spouses, family, relatives or, indeed, friends.
What? she has a position of responsibility doesn't she?
isn't it hypocritical of her husband standing to represent people if his wife & possibly him feel like this about us the people of this city?
SHE is a normal person, she isn't a Councillor.

Surely she is entitled to her own opinion unless she is under the thumb from the hubby?

Do you control your wife? Do you make sure she doesn't say things you don't want others to hear?

Be fair Loosehead :-)
In a cutting attack, she wrote: “It’s so amusing to see that the petty-minded, bigoted, inbred of Southampton have decided to have their say on here!

Anger “I only wish that the rest of you led fulfilling and worthwhile lives, but I expect in truth you do not.
I sincerely hope that your working lives are touched with redundancy and then you will truly know how it feels to be abandoned by your colleagues and career that has served you well... this man has given more to society than portrayed in this newspaper, but you cretins who are quick to stand and point will never realise this, get a life.”

And Mrs Thorpe further angered campaigners fighting to save the home and job of long-serving cemetery superintendent Jim Emery.
so you feel this is the right thing for a councillors wife to say?
For her information my father came from Liverpool & my mother came from Southampton how does this make me inbred?
You obviously worked very hard at it.lol
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: .. well, here we go, we ARE commenting. I think she is entitled to her views. She is NOT councillor Thorpe. Why the indignation now? She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate. No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now? My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.[/p][/quote]You are spot on. . The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages[/p][/quote]IMHO the story is not her comments BUT the Echo's actions re her privacy[/p][/quote]The Echo could not trace her directly, unless they are watching posters from the same IP and guessing. Unless they have an insider in the Police who are tracing Ip's?[/p][/quote]I seem to remember when I first registered to comment on this site I had to give my full personal details. If I'm not wrong, then the ECHO has used her given personal info to perform a character assassination on an ordinary member of the public. 'Ordinary'? - yes, most certainly. None of us deserve to be judged and publically humiliated by the position or reputation of our spouses, family, relatives or, indeed, friends.[/p][/quote]What? she has a position of responsibility doesn't she? isn't it hypocritical of her husband standing to represent people if his wife & possibly him feel like this about us the people of this city?[/p][/quote]SHE is a normal person, she isn't a Councillor. Surely she is entitled to her own opinion unless she is under the thumb from the hubby? Do you control your wife? Do you make sure she doesn't say things you don't want others to hear? Be fair Loosehead :-)[/p][/quote]In a cutting attack, she wrote: “It’s so amusing to see that the petty-minded, bigoted, inbred of Southampton have decided to have their say on here! Anger “I only wish that the rest of you led fulfilling and worthwhile lives, but I expect in truth you do not. I sincerely hope that your working lives are touched with redundancy and then you will truly know how it feels to be abandoned by your colleagues and career that has served you well... this man has given more to society than portrayed in this newspaper, but you cretins who are quick to stand and point will never realise this, get a life.” And Mrs Thorpe further angered campaigners fighting to save the home and job of long-serving cemetery superintendent Jim Emery. so you feel this is the right thing for a councillors wife to say? For her information my father came from Liverpool & my mother came from Southampton how does this make me inbred?[/p][/quote]You obviously worked very hard at it.lol Inform Al
  • Score: 0

10:23pm Sat 1 Sep 12

Inform Al says...

loosehead wrote:
Si if it was Moulton writing incognito slagging his electorate or a partner of a Tory or Liberal councillor doing it with the councillors blessing none of you would want to know?
Wouldn't know anyway, C'moron's Echo wouldn't print it.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: Si if it was Moulton writing incognito slagging his electorate or a partner of a Tory or Liberal councillor doing it with the councillors blessing none of you would want to know?[/p][/quote]Wouldn't know anyway, C'moron's Echo wouldn't print it. Inform Al
  • Score: 0

10:50pm Sat 1 Sep 12

G0Rf says...

Adlof Hilter wrote:
What a shame people are still peddling the idea that NHS 0844 numbers are "premium rate". They are NOT. They cost about 0.2p yes- POINT 2 p per minute over and above the standard BT rate, and enable NHS bodies to pay for more sophisticated phone systems so you can book your appointment by phone at midnight.
Of course, if you have a Vrgine landline Sir Richard charges you 14p per minute- that is not the NHS's fault.
Meanwhile patients expect the NHS to phone them on mobiles at 10p per minute!
quoted from BT website...."Calls to 0844 and 0871 numbers are not free and are often used as premium rate support lines"



Oh and...why are doctors always running behind schedule? if all patients turned up then they would constantly running 30+mins behind.
[quote][p][bold]Adlof Hilter[/bold] wrote: What a shame people are still peddling the idea that NHS 0844 numbers are "premium rate". They are NOT. They cost about 0.2p yes- POINT 2 p per minute over and above the standard BT rate, and enable NHS bodies to pay for more sophisticated phone systems so you can book your appointment by phone at midnight. Of course, if you have a Vrgine landline Sir Richard charges you 14p per minute- that is not the NHS's fault. Meanwhile patients expect the NHS to phone them on mobiles at 10p per minute![/p][/quote]quoted from BT website...."Calls to 0844 and 0871 numbers are not free and are often used as premium rate support lines" Oh and...why are doctors always running behind schedule? if all patients turned up then they would constantly running 30+mins behind. G0Rf
  • Score: 0

11:03pm Sat 1 Sep 12

peasant says...

Why are these overworked and appointment short surgeries always empty every time I'm there? It's empty, cant be that many missed appointments can there?
Why are these overworked and appointment short surgeries always empty every time I'm there? It's empty, cant be that many missed appointments can there? peasant
  • Score: 0

12:20am Sun 2 Sep 12

Vonnie says...

moocowpoorchick wrote:
I was with this surgery most of my adult life but have recently moved as I could not get appointment, the arrogant rude receptionists are beyond belief, I work fulltime and rarely need to visit the gp when I do want an appointment I get told no as I have called to early or the book diary is not open for appointments etc etc, Drs at victor street are great but appointments and reception is the worst I have encountered in any walk of life!
As a patient of this surgery, my experience exactly, moocowpoorchick
Additionally, trying to phone to make or cancel an appointment - forget it. There are hundreds of people trying to get through on the one line in the half hour that it is open to take appointments.
I made a complaint thru the right channels and to my MP but got nowhere. I was even told that I could not make an appointment to see the surgery manager, but had to write. I did so -- nothing resolved.
The doctors are great but the system at Victor Street stinks.
[quote][p][bold]moocowpoorchick[/bold] wrote: I was with this surgery most of my adult life but have recently moved as I could not get appointment, the arrogant rude receptionists are beyond belief, I work fulltime and rarely need to visit the gp when I do want an appointment I get told no as I have called to early or the book diary is not open for appointments etc etc, Drs at victor street are great but appointments and reception is the worst I have encountered in any walk of life![/p][/quote]As a patient of this surgery, my experience exactly, moocowpoorchick Additionally, trying to phone to make or cancel an appointment - forget it. There are hundreds of people trying to get through on the one line in the half hour that it is open to take appointments. I made a complaint thru the right channels and to my MP but got nowhere. I was even told that I could not make an appointment to see the surgery manager, but had to write. I did so -- nothing resolved. The doctors are great but the system at Victor Street stinks. Vonnie
  • Score: 0

6:30am Sun 2 Sep 12

sparkster says...

Mrs thorpe should remember that it was the so called bigots and inbreds that helped put her husband where he is and he's supporting her over it, yes shes entitled to an opinion as we all are but perhaps she should make sure her brain is switched on before her mouth opens, these comments wont exactly help her husband's career
Mrs thorpe should remember that it was the so called bigots and inbreds that helped put her husband where he is and he's supporting her over it, yes shes entitled to an opinion as we all are but perhaps she should make sure her brain is switched on before her mouth opens, these comments wont exactly help her husband's career sparkster
  • Score: 0

8:27am Sun 2 Sep 12

loosehead says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
southy wrote:
Tuby open up the post on "No apology from city councillor's wife after offensive remarks"
Quite agree Southy. Could be some interesting comments..... Perhaps the Echo wont like the criticism
Absolutely right.

Having done excellent bit of journalism by exposing this foul mouthed woman and her husband (NuLabour's Cllr. Thorpe who is either arrogant or stupid or combination of both, for failing to condemn the most disgraceful actions of his beloved wife, thus associating with her obnoxious views) why Echo's own website is not allowing us the people of Southampton insulted by her to respond about both in kind.

What happened to rules for fairness, which should provide victims these nasty NuLabourite creatures rights of reply?

