SE23.com - The Official Forum for Forest Hill & Honor Oak, London SE23
Online since 2002  -  10,000+ members

Home | SE23 Topics | Businesses & Services | Wider Topics | Offered/Wanted/Lost/Found | Advertising | Contact
Alexander Charles & Browne Steve Shaw Computer Services Armstrong & Co Solicitors


Post Reply  Post Topic 
Pages (7): « First < Previous 3 4 5 6 [7] Last »
What Chris Beach Did Next
Author Message
jgdoherty


Posts: 327
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #121
06-09-2020 10:19 PM

Mr Beach's hyperbole reaches new lows.

Quote:
Lewisham is staunchly political, and my political worldview doesn’t seem to “fit” here (more aligned with the rest of the U.K. outside SE London). I didn’t want my child to go to schools that were politicised, and for my political views to be unpleasantly gossiped about by other parents and maybe even teaching staff.

It’s been lovely moving to Kent, where I feel I’m surrounded by likeminded people


https://sydenham.org.uk/forum/viewtopic....42#p190442

Find all posts by this user Reply
Erekose


Posts: 555
Joined: May 2010
Post: #122
10-10-2020 07:54 AM

And presumably less foxes?

Find all posts by this user Reply
jgdoherty


Posts: 327
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #123
23-10-2020 04:17 PM

Here is a bad-faith projection expressed elsewhere by the guy who promised us he was leaving town some weeks ago.




The thinking is the equivalent of the good residents of SE23 wondering what would be the chances of a guy who is always boasting about his ownership of a Tesla car being run over by that same car.

Most would conclude that the chances are small.

But this non-resident has taken to criticising Marcus Rashford and Lewisham Council's excellent actions in supporting those who need help.

https://se23.life/t/free-school-meal-hal...ns/15969/8

Mr Beach doesn't get it that the rest of us see these support activities as being essential.

And does ForestHull as the new owner hold an opinion that matches that of the community or the bad-faith one as expressed by Mr Beach?

Find all posts by this user Reply
Erekose


Posts: 555
Joined: May 2010
Post: #124
23-10-2020 05:17 PM

Takes all sorts as we used to say and ‘let sleeping foxes lie’ might be the best policy.

Find all posts by this user Reply
jgdoherty


Posts: 327
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #125
23-10-2020 09:50 PM

Excellent point.

A substantive Foxtrot Oscar for one Chris Beach might be another.

It would seem ForestHull has adopted the same approach as all the other ineffectual "old" Mods, Owners and Owners' best buddies and victim bashers.

In short order ForestHull has demonstrated how his nascent forum ownership is to be conducted in the shadow of the old.

And that is to hide Mr Beach's indiscretions after he has made his compunction-free divisive and prejudicial comments about those who can defend themselves least. And in this case he chooses to attack every family who deserves and needs our community's support.

Without critical or effective censure of Mr Beach's unacceptable conduct or its offensive off-topic impact on the forum and its community and families.

For every family who have been supported by our community's essential actions and have been targeted by Chris's venal attacks, it is essential that his bile is rebutted whenever and wherever he - and his wingmen - project this categoric nonsense.

This post was last modified: 23-10-2020 09:55 PM by jgdoherty.

Find all posts by this user Reply
jgdoherty


Posts: 327
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #126
Yesterday 01:36 PM

Another explanatory pronouncement from the new owner of the .life entities.

At risk of interpreting ForestHull’s latest post in an overly harsh light, this is how most people will view it.

No. But.

Yes. But

Chris Beach cannot be excluded from the forum and can do as he chooses.

No. But.

The master of this domain’s posts cannot be censured and Mr Beach is permitted to regale the (mugs/stiffs) forum members with the ordure that is his right wing dogma.

Yes. But.

Just as he has done over many years.

Yes. But.

There is no concerns arising from the fact that Mr Beach’s doctrine is out of step with the community and is rejected by it.

No. But.

There are no concerns about those he attacks also being forum members who find themselves in the position of observing Mr Beach being given a platform to unilaterally and singularly condemn them.

Yes. But.

Find all posts by this user Reply
jgdoherty


Posts: 327
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #127
Yesterday 03:00 PM

ForestHull's closing paragraphs are confusing on two key areas.

"In this case the edited post had some redundant part of the message owing to the split so was cleaned up. I think that was probably unnecessary, but I don’t think there was anything nefarious about this,.
@ChrisBeach may have jumped the gun with the edit rather than recuse himself. He was helping out in the in the capacity of a Trust Level 4 member in this case.

As for the admin role itself, and as noted in the banner at the top of the site, we are looking to hand over ownership of the sites on 1st November. We have to wait to give fair notice of the transfer to members, and are currently co-admins."



What did he intend to impart about what was edited and why? Was it necessary for Mr Beach to make those edits at all?

Who are "We" and why do we have to wait and for what do we have to wait?

Find all posts by this user Reply
Pages (7): « First < Previous 3 4 5 6 [7] Last »

Friends of Blythe Hill Fields


Possibly Related Topics ...
Topic: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Concerning Chris Beach StuartG 9 1,266 09-09-2020 09:21 PM
Last Post: jgdoherty