Forum Topic

Hello, Paul Campbell

The irascible baker is back.Thanks to whomever made that happen. Sorry I can't provide details as to why I was suspended but no one shared them with me. All a bit of a mystery.So much for teachable moments.

David Lesniak ● 1612d24 Comments

Once more unto the breach dear friend or clog the road up with.............Choose your own ending!

Adrian Irving ● 1612d

Welcome back. Give ‘em hell!

Steve Taylor ● 1612d

Great you're back.Certainly Messrs Campbell, Pike etc will be really chuffed 😉

Loraine Pemberton ● 1612d

I look forward to David running rings around them once again. Note that he has shut Saper up.

Steve Taylor ● 1612d

Indeed Steve, however I do wonder if Mr Saper has taken an enforced break from the Forum due to his prolific use of the 'S' word, just asking ?

Loraine Pemberton ● 1612d

Thought you must just be busy David, welcome back.

Janice Evans ● 1612d

Perhaps people who regularly refer to their fellow citizens as "morons" could also take an enforced break from CW4 ? (Not you, Loraine).

Richard Greenhough ● 1612d

Yes, didn’t Saper call him an arsehole?  Whatever it was,  David obviously got to him and hit some home truth!!  😂😂

Steve Taylor ● 1611d

Gosh, I hope someone didn’t try to get the ‘irascible baker’ cancelled. That would be a sour soup if they did.

Russell Pearson ● 1611d

No Russ "it wasn't me who said Brentford Taliban" Pearson. It was his "friends". I love the irascible baker. He is the second most important asset of the Evil Cycling Lobby and I am glad to see him back because Taylor, Dodge, you and the hilarious new lad Jones have been poor imitations during his absence.

Paul Campbell ● 1611d

Thanks for the warm welcome.Loraine, if the 'S' word were to blame, surely we'd see John Hall take leave.But as I said, there is no telling what happened as details were not given. One can't learn and things cannot progress in the absence of transparency.

David Lesniak ● 1611d

Thanks, Grove Park Man. I'm only too happy to help get the Martian Scientist Guy to admit construction isn't construction and tarmac isn't tarmac. So much for those advanced degrees. At least I'm using mine to make him look the fool. Oh wait, I'm not needed for that.But I'm curious Paul, what do you know that I don't? You allege info was shared with you. Info that wasn't to be shared. So that's super interesting...

David Lesniak ● 1611d

David, although I am pleased to see you return, the faux victimhood is a bit juvenile. You used an obscenity which, as a long term user of this forum you know very well is verboten and quite rightly too.Perhaps also your time in the wilderness might have given you pause for reflection on the tone of your posts. You have a lot of value to add but good points can be obscured when they are accompanied by personal attacks on those who disagree with you.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1611d

"points can be obscured when they are accompanied by personal attacks on those who disagree with you"That seems an appropriate point to return to the original title of the thread.

Amanda Smith ● 1611d

Jeremy, there are others using obscenity who have yet to be banned. John Hall, Ed Saper and Bobbie Osborne with that ridiculous bit about sex toys. Is that all fine and dandy but somehow the 'F" word is not? Are we all 12 and we have to hush hush the 'F' word because mom might hear? There are infinite stories on this forum of people being told to 'F' off. Why should they bear the brunt of that and then have to suck it in when trying to convey their experience? Not to mention the word is now appearing in the public domain in the US press as well as here in the UK. So yeah, I dipped my toe in based on precedent I've seen. Oops. Once personal attacks stop (mind you the complaining and getting me banned was precisely that) let me know. But plenty of them being flung around by none other than Paul Campbelll. Relative to the tone he sets, I'd say I'm right on pitch. Maybe even pitch perfect

David Lesniak ● 1611d

I personally can live with the odd swear word, but  I can’t abide fake stats. Once is bad but when it’s continual i think it deserves a ban. Just my opinion . Is it in the rules somewhere. .

Maggie Dodge ● 1610d

Oh dear

Russell Pearson ● 1609d

“I can’t abide fake stats. Once is bad but when it’s continual i think it deserves a ban. Just my opinion . Is it in the rules somewhere.”Might be worth looking at Putin’s ban of “fake news”. He couldn’t abide information that challenged his worldview either.But how would you identify it’s fake apart from that can’t abide it? You’ve said previously that rely on others views as far as any analysis is concerned.

Tom Pike ● 1609d

Yep. I bow down to the greater knowledge of others on these matters.  In the same way people who present the stats appear to know they’re stuff, have letters after their name etc, those people who pull information apart seem to know theirs too. Do you know who’s fake stats I’m referring to?

Maggie Dodge ● 1609d

“Might be worth looking at Putin’s ban of “fake news”. He couldn’t abide information that challenged his worldview either.”I see some resemblance to the cycle lobby now you mention it. Putin 🤣🤣🤷‍♀️🤷‍♀️🤷‍♀️🤷‍♀️👏👏👏👏

Maggie Dodge ● 1609d

No, you’re the only one calling for a ban of any statistics you can’t abide.

Tom Pike ● 1609d

I’m sorry you find requiring accurate stats so hard to swallow. You need to lookat that

Maggie Dodge ● 1609d

But you’ve admitted you can’t tell yourself if statistics are accurate. Rather you agree with any attempted analysis that suits your beliefs despite their very clear shortcomings. Now, just like Putin, want to ban anything that doesn’t reinforce your viewpoint. And you see nothing wrong with that.

Tom Pike ● 1609d

Tom, this is where you fall down. When you can’t lose the likes of me with long drawn out complicated stat filled replies. Your silly, can’t defend your argument side shows you up.

Maggie Dodge ● 1609d