Come on Ian Murray; stop your people imposing this most ridiculous censorship.
She is entitled to an opinion as we all are surely? She is not a Councillor, I assume she is just a normal person like me and you, so why can't she speak her mind?
Ironlady firstly if the doctors adopted Southy's way the A&E department would be inundated with minor cases of people who couldn't get to see their doctors.
As for Mr's Thorpe she is the wife of a guy who wanted to be a councillor & she printed/posted remarks insulting the very people her husband wanted to represent?
then when elected she still carried on?
he's standing by her? or is it because he actually agrees with her & was party to the posts?
how many politicians have had to resign over their partners actions?
She isn't a Councillor though, fair play to her husband for standing up for his wife though ;-)
So if David Camerons wife said send back all non whites or single mums should be made to work or have their children taken away.
Or people on welfare should be put into chain gangs & forced to work this shouldn't have any reflection on him?
I usually agree with you but get real will you.
Have you seen the picture of his wife?
how she has the nerve to slate us is unbelievable. she ought to get of her arse & burn of that ugly fat & maybe stop taking the ugly pills.
I hope she doesn't live in Millbrook Green Park Estate & for her sake she lives in original Millbrook ( Freshfield Rd,Victory Street etc;) as if she lives in the estate I can't see them being to happy with her or her husband
You and your comments are a disgrace.
.
Exactly why? I was only trying to point out that the people who read this aren't going to be happy about it so why did she print it? why no formal apology?
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Tuby open up the post on "No apology from city councillor's wife after offensive remarks"[/p][/quote]Quite agree Southy. Could be some interesting comments..... Perhaps the Echo wont like the criticism[/p][/quote]Absolutely right. Having done excellent bit of journalism by exposing this foul mouthed woman and her husband (NuLabour's Cllr. Thorpe who is either arrogant or stupid or combination of both, for failing to condemn the most disgraceful actions of his beloved wife, thus associating with her obnoxious views) why Echo's own website is not allowing us the people of Southampton insulted by her to respond about both in kind. What happened to rules for fairness, which should provide victims these nasty NuLabourite creatures rights of reply? Come on Ian Murray; stop your people imposing this most ridiculous censorship.[/p][/quote]She is entitled to an opinion as we all are surely? She is not a Councillor, I assume she is just a normal person like me and you, so why can't she speak her mind?[/p][/quote]Ironlady firstly if the doctors adopted Southy's way the A&E department would be inundated with minor cases of people who couldn't get to see their doctors. As for Mr's Thorpe she is the wife of a guy who wanted to be a councillor & she printed/posted remarks insulting the very people her husband wanted to represent? then when elected she still carried on? he's standing by her? or is it because he actually agrees with her & was party to the posts? how many politicians have had to resign over their partners actions?[/p][/quote]She isn't a Councillor though, fair play to her husband for standing up for his wife though ;-)[/p][/quote]So if David Camerons wife said send back all non whites or single mums should be made to work or have their children taken away. Or people on welfare should be put into chain gangs & forced to work this shouldn't have any reflection on him? I usually agree with you but get real will you. Have you seen the picture of his wife? how she has the nerve to slate us is unbelievable. she ought to get of her arse & burn of that ugly fat & maybe stop taking the ugly pills. I hope she doesn't live in Millbrook Green Park Estate & for her sake she lives in original Millbrook ( Freshfield Rd,Victory Street etc;) as if she lives in the estate I can't see them being to happy with her or her husband[/p][/quote]You and your comments are a disgrace. .[/p][/quote]Exactly why? I was only trying to point out that the people who read this aren't going to be happy about it so why did she print it? why no formal apology? loosehead
  • Score: 0

8:31am Sun 2 Sep 12

loosehead says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
freefinker wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
freefinker wrote:
.. well, here we go, we ARE commenting.

I think she is entitled to her views.
She is NOT councillor Thorpe.
Why the indignation now?
She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate.
No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now?

My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.
You are spot on.
.
The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages
IMHO the story is not her comments BUT the Echo's actions re her privacy
The Echo could not trace her directly, unless they are watching posters from the same IP and guessing.

Unless they have an insider in the Police who are tracing Ip's?
I seem to remember when I first registered to comment on this site I had to give my full personal details.

If I'm not wrong, then the ECHO has used her given personal info to perform a character assassination on an ordinary member of the public.

'Ordinary'? - yes, most certainly. None of us deserve to be judged and publically humiliated by the position or reputation of our spouses, family, relatives or, indeed, friends.
What? she has a position of responsibility doesn't she?
isn't it hypocritical of her husband standing to represent people if his wife & possibly him feel like this about us the people of this city?
SHE is a normal person, she isn't a Councillor.

Surely she is entitled to her own opinion unless she is under the thumb from the hubby?

Do you control your wife? Do you make sure she doesn't say things you don't want others to hear?

Be fair Loosehead :-)
Ironlady I think two wrongs have been committed here.
1/ the Echo should not have revealed her true identity.
2/ sha a councillors wife should not have printed these remarks.
I still feel he must have agreed with it & a formal apology should be made by both Mr's Thorpe & the Echo
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: .. well, here we go, we ARE commenting. I think she is entitled to her views. She is NOT councillor Thorpe. Why the indignation now? She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate. No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now? My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.[/p][/quote]You are spot on. . The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages[/p][/quote]IMHO the story is not her comments BUT the Echo's actions re her privacy[/p][/quote]The Echo could not trace her directly, unless they are watching posters from the same IP and guessing. Unless they have an insider in the Police who are tracing Ip's?[/p][/quote]I seem to remember when I first registered to comment on this site I had to give my full personal details. If I'm not wrong, then the ECHO has used her given personal info to perform a character assassination on an ordinary member of the public. 'Ordinary'? - yes, most certainly. None of us deserve to be judged and publically humiliated by the position or reputation of our spouses, family, relatives or, indeed, friends.[/p][/quote]What? she has a position of responsibility doesn't she? isn't it hypocritical of her husband standing to represent people if his wife & possibly him feel like this about us the people of this city?[/p][/quote]SHE is a normal person, she isn't a Councillor. Surely she is entitled to her own opinion unless she is under the thumb from the hubby? Do you control your wife? Do you make sure she doesn't say things you don't want others to hear? Be fair Loosehead :-)[/p][/quote]Ironlady I think two wrongs have been committed here. 1/ the Echo should not have revealed her true identity. 2/ sha a councillors wife should not have printed these remarks. I still feel he must have agreed with it & a formal apology should be made by both Mr's Thorpe & the Echo loosehead
  • Score: 0

8:34am Sun 2 Sep 12

loosehead says...

Back to appointments.In my surgery on a Monday morning if you phone in you can get an emergency appointment for that day.
if you've been well enough to book an appointment you must be well enough to phone & cancel.
the idea of a walk in surgery wouldn't work look at what happened to the NHS walk in surgery in Shirley they were queuing up at 4-6 in the morning for colds & all other types of minor ailments
Back to appointments.In my surgery on a Monday morning if you phone in you can get an emergency appointment for that day. if you've been well enough to book an appointment you must be well enough to phone & cancel. the idea of a walk in surgery wouldn't work look at what happened to the NHS walk in surgery in Shirley they were queuing up at 4-6 in the morning for colds & all other types of minor ailments loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:31am Sun 2 Sep 12

SOULJACKER says...

jonnyx wrote:
SOULJACKER wrote:
Let's face it......

Shirley isn't called the "Mutant mile" for no reason, it is probably all them Polish that hang around drinking "Tyskie" & leaving their cans everywhere!

Just saying :P
xenophobic pr**k.
Well done with the spelling on that one, I wouldn't have attempted that one....very impressed!

I am guessing you live on the "Mutant mile" then Johnny boi!

