Non Partisan Labour Party (NPLP)

[jeffh]

Does anybody know the opening times of the town Labour Party Office in South Road?  I went along there this morning to try to find out more about Mike Hill's proposal for a Non Partisan Labour Party in a neutral part of the office - all the shutters were up.

[Riqueti]

Yes.

[Riqueti]

Best off emailing Mike as he won't always be at the office.

[jeffh]

Best off emailing Mike as he won't always be at the office.

Thanks

[mk1]

Yes.

Back to your last ID now?

[Riqueti]

I've only got this one ID on here. Mine didn't change

[Inspector Knacker]

A non  partisan political party is like a non partisan wolf.

[steveL]

One ID Michelle but then you share it with so many . . .

[Riqueti]

Nope, wrong again Mr Latimer. Please don't be making accusationary comments like that. It's not clever.

My posting history is there for all to see. Nothing to hide

[mk1]

Interesting exchange on Facebook where  James tacitly admits he was the 'new' poster and he was 'testing/probing' the site security.

[danny_boy]

Nope, wrong again Mr Latimer. Please don't be making accusationary comments like that. It's not clever.

My posting history is there for all to see. Nothing to hide

What Steve thinks is his own business. Frankly, I'm not in the mood to chance it.

[Username]

That seems to be a warning of some sort because one member corrected another. That can't be right surely? I can't see anything there against the registration agreement or are there other rules I need to be aware of?

[Username]

Interesting exchange on Facebook where  James tacitly admits he was the 'new' poster and he was 'testing/probing' the site security.

I think this is misleading and doesn't fit with the posted picture 'evidence'. The first person questions bypassing a restriction, a full read of the post shows this to be an IP block, IPs can be changed with ease and it is perfectly legal to do. The second person replays that his security software alerted him to insecurities. There is no suggestion of probing or hacking etc.

This could well be against the terms of the registration agreement I'm not sure and would happily accept guidance.

[Riqueti]

Interesting exchange on Facebook where  James tacitly admits he was the 'new' poster and he was 'testing/probing' the site security.

MK1... I'm not sure I follow?

[mk1]

I think this is misleading and doesn't fit with the posted picture 'evidence'. The first person questions bypassing a restriction, a full read of the post shows this to be an IP block, IPs can be changed with ease and it is perfectly legal to do. The second person replays that his security software alerted him to insecurities. There is no suggestion of probing or hacking etc.
This could well be against the terms of the registration agreement I'm not sure and would happily accept guidance.

You seem remarkably well informed on the actions of  certain 'other' posters. Oh and remember this 'other' poster was denying he was the man and  now admits it was him.....and in a thread he started where he was banging on about people lying!!!!!!!!!


You were not banned but put on pre-mod.  Congratulations on your swift return. I doubt it will last though given the  recurring forum problem with 'Trojan Horse' posters. The Red Dreams bloke did a lot of damage in his short time here. Obviously the threat is being taken more seriously this time around.