Oh & yes I guess I am what you wrote (not gonna attempt to spell it.....it's far too early for all that:).
[quote][p][bold]jonnyx[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SOULJACKER[/bold] wrote: Let's face it...... Shirley isn't called the "Mutant mile" for no reason, it is probably all them Polish that hang around drinking "Tyskie" & leaving their cans everywhere! Just saying :P[/p][/quote]xenophobic pr**k.[/p][/quote]Well done with the spelling on that one, I wouldn't have attempted that one....very impressed! I am guessing you live on the "Mutant mile" then Johnny boi! Oh & yes I guess I am what you wrote (not gonna attempt to spell it.....it's far too early for all that:). SOULJACKER
  • Score: 0

10:03am Sun 2 Sep 12

Vonnie says...

loosehead wrote:
Back to appointments.In my surgery on a Monday morning if you phone in you can get an emergency appointment for that day. if you've been well enough to book an appointment you must be well enough to phone & cancel. the idea of a walk in surgery wouldn't work look at what happened to the NHS walk in surgery in Shirley they were queuing up at 4-6 in the morning for colds & all other types of minor ailments
Loosehead. Part of the reason why there were queues at the walk-in surgery in Shirley was because doctor's surgeries in the vicinity - including Victor Street - were telling patients to go there for blood tests and for minor ailments rather than use up the doctor's time. That is what walk-in surgeries were supposed to be for. The fact that they were used to capacity and had queues should have told the medical profession something. ie. there are more patients than doctor's surgeries to serve them.
The difference in the service received and the way surgeries are managed is different from area to area, and whether they are NHS funded or NHS supported. That should never be, but it is so.
Dr Tongue and his colleagues are looking in the wrong place to put the blame. Yes, there are some lazy and rude patients who would not attempt to ring to cancel an appointment, but in the numbers that he is talking about??? I think not.
There are other reasons, some acceptable, some not, but until GP surgeries get their own house in order so that patients, not staff and financial considerations, come first, this problem will continue.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: Back to appointments.In my surgery on a Monday morning if you phone in you can get an emergency appointment for that day. if you've been well enough to book an appointment you must be well enough to phone & cancel. the idea of a walk in surgery wouldn't work look at what happened to the NHS walk in surgery in Shirley they were queuing up at 4-6 in the morning for colds & all other types of minor ailments[/p][/quote]Loosehead. Part of the reason why there were queues at the walk-in surgery in Shirley was because doctor's surgeries in the vicinity - including Victor Street - were telling patients to go there for blood tests and for minor ailments rather than use up the doctor's time. That is what walk-in surgeries were supposed to be for. The fact that they were used to capacity and had queues should have told the medical profession something. ie. there are more patients than doctor's surgeries to serve them. The difference in the service received and the way surgeries are managed is different from area to area, and whether they are NHS funded or NHS supported. That should never be, but it is so. Dr Tongue and his colleagues are looking in the wrong place to put the blame. Yes, there are some lazy and rude patients who would not attempt to ring to cancel an appointment, but in the numbers that he is talking about??? I think not. There are other reasons, some acceptable, some not, but until GP surgeries get their own house in order so that patients, not staff and financial considerations, come first, this problem will continue. Vonnie
  • Score: 0

11:13am Sun 2 Sep 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
freefinker wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
freefinker wrote:
.. well, here we go, we ARE commenting.

I think she is entitled to her views.
She is NOT councillor Thorpe.
Why the indignation now?
She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate.
No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now?

My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.
You are spot on.
.
The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages
IMHO the story is not her comments BUT the Echo's actions re her privacy
The Echo could not trace her directly, unless they are watching posters from the same IP and guessing.

Unless they have an insider in the Police who are tracing Ip's?
I seem to remember when I first registered to comment on this site I had to give my full personal details.

If I'm not wrong, then the ECHO has used her given personal info to perform a character assassination on an ordinary member of the public.

'Ordinary'? - yes, most certainly. None of us deserve to be judged and publically humiliated by the position or reputation of our spouses, family, relatives or, indeed, friends.
What? she has a position of responsibility doesn't she?
isn't it hypocritical of her husband standing to represent people if his wife & possibly him feel like this about us the people of this city?
SHE is a normal person, she isn't a Councillor.

Surely she is entitled to her own opinion unless she is under the thumb from the hubby?

Do you control your wife? Do you make sure she doesn't say things you don't want others to hear?

Be fair Loosehead :-)
Ironlady I think two wrongs have been committed here.
1/ the Echo should not have revealed her true identity.
2/ sha a councillors wife should not have printed these remarks.
I still feel he must have agreed with it & a formal apology should be made by both Mr's Thorpe & the Echo
Loosehead you may have noticed Echo has opened comments on foul mouthed wife of Cllr. Thorpe, who rather than condemning her remarks has appreciated her actions, thus making himself part of the offensive remarks. But you are attacking him because he is her husband, which is to say the least is less than even weak reason.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: .. well, here we go, we ARE commenting. I think she is entitled to her views. She is NOT councillor Thorpe. Why the indignation now? She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate. No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now? My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.[/p][/quote]You are spot on. . The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages[/p][/quote]IMHO the story is not her comments BUT the Echo's actions re her privacy[/p][/quote]The Echo could not trace her directly, unless they are watching posters from the same IP and guessing. Unless they have an insider in the Police who are tracing Ip's?[/p][/quote]I seem to remember when I first registered to comment on this site I had to give my full personal details. If I'm not wrong, then the ECHO has used her given personal info to perform a character assassination on an ordinary member of the public. 'Ordinary'? - yes, most certainly. None of us deserve to be judged and publically humiliated by the position or reputation of our spouses, family, relatives or, indeed, friends.[/p][/quote]What? she has a position of responsibility doesn't she? isn't it hypocritical of her husband standing to represent people if his wife & possibly him feel like this about us the people of this city?[/p][/quote]SHE is a normal person, she isn't a Councillor. Surely she is entitled to her own opinion unless she is under the thumb from the hubby? Do you control your wife? Do you make sure she doesn't say things you don't want others to hear? Be fair Loosehead :-)[/p][/quote]Ironlady I think two wrongs have been committed here. 1/ the Echo should not have revealed her true identity. 2/ sha a councillors wife should not have printed these remarks. I still feel he must have agreed with it & a formal apology should be made by both Mr's Thorpe & the Echo[/p][/quote]Loosehead you may have noticed Echo has opened comments on foul mouthed wife of Cllr. Thorpe, who rather than condemning her remarks has appreciated her actions, thus making himself part of the offensive remarks. But you are attacking him because he is her husband, which is to say the least is less than even weak reason. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

11:37am Sun 2 Sep 12

loosehead says...

Vonnie wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Back to appointments.In my surgery on a Monday morning if you phone in you can get an emergency appointment for that day. if you've been well enough to book an appointment you must be well enough to phone & cancel. the idea of a walk in surgery wouldn't work look at what happened to the NHS walk in surgery in Shirley they were queuing up at 4-6 in the morning for colds & all other types of minor ailments
Loosehead. Part of the reason why there were queues at the walk-in surgery in Shirley was because doctor's surgeries in the vicinity - including Victor Street - were telling patients to go there for blood tests and for minor ailments rather than use up the doctor's time. That is what walk-in surgeries were supposed to be for. The fact that they were used to capacity and had queues should have told the medical profession something. ie. there are more patients than doctor's surgeries to serve them.
The difference in the service received and the way surgeries are managed is different from area to area, and whether they are NHS funded or NHS supported. That should never be, but it is so.
Dr Tongue and his colleagues are looking in the wrong place to put the blame. Yes, there are some lazy and rude patients who would not attempt to ring to cancel an appointment, but in the numbers that he is talking about??? I think not.
There are other reasons, some acceptable, some not, but until GP surgeries get their own house in order so that patients, not staff and financial considerations, come first, this problem will continue.
Sorry yes the walk in Surgery was for blood tests but not all minor ailments.
My wife & I went to get a blood test I went straight there my wife popped into a shop & arrived after me in the space of ten minutes she was told due to the amount of minor ailments & the wait she wouldn't be seen I was there for over three hours
[quote][p][bold]Vonnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: Back to appointments.In my surgery on a Monday morning if you phone in you can get an emergency appointment for that day. if you've been well enough to book an appointment you must be well enough to phone & cancel. the idea of a walk in surgery wouldn't work look at what happened to the NHS walk in surgery in Shirley they were queuing up at 4-6 in the morning for colds & all other types of minor ailments[/p][/quote]Loosehead. Part of the reason why there were queues at the walk-in surgery in Shirley was because doctor's surgeries in the vicinity - including Victor Street - were telling patients to go there for blood tests and for minor ailments rather than use up the doctor's time. That is what walk-in surgeries were supposed to be for. The fact that they were used to capacity and had queues should have told the medical profession something. ie. there are more patients than doctor's surgeries to serve them. The difference in the service received and the way surgeries are managed is different from area to area, and whether they are NHS funded or NHS supported. That should never be, but it is so. Dr Tongue and his colleagues are looking in the wrong place to put the blame. Yes, there are some lazy and rude patients who would not attempt to ring to cancel an appointment, but in the numbers that he is talking about??? I think not. There are other reasons, some acceptable, some not, but until GP surgeries get their own house in order so that patients, not staff and financial considerations, come first, this problem will continue.[/p][/quote]Sorry yes the walk in Surgery was for blood tests but not all minor ailments. My wife & I went to get a blood test I went straight there my wife popped into a shop & arrived after me in the space of ten minutes she was told due to the amount of minor ailments & the wait she wouldn't be seen I was there for over three hours loosehead
  • Score: 0

12:27pm Sun 2 Sep 12

bobbyboy says...

And how comes if there are so many peoples not turning up for appiontments i get told there are no spots available for a week enough said.
And how comes if there are so many peoples not turning up for appiontments i get told there are no spots available for a week enough said. bobbyboy
  • Score: 0

2:04pm Sun 2 Sep 12

TEBOURBA says...

The Doctors, nursing staff and admin staff at Victor Street are excellent.
I know the appointments booking system is a bit convaluted but having once been made aware of the system it is easy to work with.
Dr Tongue is my Doctor and I couldn't wish for better.
He listens, diagnoses and advises with consumate care.
He is certainly not a self publicist and I am in no doubt he has raised this matter in the interests of providing better health cover to more patients.
In the surgery there is a video screen displaying the number of missed appointments where no prior notice was given and these run in to hundreds if not thousands, so all patients unless they are blind, are aware of the waste of money.
Parking problems and the cost of ,phone calls, raised by other contributors are just red herrings, there is no excuse whatsoever for not advising the surgery of non - attendance, it is the couldn't care less and ignorant attitude of some people today, sadly fast becoming the majority.
Those who complain about mobile 'phone costs are no doubt those who are happy to pay to have have their 'phones glued to their ears 24/7.
I bet, if the surgery listed the non-attendees the vast majority they would find that there were very few if any in the over 60 age group.
People of this generation were taught to respect the requirements of the NHS, the finest health service in the World.
I think the surgery should study the list of non - attendees and adopt a policy of three strikes and you're out!
The Doctors, nursing staff and admin staff at Victor Street are excellent. I know the appointments booking system is a bit convaluted but having once been made aware of the system it is easy to work with. Dr Tongue is my Doctor and I couldn't wish for better. He listens, diagnoses and advises with consumate care. He is certainly not a self publicist and I am in no doubt he has raised this matter in the interests of providing better health cover to more patients. In the surgery there is a video screen displaying the number of missed appointments where no prior notice was given and these run in to hundreds if not thousands, so all patients unless they are blind, are aware of the waste of money. Parking problems and the cost of ,phone calls, raised by other contributors are just red herrings, there is no excuse whatsoever for not advising the surgery of non - attendance, it is the couldn't care less and ignorant attitude of some people today, sadly fast becoming the majority. Those who complain about mobile 'phone costs are no doubt those who are happy to pay to have have their 'phones glued to their ears 24/7. I bet, if the surgery listed the non-attendees the vast majority they would find that there were very few if any in the over 60 age group. People of this generation were taught to respect the requirements of the NHS, the finest health service in the World. I think the surgery should study the list of non - attendees and adopt a policy of three strikes and you're out! TEBOURBA
  • Score: 0

4:28pm Sun 2 Sep 12

Inform Al says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
freefinker wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
freefinker wrote:
.. well, here we go, we ARE commenting.

I think she is entitled to her views.
She is NOT councillor Thorpe.
Why the indignation now?
She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate.
No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now?

My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.
You are spot on.
.
The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages
IMHO the story is not her comments BUT the Echo's actions re her privacy
The Echo could not trace her directly, unless they are watching posters from the same IP and guessing.

Unless they have an insider in the Police who are tracing Ip's?
I seem to remember when I first registered to comment on this site I had to give my full personal details.

If I'm not wrong, then the ECHO has used her given personal info to perform a character assassination on an ordinary member of the public.

'Ordinary'? - yes, most certainly. None of us deserve to be judged and publically humiliated by the position or reputation of our spouses, family, relatives or, indeed, friends.
What? she has a position of responsibility doesn't she?
isn't it hypocritical of her husband standing to represent people if his wife & possibly him feel like this about us the people of this city?
SHE is a normal person, she isn't a Councillor.

Surely she is entitled to her own opinion unless she is under the thumb from the hubby?

Do you control your wife? Do you make sure she doesn't say things you don't want others to hear?

Be fair Loosehead :-)
Ironlady I think two wrongs have been committed here.
1/ the Echo should not have revealed her true identity.
2/ sha a councillors wife should not have printed these remarks.
I still feel he must have agreed with it & a formal apology should be made by both Mr's Thorpe & the Echo
Loosehead you may have noticed Echo has opened comments on foul mouthed wife of Cllr. Thorpe, who rather than condemning her remarks has appreciated her actions, thus making himself part of the offensive remarks. But you are attacking him because he is her husband, which is to say the least is less than even weak reason.
Well, well ,well. Just looked at the proper site for comments on the Echo's disingenious story on the Thorpes, and at 16.25 all the comments have been removed.
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: .. well, here we go, we ARE commenting. I think she is entitled to her views. She is NOT councillor Thorpe. Why the indignation now? She took part in the cut and thrust of a debate. No one was calling for her public humiliation at the time, so why now? My concern is that almost all of us post on this site anonymously, as she did. OK, she is the spouse of a councillor. But that does not make it OK to strip away her anonymity, which we all anticipate will be respected by the Echo, just for a fairly insignificant news item.[/p][/quote]You are spot on. . The Echo has breached her anonimity and plastered it over three pages[/p][/quote]IMHO the story is not her comments BUT the Echo's actions re her privacy[/p][/quote]The Echo could not trace her directly, unless they are watching posters from the same IP and guessing. Unless they have an insider in the Police who are tracing Ip's?[/p][/quote]I seem to remember when I first registered to comment on this site I had to give my full personal details. If I'm not wrong, then the ECHO has used her given personal info to perform a character assassination on an ordinary member of the public. 'Ordinary'? - yes, most certainly. None of us deserve to be judged and publically humiliated by the position or reputation of our spouses, family, relatives or, indeed, friends.[/p][/quote]What? she has a position of responsibility doesn't she? isn't it hypocritical of her husband standing to represent people if his wife & possibly him feel like this about us the people of this city?[/p][/quote]SHE is a normal person, she isn't a Councillor. Surely she is entitled to her own opinion unless she is under the thumb from the hubby? Do you control your wife? Do you make sure she doesn't say things you don't want others to hear? Be fair Loosehead :-)[/p][/quote]Ironlady I think two wrongs have been committed here. 1/ the Echo should not have revealed her true identity. 2/ sha a councillors wife should not have printed these remarks. I still feel he must have agreed with it & a formal apology should be made by both Mr's Thorpe & the Echo[/p][/quote]Loosehead you may have noticed Echo has opened comments on foul mouthed wife of Cllr. Thorpe, who rather than condemning her remarks has appreciated her actions, thus making himself part of the offensive remarks. But you are attacking him because he is her husband, which is to say the least is less than even weak reason.[/p][/quote]Well, well ,well. Just looked at the proper site for comments on the Echo's disingenious story on the Thorpes, and at 16.25 all the comments have been removed. Inform Al
  • Score: 0

4:59pm Sun 2 Sep 12

TEBOURBA says...

Many thanks to the many cretins who hi-jacked the very important article regarding the waste of NHS resources by Dr Tongue with their comments about Thorpe.
Many thanks to the many cretins who hi-jacked the very important article regarding the waste of NHS resources by Dr Tongue with their comments about Thorpe. TEBOURBA
  • Score: 0

5:10pm Sun 2 Sep 12

freefinker says...

TEBOURBA wrote:
Many thanks to the many cretins who hi-jacked the very important article regarding the waste of NHS resources by Dr Tongue with their comments about Thorpe.
Well, the Thorpe story was obviously an issue many wanted to discuss. Who denied us? The Echo.
[quote][p][bold]TEBOURBA[/bold] wrote: Many thanks to the many cretins who hi-jacked the very important article regarding the waste of NHS resources by Dr Tongue with their comments about Thorpe.[/p][/quote]Well, the Thorpe story was obviously an issue many wanted to discuss. Who denied us? The Echo. freefinker
  • Score: 0

5:19pm Sun 2 Sep 12

Inform Al says...

TEBOURBA wrote:
Many thanks to the many cretins who hi-jacked the very important article regarding the waste of NHS resources by Dr Tongue with their comments about Thorpe.
Don't consider it hijacked as multitasking is something most of us can deal with, anyway it's the Echo's fault.
[quote][p][bold]TEBOURBA[/bold] wrote: Many thanks to the many cretins who hi-jacked the very important article regarding the waste of NHS resources by Dr Tongue with their comments about Thorpe.[/p][/quote]Don't consider it hijacked as multitasking is something most of us can deal with, anyway it's the Echo's fault. Inform Al
  • Score: 0

7:20pm Sun 2 Sep 12

Adlof Hilter says...

G0Rf wrote:
Adlof Hilter wrote:
What a shame people are still peddling the idea that NHS 0844 numbers are "premium rate". They are NOT. They cost about 0.2p yes- POINT 2 p per minute over and above the standard BT rate, and enable NHS bodies to pay for more sophisticated phone systems so you can book your appointment by phone at midnight.
Of course, if you have a Vrgine landline Sir Richard charges you 14p per minute- that is not the NHS's fault.
Meanwhile patients expect the NHS to phone them on mobiles at 10p per minute!
quoted from BT website...."Calls to 0844 and 0871 numbers are not free and are often used as premium rate support lines"



Oh and...why are doctors always running behind schedule? if all patients turned up then they would constantly running 30+mins behind.
Wrong GoRF- it ISN'T premium rate. I asked them.

If people think it is so terrible- go and register at the NU-Labour founded Darzi-Adelaide practice which costs the NHS 5 times per patient what a "normal" GP practice is paid.
[quote][p][bold]G0Rf[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Adlof Hilter[/bold] wrote: What a shame people are still peddling the idea that NHS 0844 numbers are "premium rate". They are NOT. They cost about 0.2p yes- POINT 2 p per minute over and above the standard BT rate, and enable NHS bodies to pay for more sophisticated phone systems so you can book your appointment by phone at midnight. Of course, if you have a Vrgine landline Sir Richard charges you 14p per minute- that is not the NHS's fault. Meanwhile patients expect the NHS to phone them on mobiles at 10p per minute![/p][/quote]quoted from BT website...."Calls to 0844 and 0871 numbers are not free and are often used as premium rate support lines" Oh and...why are doctors always running behind schedule? if all patients turned up then they would constantly running 30+mins behind.[/p][/quote]Wrong GoRF- it ISN'T premium rate. I asked them. If people think it is so terrible- go and register at the NU-Labour founded Darzi-Adelaide practice which costs the NHS 5 times per patient what a "normal" GP practice is paid. Adlof Hilter
  • Score: 0

7:22pm Sun 2 Sep 12

Adlof Hilter says...

Vonnie wrote:
moocowpoorchick wrote:
I was with this surgery most of my adult life but have recently moved as I could not get appointment, the arrogant rude receptionists are beyond belief, I work fulltime and rarely need to visit the gp when I do want an appointment I get told no as I have called to early or the book diary is not open for appointments etc etc, Drs at victor street are great but appointments and reception is the worst I have encountered in any walk of life!
As a patient of this surgery, my experience exactly, moocowpoorchick
Additionally, trying to phone to make or cancel an appointment - forget it. There are hundreds of people trying to get through on the one line in the half hour that it is open to take appointments.
I made a complaint thru the right channels and to my MP but got nowhere. I was even told that I could not make an appointment to see the surgery manager, but had to write. I did so -- nothing resolved.
The doctors are great but the system at Victor Street stinks.
Er... there ISN'T just one line- that is true for almost all surgeries now. That is precisely what the 0844 number helps with- multiple lines and call queuing. Why not register for on line access ? You clearly have the internet!
[quote][p][bold]Vonnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]moocowpoorchick[/bold] wrote: I was with this surgery most of my adult life but have recently moved as I could not get appointment, the arrogant rude receptionists are beyond belief, I work fulltime and rarely need to visit the gp when I do want an appointment I get told no as I have called to early or the book diary is not open for appointments etc etc, Drs at victor street are great but appointments and reception is the worst I have encountered in any walk of life![/p][/quote]As a patient of this surgery, my experience exactly, moocowpoorchick Additionally, trying to phone to make or cancel an appointment - forget it. There are hundreds of people trying to get through on the one line in the half hour that it is open to take appointments. I made a complaint thru the right channels and to my MP but got nowhere. I was even told that I could not make an appointment to see the surgery manager, but had to write. I did so -- nothing resolved. The doctors are great but the system at Victor Street stinks.[/p][/quote]Er... there ISN'T just one line- that is true for almost all surgeries now. That is precisely what the 0844 number helps with- multiple lines and call queuing. Why not register for on line access ? You clearly have the internet! Adlof Hilter
  • Score: 0

7:24pm Sun 2 Sep 12

Adlof Hilter says...

Inform Al wrote:
TEBOURBA wrote:
Many thanks to the many cretins who hi-jacked the very important article regarding the waste of NHS resources by Dr Tongue with their comments about Thorpe.
Don't consider it hijacked as multitasking is something most of us can deal with, anyway it's the Echo's fault.
Hey! Just try logging onto the Daily Wail's site and writing something that the editor disagrees with- they just don't publish it. Censorship exists all over our so-called "free press". Hypocrites of the Fourth Estate.
[quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TEBOURBA[/bold] wrote: Many thanks to the many cretins who hi-jacked the very important article regarding the waste of NHS resources by Dr Tongue with their comments about Thorpe.[/p][/quote]Don't consider it hijacked as multitasking is something most of us can deal with, anyway it's the Echo's fault.[/p][/quote]Hey! Just try logging onto the Daily Wail's site and writing something that the editor disagrees with- they just don't publish it. Censorship exists all over our so-called "free press". Hypocrites of the Fourth Estate. Adlof Hilter
  • Score: 0

7:33pm Sun 2 Sep 12

Vonnie says...

Adlof Hilter wrote:
Vonnie wrote:
moocowpoorchick wrote: I was with this surgery most of my adult life but have recently moved as I could not get appointment, the arrogant rude receptionists are beyond belief, I work fulltime and rarely need to visit the gp when I do want an appointment I get told no as I have called to early or the book diary is not open for appointments etc etc, Drs at victor street are great but appointments and reception is the worst I have encountered in any walk of life!
As a patient of this surgery, my experience exactly, moocowpoorchick Additionally, trying to phone to make or cancel an appointment - forget it. There are hundreds of people trying to get through on the one line in the half hour that it is open to take appointments. I made a complaint thru the right channels and to my MP but got nowhere. I was even told that I could not make an appointment to see the surgery manager, but had to write. I did so -- nothing resolved. The doctors are great but the system at Victor Street stinks.
Er... there ISN'T just one line- that is true for almost all surgeries now. That is precisely what the 0844 number helps with- multiple lines and call queuing. Why not register for on line access ? You clearly have the internet!
There IS only one line with one person answering and a constant queue of six callers waiting. After a few minutes one is cut off with a message like "please call later". Or before you get thru, one initially gets a message like " the line is busy, please call later"
Why the hell should I register for on line access? That doesn't work either, as it is constantly "down". A great many patients do not have computer access, particularly older people. All they and I want to do is make or cancel an appointment. You can't even do it face to face at the surgery because you are told to "phone between these times".
[quote][p][bold]Adlof Hilter[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Vonnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]moocowpoorchick[/bold] wrote: I was with this surgery most of my adult life but have recently moved as I could not get appointment, the arrogant rude receptionists are beyond belief, I work fulltime and rarely need to visit the gp when I do want an appointment I get told no as I have called to early or the book diary is not open for appointments etc etc, Drs at victor street are great but appointments and reception is the worst I have encountered in any walk of life![/p][/quote]As a patient of this surgery, my experience exactly, moocowpoorchick Additionally, trying to phone to make or cancel an appointment - forget it. There are hundreds of people trying to get through on the one line in the half hour that it is open to take appointments. I made a complaint thru the right channels and to my MP but got nowhere. I was even told that I could not make an appointment to see the surgery manager, but had to write. I did so -- nothing resolved. The doctors are great but the system at Victor Street stinks.[/p][/quote]Er... there ISN'T just one line- that is true for almost all surgeries now. That is precisely what the 0844 number helps with- multiple lines and call queuing. Why not register for on line access ? You clearly have the internet![/p][/quote]There IS only one line with one person answering and a constant queue of six callers waiting. After a few minutes one is cut off with a message like "please call later". Or before you get thru, one initially gets a message like " the line is busy, please call later" Why the hell should I register for on line access? That doesn't work either, as it is constantly "down". A great many patients do not have computer access, particularly older people. All they and I want to do is make or cancel an appointment. You can't even do it face to face at the surgery because you are told to "phone between these times". Vonnie
  • Score: 0

8:50pm Sun 2 Sep 12

Scrutinizer says...

freefinker wrote:
Scrutinizer wrote: The Echo is getting like the BBC, far too fussy about receiving comments about 'sensitive' stories. You don't get this to anything like the same extent on the U.S. news web sites.
.. oh yes, but when the Echo says: - "The remarks were posted anonymously under the username “commnurse” – but the Daily Echo can reveal that they were written by Mrs Thorpe. " they are using the info they have held on her since she first registered to comment in these columns. We may 'hide' behind our made up names, but remember this story - it is not beyond the Echo to expose you with personal information you thought was confidential.
Yes, indeed. This is certainly of some serious concern... Perhaps we should consider exposing the real name of 'The Echo' - a certain Mr. Murray...
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: The Echo is getting like the BBC, far too fussy about receiving comments about 'sensitive' stories. You don't get this to anything like the same extent on the U.S. news web sites.[/p][/quote].. oh yes, but when the Echo says: - "The remarks were posted anonymously under the username “commnurse” – but the Daily Echo can reveal that they were written by Mrs Thorpe. " they are using the info they have held on her since she first registered to comment in these columns. We may 'hide' behind our made up names, but remember this story - it is not beyond the Echo to expose you with personal information you thought was confidential.[/p][/quote]Yes, indeed. This is certainly of some serious concern... Perhaps we should consider exposing the real name of 'The Echo' - a certain Mr. Murray... Scrutinizer
  • Score: 0

8:55pm Sun 2 Sep 12

loosehead says...

Why don't we all publish our real names?
I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?
Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone? loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:09pm Sun 2 Sep 12

Scrutinizer says...

loosehead wrote:
Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?
But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?[/p][/quote]But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really. Scrutinizer
  • Score: 0

9:19pm Sun 2 Sep 12

loosehead says...

Scrutinizer wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?
But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.
Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are?
this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology.
If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point
[quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?[/p][/quote]But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.[/p][/quote]Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are? this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology. If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:57pm Sun 2 Sep 12

Scrutinizer says...

loosehead wrote:
Scrutinizer wrote:
loosehead wrote: Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?
But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.
Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are? this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology. If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point
Yes, if people did have to print their real names they would, I'm sure, be a lot more careful about what they say on-line. But I, myself, still much prefer to adopt the anonymous option and stick with an assumed name. I have to say though, that in a way I do kind of admire those who don't, eg. Paramjit Bahia and yourself in this respect, even if I don't necessarilly agree with some of both your comments.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?[/p][/quote]But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.[/p][/quote]Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are? this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology. If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point[/p][/quote]Yes, if people did have to print their real names they would, I'm sure, be a lot more careful about what they say on-line. But I, myself, still much prefer to adopt the anonymous option and stick with an assumed name. I have to say though, that in a way I do kind of admire those who don't, eg. Paramjit Bahia and yourself in this respect, even if I don't necessarilly agree with some of both your comments. Scrutinizer
  • Score: 0

10:32pm Sun 2 Sep 12

Georgem says...

Scrutinizer wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Scrutinizer wrote:
loosehead wrote: Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?
But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.
Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are? this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology. If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point
Yes, if people did have to print their real names they would, I'm sure, be a lot more careful about what they say on-line. But I, myself, still much prefer to adopt the anonymous option and stick with an assumed name. I have to say though, that in a way I do kind of admire those who don't, eg. Paramjit Bahia and yourself in this respect, even if I don't necessarilly agree with some of both your comments.
And southy, more or less. Ok, that's not his real name, but most of us know who he is, and he does nothing to hide it. Got to give him that.
[quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?[/p][/quote]But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.[/p][/quote]Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are? this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology. If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point[/p][/quote]Yes, if people did have to print their real names they would, I'm sure, be a lot more careful about what they say on-line. But I, myself, still much prefer to adopt the anonymous option and stick with an assumed name. I have to say though, that in a way I do kind of admire those who don't, eg. Paramjit Bahia and yourself in this respect, even if I don't necessarilly agree with some of both your comments.[/p][/quote]And southy, more or less. Ok, that's not his real name, but most of us know who he is, and he does nothing to hide it. Got to give him that. Georgem
  • Score: 0

12:18am Mon 3 Sep 12

Scrutinizer says...

Georgem wrote:
Scrutinizer wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Scrutinizer wrote:
loosehead wrote: Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?
But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.
Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are? this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology. If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point
Yes, if people did have to print their real names they would, I'm sure, be a lot more careful about what they say on-line. But I, myself, still much prefer to adopt the anonymous option and stick with an assumed name. I have to say though, that in a way I do kind of admire those who don't, eg. Paramjit Bahia and yourself in this respect, even if I don't necessarilly agree with some of both your comments.
And southy, more or less. Ok, that's not his real name, but most of us know who he is, and he does nothing to hide it. Got to give him that.
Yes, and that is about the ONLY compliment he'll be getting from me!
[quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?[/p][/quote]But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.[/p][/quote]Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are? this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology. If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point[/p][/quote]Yes, if people did have to print their real names they would, I'm sure, be a lot more careful about what they say on-line. But I, myself, still much prefer to adopt the anonymous option and stick with an assumed name. I have to say though, that in a way I do kind of admire those who don't, eg. Paramjit Bahia and yourself in this respect, even if I don't necessarilly agree with some of both your comments.[/p][/quote]And southy, more or less. Ok, that's not his real name, but most of us know who he is, and he does nothing to hide it. Got to give him that.[/p][/quote]Yes, and that is about the ONLY compliment he'll be getting from me! Scrutinizer
  • Score: 0

10:12am Mon 3 Sep 12

Inform Al says...

loosehead wrote:
Scrutinizer wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?
But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.
Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are?
this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology.
If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point
Yes she lashed out at US, not the people of Southampton as the Echo story so blatantly claims. In fact at times I tend to agree with her when she states that all the inbreds etc of Southampton are posting here. As I count no more than 4 or 5 postees as possibly in this class, she is not guilty of defaming Southampton's residents. The Echo should be ashamed of it's open one sided political stance which caused me to stop buying it, except on Saturdays for the TV information some time ago.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?[/p][/quote]But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.[/p][/quote]Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are? this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology. If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point[/p][/quote]Yes she lashed out at US, not the people of Southampton as the Echo story so blatantly claims. In fact at times I tend to agree with her when she states that all the inbreds etc of Southampton are posting here. As I count no more than 4 or 5 postees as possibly in this class, she is not guilty of defaming Southampton's residents. The Echo should be ashamed of it's open one sided political stance which caused me to stop buying it, except on Saturdays for the TV information some time ago. Inform Al
  • Score: 0

3:01pm Mon 3 Sep 12

loosehead says...

Inform Al wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Scrutinizer wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?
But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.
Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are?
this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology.
If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point
Yes she lashed out at US, not the people of Southampton as the Echo story so blatantly claims. In fact at times I tend to agree with her when she states that all the inbreds etc of Southampton are posting here. As I count no more than 4 or 5 postees as possibly in this class, she is not guilty of defaming Southampton's residents. The Echo should be ashamed of it's open one sided political stance which caused me to stop buying it, except on Saturdays for the TV information some time ago.
so you like being called an inbreed by someone who looks like her then Mr Keeble?
[quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?[/p][/quote]But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.[/p][/quote]Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are? this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology. If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point[/p][/quote]Yes she lashed out at US, not the people of Southampton as the Echo story so blatantly claims. In fact at times I tend to agree with her when she states that all the inbreds etc of Southampton are posting here. As I count no more than 4 or 5 postees as possibly in this class, she is not guilty of defaming Southampton's residents. The Echo should be ashamed of it's open one sided political stance which caused me to stop buying it, except on Saturdays for the TV information some time ago.[/p][/quote]so you like being called an inbreed by someone who looks like her then Mr Keeble? loosehead
  • Score: 0

3:08pm Mon 3 Sep 12

Inform Al says...

loosehead wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Scrutinizer wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?
But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.
Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are?
this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology.
If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point
Yes she lashed out at US, not the people of Southampton as the Echo story so blatantly claims. In fact at times I tend to agree with her when she states that all the inbreds etc of Southampton are posting here. As I count no more than 4 or 5 postees as possibly in this class, she is not guilty of defaming Southampton's residents. The Echo should be ashamed of it's open one sided political stance which caused me to stop buying it, except on Saturdays for the TV information some time ago.
so you like being called an inbreed by someone who looks like her then Mr Keeble?
One day perhaps you will get my name right, in the mean time as I have had a few insults from you without having a hissy fit, I feel she is entitled to say what she likes on this site, in the same way as your obnoxious comment about her looks.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?[/p][/quote]But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.[/p][/quote]Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are? this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology. If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point[/p][/quote]Yes she lashed out at US, not the people of Southampton as the Echo story so blatantly claims. In fact at times I tend to agree with her when she states that all the inbreds etc of Southampton are posting here. As I count no more than 4 or 5 postees as possibly in this class, she is not guilty of defaming Southampton's residents. The Echo should be ashamed of it's open one sided political stance which caused me to stop buying it, except on Saturdays for the TV information some time ago.[/p][/quote]so you like being called an inbreed by someone who looks like her then Mr Keeble?[/p][/quote]One day perhaps you will get my name right, in the mean time as I have had a few insults from you without having a hissy fit, I feel she is entitled to say what she likes on this site, in the same way as your obnoxious comment about her looks. Inform Al
  • Score: 0

3:16pm Mon 3 Sep 12

loosehead says...

Inform Al wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Scrutinizer wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?
But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.
Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are?
this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology.
If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point
Yes she lashed out at US, not the people of Southampton as the Echo story so blatantly claims. In fact at times I tend to agree with her when she states that all the inbreds etc of Southampton are posting here. As I count no more than 4 or 5 postees as possibly in this class, she is not guilty of defaming Southampton's residents. The Echo should be ashamed of it's open one sided political stance which caused me to stop buying it, except on Saturdays for the TV information some time ago.
so you like being called an inbreed by someone who looks like her then Mr Keeble?
One day perhaps you will get my name right, in the mean time as I have had a few insults from you without having a hissy fit, I feel she is entitled to say what she likes on this site, in the same way as your obnoxious comment about her looks.
It's Alan Keeble isn't it?
I have given up with a Person like you this so called Lady ripped into posters calling them inbred & numerous other names .
maybe if her & her husband went to a gym she wouldn't have had so much pent up anger but she openly attacked posters over a subject her father should have posted on.
I don't remember it & I didn't comment on it so please stop trying to guess the intelligence of me & other posters until you actually find out if you have any
[quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?[/p][/quote]But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.[/p][/quote]Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are? this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology. If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point[/p][/quote]Yes she lashed out at US, not the people of Southampton as the Echo story so blatantly claims. In fact at times I tend to agree with her when she states that all the inbreds etc of Southampton are posting here. As I count no more than 4 or 5 postees as possibly in this class, she is not guilty of defaming Southampton's residents. The Echo should be ashamed of it's open one sided political stance which caused me to stop buying it, except on Saturdays for the TV information some time ago.[/p][/quote]so you like being called an inbreed by someone who looks like her then Mr Keeble?[/p][/quote]One day perhaps you will get my name right, in the mean time as I have had a few insults from you without having a hissy fit, I feel she is entitled to say what she likes on this site, in the same way as your obnoxious comment about her looks.[/p][/quote]It's Alan Keeble isn't it? I have given up with a Person like you this so called Lady ripped into posters calling them inbred & numerous other names . maybe if her & her husband went to a gym she wouldn't have had so much pent up anger but she openly attacked posters over a subject her father should have posted on. I don't remember it & I didn't comment on it so please stop trying to guess the intelligence of me & other posters until you actually find out if you have any loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:12pm Mon 3 Sep 12

forest hump says...

"Dr, Dr, I think i am a dog" "how long have you felt like this?" "ever since I was a pup"

"well, sit on the couch and I'll examine you" "not allowed on the couch"
"Dr, Dr, I think i am a dog" "how long have you felt like this?" "ever since I was a pup" "well, sit on the couch and I'll examine you" "not allowed on the couch" forest hump
  • Score: 0

9:21pm Mon 3 Sep 12

Inform Al says...

loosehead wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Scrutinizer wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?
But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.
Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are?
this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology.
If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point
Yes she lashed out at US, not the people of Southampton as the Echo story so blatantly claims. In fact at times I tend to agree with her when she states that all the inbreds etc of Southampton are posting here. As I count no more than 4 or 5 postees as possibly in this class, she is not guilty of defaming Southampton's residents. The Echo should be ashamed of it's open one sided political stance which caused me to stop buying it, except on Saturdays for the TV information some time ago.
so you like being called an inbreed by someone who looks like her then Mr Keeble?
One day perhaps you will get my name right, in the mean time as I have had a few insults from you without having a hissy fit, I feel she is entitled to say what she likes on this site, in the same way as your obnoxious comment about her looks.
It's Alan Keeble isn't it?
I have given up with a Person like you this so called Lady ripped into posters calling them inbred & numerous other names .
maybe if her & her husband went to a gym she wouldn't have had so much pent up anger but she openly attacked posters over a subject her father should have posted on.
I don't remember it & I didn't comment on it so please stop trying to guess the intelligence of me & other posters until you actually find out if you have any
In your case I don't need to guess, you still haven't got my name right, apart from my Christian name.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?[/p][/quote]But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.[/p][/quote]Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are? this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology. If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point[/p][/quote]Yes she lashed out at US, not the people of Southampton as the Echo story so blatantly claims. In fact at times I tend to agree with her when she states that all the inbreds etc of Southampton are posting here. As I count no more than 4 or 5 postees as possibly in this class, she is not guilty of defaming Southampton's residents. The Echo should be ashamed of it's open one sided political stance which caused me to stop buying it, except on Saturdays for the TV information some time ago.[/p][/quote]so you like being called an inbreed by someone who looks like her then Mr Keeble?[/p][/quote]One day perhaps you will get my name right, in the mean time as I have had a few insults from you without having a hissy fit, I feel she is entitled to say what she likes on this site, in the same way as your obnoxious comment about her looks.[/p][/quote]It's Alan Keeble isn't it? I have given up with a Person like you this so called Lady ripped into posters calling them inbred & numerous other names . maybe if her & her husband went to a gym she wouldn't have had so much pent up anger but she openly attacked posters over a subject her father should have posted on. I don't remember it & I didn't comment on it so please stop trying to guess the intelligence of me & other posters until you actually find out if you have any[/p][/quote]In your case I don't need to guess, you still haven't got my name right, apart from my Christian name. Inform Al
  • Score: 0

9:25pm Mon 3 Sep 12

loosehead says...

Inform Al wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Scrutinizer wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?
But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.
Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are?
this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology.
If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point
Yes she lashed out at US, not the people of Southampton as the Echo story so blatantly claims. In fact at times I tend to agree with her when she states that all the inbreds etc of Southampton are posting here. As I count no more than 4 or 5 postees as possibly in this class, she is not guilty of defaming Southampton's residents. The Echo should be ashamed of it's open one sided political stance which caused me to stop buying it, except on Saturdays for the TV information some time ago.
so you like being called an inbreed by someone who looks like her then Mr Keeble?
One day perhaps you will get my name right, in the mean time as I have had a few insults from you without having a hissy fit, I feel she is entitled to say what she likes on this site, in the same way as your obnoxious comment about her looks.
It's Alan Keeble isn't it?
I have given up with a Person like you this so called Lady ripped into posters calling them inbred & numerous other names .
maybe if her & her husband went to a gym she wouldn't have had so much pent up anger but she openly attacked posters over a subject her father should have posted on.
I don't remember it & I didn't comment on it so please stop trying to guess the intelligence of me & other posters until you actually find out if you have any
In your case I don't need to guess, you still haven't got my name right, apart from my Christian name.
So come on spell you're surname is it Kebble?
[quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?[/p][/quote]But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.[/p][/quote]Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are? this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology. If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point[/p][/quote]Yes she lashed out at US, not the people of Southampton as the Echo story so blatantly claims. In fact at times I tend to agree with her when she states that all the inbreds etc of Southampton are posting here. As I count no more than 4 or 5 postees as possibly in this class, she is not guilty of defaming Southampton's residents. The Echo should be ashamed of it's open one sided political stance which caused me to stop buying it, except on Saturdays for the TV information some time ago.[/p][/quote]so you like being called an inbreed by someone who looks like her then Mr Keeble?[/p][/quote]One day perhaps you will get my name right, in the mean time as I have had a few insults from you without having a hissy fit, I feel she is entitled to say what she likes on this site, in the same way as your obnoxious comment about her looks.[/p][/quote]It's Alan Keeble isn't it? I have given up with a Person like you this so called Lady ripped into posters calling them inbred & numerous other names . maybe if her & her husband went to a gym she wouldn't have had so much pent up anger but she openly attacked posters over a subject her father should have posted on. I don't remember it & I didn't comment on it so please stop trying to guess the intelligence of me & other posters until you actually find out if you have any[/p][/quote]In your case I don't need to guess, you still haven't got my name right, apart from my Christian name.[/p][/quote]So come on spell you're surname is it Kebble? loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:28pm Mon 3 Sep 12

Inform Al says...

loosehead wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Scrutinizer wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?
But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.
Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are?
this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology.
If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point
Yes she lashed out at US, not the people of Southampton as the Echo story so blatantly claims. In fact at times I tend to agree with her when she states that all the inbreds etc of Southampton are posting here. As I count no more than 4 or 5 postees as possibly in this class, she is not guilty of defaming Southampton's residents. The Echo should be ashamed of it's open one sided political stance which caused me to stop buying it, except on Saturdays for the TV information some time ago.
so you like being called an inbreed by someone who looks like her then Mr Keeble?
One day perhaps you will get my name right, in the mean time as I have had a few insults from you without having a hissy fit, I feel she is entitled to say what she likes on this site, in the same way as your obnoxious comment about her looks.
It's Alan Keeble isn't it?
I have given up with a Person like you this so called Lady ripped into posters calling them inbred & numerous other names .
maybe if her & her husband went to a gym she wouldn't have had so much pent up anger but she openly attacked posters over a subject her father should have posted on.
I don't remember it & I didn't comment on it so please stop trying to guess the intelligence of me & other posters until you actually find out if you have any
In your case I don't need to guess, you still haven't got my name right, apart from my Christian name.
So come on spell you're surname is it Kebble?
No, wrong again. Are we playing 20 questions?
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?[/p][/quote]But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.[/p][/quote]Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are? this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology. If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point[/p][/quote]Yes she lashed out at US, not the people of Southampton as the Echo story so blatantly claims. In fact at times I tend to agree with her when she states that all the inbreds etc of Southampton are posting here. As I count no more than 4 or 5 postees as possibly in this class, she is not guilty of defaming Southampton's residents. The Echo should be ashamed of it's open one sided political stance which caused me to stop buying it, except on Saturdays for the TV information some time ago.[/p][/quote]so you like being called an inbreed by someone who looks like her then Mr Keeble?[/p][/quote]One day perhaps you will get my name right, in the mean time as I have had a few insults from you without having a hissy fit, I feel she is entitled to say what she likes on this site, in the same way as your obnoxious comment about her looks.[/p][/quote]It's Alan Keeble isn't it? I have given up with a Person like you this so called Lady ripped into posters calling them inbred & numerous other names . maybe if her & her husband went to a gym she wouldn't have had so much pent up anger but she openly attacked posters over a subject her father should have posted on. I don't remember it & I didn't comment on it so please stop trying to guess the intelligence of me & other posters until you actually find out if you have any[/p][/quote]In your case I don't need to guess, you still haven't got my name right, apart from my Christian name.[/p][/quote]So come on spell you're surname is it Kebble?[/p][/quote]No, wrong again. Are we playing 20 questions? Inform Al
  • Score: 0

9:45pm Mon 3 Sep 12

loosehead says...

Inform Al wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Scrutinizer wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?
But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.
Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are?
this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology.
If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point
Yes she lashed out at US, not the people of Southampton as the Echo story so blatantly claims. In fact at times I tend to agree with her when she states that all the inbreds etc of Southampton are posting here. As I count no more than 4 or 5 postees as possibly in this class, she is not guilty of defaming Southampton's residents. The Echo should be ashamed of it's open one sided political stance which caused me to stop buying it, except on Saturdays for the TV information some time ago.
so you like being called an inbreed by someone who looks like her then Mr Keeble?
One day perhaps you will get my name right, in the mean time as I have had a few insults from you without having a hissy fit, I feel she is entitled to say what she likes on this site, in the same way as your obnoxious comment about her looks.
It's Alan Keeble isn't it?
I have given up with a Person like you this so called Lady ripped into posters calling them inbred & numerous other names .
maybe if her & her husband went to a gym she wouldn't have had so much pent up anger but she openly attacked posters over a subject her father should have posted on.
I don't remember it & I didn't comment on it so please stop trying to guess the intelligence of me & other posters until you actually find out if you have any
In your case I don't need to guess, you still haven't got my name right, apart from my Christian name.
So come on spell you're surname is it Kebble?
No, wrong again. Are we playing 20 questions?
No I was copying a spelling of you're name in the Echo so why is it wrong aren't you that guy who's a UKIP member but is also aligned to Labour?
[quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?[/p][/quote]But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.[/p][/quote]Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are? this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology. If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point[/p][/quote]Yes she lashed out at US, not the people of Southampton as the Echo story so blatantly claims. In fact at times I tend to agree with her when she states that all the inbreds etc of Southampton are posting here. As I count no more than 4 or 5 postees as possibly in this class, she is not guilty of defaming Southampton's residents. The Echo should be ashamed of it's open one sided political stance which caused me to stop buying it, except on Saturdays for the TV information some time ago.[/p][/quote]so you like being called an inbreed by someone who looks like her then Mr Keeble?[/p][/quote]One day perhaps you will get my name right, in the mean time as I have had a few insults from you without having a hissy fit, I feel she is entitled to say what she likes on this site, in the same way as your obnoxious comment about her looks.[/p][/quote]It's Alan Keeble isn't it? I have given up with a Person like you this so called Lady ripped into posters calling them inbred & numerous other names . maybe if her & her husband went to a gym she wouldn't have had so much pent up anger but she openly attacked posters over a subject her father should have posted on. I don't remember it & I didn't comment on it so please stop trying to guess the intelligence of me & other posters until you actually find out if you have any[/p][/quote]In your case I don't need to guess, you still haven't got my name right, apart from my Christian name.[/p][/quote]So come on spell you're surname is it Kebble?[/p][/quote]No, wrong again. Are we playing 20 questions?[/p][/quote]No I was copying a spelling of you're name in the Echo so why is it wrong aren't you that guy who's a UKIP member but is also aligned to Labour? loosehead
  • Score: 0

10:49pm Mon 3 Sep 12

Inform Al says...

loosehead wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Scrutinizer wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?
But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.
Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are?
this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology.
If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point
Yes she lashed out at US, not the people of Southampton as the Echo story so blatantly claims. In fact at times I tend to agree with her when she states that all the inbreds etc of Southampton are posting here. As I count no more than 4 or 5 postees as possibly in this class, she is not guilty of defaming Southampton's residents. The Echo should be ashamed of it's open one sided political stance which caused me to stop buying it, except on Saturdays for the TV information some time ago.
so you like being called an inbreed by someone who looks like her then Mr Keeble?
One day perhaps you will get my name right, in the mean time as I have had a few insults from you without having a hissy fit, I feel she is entitled to say what she likes on this site, in the same way as your obnoxious comment about her looks.
It's Alan Keeble isn't it?
I have given up with a Person like you this so called Lady ripped into posters calling them inbred & numerous other names .
maybe if her & her husband went to a gym she wouldn't have had so much pent up anger but she openly attacked posters over a subject her father should have posted on.
I don't remember it & I didn't comment on it so please stop trying to guess the intelligence of me & other posters until you actually find out if you have any
In your case I don't need to guess, you still haven't got my name right, apart from my Christian name.
So come on spell you're surname is it Kebble?
No, wrong again. Are we playing 20 questions?
No I was copying a spelling of you're name in the Echo so why is it wrong aren't you that guy who's a UKIP member but is also aligned to Labour?
Sorry, I'm definitely not a UKIP member. Think we should be out of the EU though. 17 to go.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: Why don't we all publish our real names? I did on the Thorpe site to prove I had nothing to hide but it's gone?[/p][/quote]But it's not all about having "...nothing to hide...", as you put it, is it?. We all know - or should by now - that people who reveal their real name on the internet expose themselves to being tracked down by some means or other by individuals and various organisations, and caused all manner of problems all over the place on-line and beyond. I'd have thought that was pretty obvious really.[/p][/quote]Sorry but after taking total abuse & threats open or hidden I would love to know who these people actually are? this Lady was upset but in her temper lashed out at all of us & for that I feel we deserve an apology. If we had to print our real names some of these threats or insults would not be printed but yes I can see your point[/p][/quote]Yes she lashed out at US, not the people of Southampton as the Echo story so blatantly claims. In fact at times I tend to agree with her when she states that all the inbreds etc of Southampton are posting here. As I count no more than 4 or 5 postees as possibly in this class, she is not guilty of defaming Southampton's residents. The Echo should be ashamed of it's open one sided political stance which caused me to stop buying it, except on Saturdays for the TV information some time ago.[/p][/quote]so you like being called an inbreed by someone who looks like her then Mr Keeble?[/p][/quote]One day perhaps you will get my name right, in the mean time as I have had a few insults from you without having a hissy fit, I feel she is entitled to say what she likes on this site, in the same way as your obnoxious comment about her looks.[/p][/quote]It's Alan Keeble isn't it? I have given up with a Person like you this so called Lady ripped into posters calling them inbred & numerous other names . maybe if her & her husband went to a gym she wouldn't have had so much pent up anger but she openly attacked posters over a subject her father should have posted on. I don't remember it & I didn't comment on it so please stop trying to guess the intelligence of me & other posters until you actually find out if you have any[/p][/quote]In your case I don't need to guess, you still haven't got my name right, apart from my Christian name.[/p][/quote]So come on spell you're surname is it Kebble?[/p][/quote]No, wrong again. Are we playing 20 questions?[/p][/quote]No I was copying a spelling of you're name in the Echo so why is it wrong aren't you that guy who's a UKIP member but is also aligned to Labour?[/p][/quote]Sorry, I'm definitely not a UKIP member. Think we should be out of the EU though. 17 to go. Inform Al
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree