|
Post by naughtyfox on Oct 11, 2022 16:53:46 GMT
Hey Dunkers, how's the forum stature grabbing you these days? Just lesser audience to ignore him now. Fewer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2022 16:57:39 GMT
Hey Dunkers, how's the forum stature grabbing you these days? Just lesser audience to ignore him now. *Less of an*
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Oct 11, 2022 17:01:36 GMT
Just lesser audience to ignore him now. Fewer. Wrong. You can't have "fewer audience". You can have "fewer audiences" but "fewer" must precede a pluralised noun. The general rule is that you use "fewer" if the item can be counted- "fewer cats, fewer trees, fewer than six items in the shopping basket" and "less" if the item cannot be counted- "less sugar, less humid, less water in the canal" etc.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Oct 11, 2022 18:03:19 GMT
Wrong. You can't have "fewer audience". You can have "fewer audiences" but "fewer" must precede a pluralised noun. The general rule is that you use "fewer" if the item can be counted- "fewer cats, fewer trees, fewer than six items in the shopping basket" and "less" if the item cannot be counted- "less sugar, less humid, less water in the canal" etc. Hook, line and sinker, caught a Pedant. Definitely a lesser audience now all the great ones have left, though some do pop back to laugh at the inmates, a bit like Victorians visiting the madhouse. 🤣🤣🤣🤣 Comedic licence allowed me to miss out the "a".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2022 18:15:15 GMT
Wrong. You can't have "fewer audience". You can have "fewer audiences" but "fewer" must precede a pluralised noun. The general rule is that you use "fewer" if the item can be counted- "fewer cats, fewer trees, fewer than six items in the shopping basket" and "less" if the item cannot be counted- "less sugar, less humid, less water in the canal" etc. Hook, line and sinker, caught a Pedant. Definitely a lesser audience now all the great ones have left, though some do pop back to laugh at the inmates, a bit like Victorians visiting the madhouse. 🤣🤣🤣🤣 Comedic licence allowed me to miss out the "a". *yawns*
|
|
|
Post by fi on Oct 11, 2022 18:15:54 GMT
Hey Dunkers, how's the forum stature grabbing you these days? Just lesser audience to ignore him now. Only very slightly. Most former members still visit here and number of guests is fairly stable at 30 members and 1100 guests per day.
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Oct 11, 2022 18:23:29 GMT
Wrong. You can't have "fewer audience". You can have "fewer audiences" but "fewer" must precede a pluralised noun. The general rule is that you use "fewer" if the item can be counted- "fewer cats, fewer trees, fewer than six items in the shopping basket" and "less" if the item cannot be counted- "less sugar, less humid, less water in the canal" etc. Definitely a lesser audience now all the old farts have left Fewer 'vaccine' junkies. Even fewer if NATO gets the war they're trying to stir up. China stands on the sidelines whilst Russia and Europe+America slog it out, waiting for an exhausted winner ... and then they move in for the kill. They'll put you in their woks and have a fry-up, along with your dog. And cat. And pet bat, if you have one.
|
|
|
Post by fi on Oct 11, 2022 18:30:03 GMT
Dinner tonight...
Duck spring rolls for starters.
Singapore noodles, special fried rice, hoisin glazed beef ribs for main.
All here waiting my inspection to check no hidden chips have got into the meal.
All meals cooked in the UK.
Yum yum.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2022 18:36:00 GMT
I saw a Chinese restaurant called "Wok around the clock"
Brilliant.
It was closed which defeated the idea but it was stilly a stunning pun.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Oct 11, 2022 18:43:46 GMT
I saw a Chinese restaurant called "Wok around the clock" Brilliant. It was closed which defeated the idea but it was stilly a stunning pun. Sum ting wong.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2022 12:25:24 GMT
.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Feb 21, 2023 18:01:43 GMT
It is, therefore, time for Thunderboat's membership to exercise such powers of self-moderation that% it has at its disposal. At this stage, I am prepared to let the matter drop, and take no further action in relation to the Thunderboat forum itself, or its hosts ProBoards, provided that Mr Stabby (Vince Coventon) is compelled by the membership to :- 1) Permanently take down all the posts deemed by me to be unacceptable in any way or form, . . and to undertake that there will be no repeat posting of the same or similar malicious falsehoods, unsubstantiated allegations, or knowing distortions of fact or truth. 2) Apologise publicly and unreservedly for the content of all the offending posts, . . and publish an admission that all the offending material was posted in the absence of any reasonable grounds or other valid reason for so doing. _______________________________________________________________ Any updates on how this ultimatum went, Tony?
|
|
|
Post by Aloysius on Feb 21, 2023 19:24:55 GMT
You missed out my favourite bit:
"Of late, however, the content posted by Mr Stabby (Vince Coventon) has reached a level, and a tone, that cannot and will not be allowed to continue."
|
|
|
Post by Tony Dunkley on Mar 12, 2023 11:54:37 GMT
What is a 'houseboat' ?
A 'houseboat' is what most people - the people at the Government's Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy included - would call a boat that's used for residential purposes in addition to sometimes being used for cruising, . . and it's also what the professional liars at C&RT dishonestly call a self-propelled canal or river pleasure craft, if it happens to have been licensed under the CC'ing clause (S.17, subsection 3/c/ii) of the 1995 BW Act, . . and if the Trust's corrupt management have targeted the boat and its owner to be subjected to one of their specialist frauds.
The fraud is initiated by C&RT's so-called Legal & Governance Services by way of a known (to the C&RT) to be inappropriate and dishonest application to the Courts, under Part 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules, for an Order for what is technically called Declaratory and Injunctive Relief. These Court Orders are applied for under the known (to the C&RT) false pretence of needing to to apply to and to gain the authority and blessing of the Courts to enforce the statutory powers of boat removal already available to the Trust under Sections 8 and 13 (respectively) of the British Waterways Acts of 1995 and 1971 (respectively).
Having obtained such an Order, the C&RT then use it to defraud targeted CC'ers out of their boats by employing bogus Bailiffs impersonating genuine officers of the Court - a serious criminal offence - to forcibly and unlawfully disposess selected boatowners of their homes and property. These bogus Bailiffs, working for and supplied to the C&RT by a crook called Brian Clarke of Commercial Boat Services of Chester, are deployed to lie to and convince both the boat owner and the Police that they have what amounts to a Writ or Warrant of Control that entitles and authorizes them to seize and take possession of the boat named on the Court Order. Once separated from its rightful owner, the boat is spirited away and disposed of, illegally, on behalf of the C&RT, and ultimately on the instructions of its Company Secretary, Tom Deards, head of what should and would be more appropriately called the Trust's 'Illegal & Connivance Services'.
On the other side of the 'houseboat' coin, however, . . when the professional liars at C&RT are talking to the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy, the Government department that decides on the question of eligibility for the £400 EBSS fuel payment in respect of boats licensed under the CC'ing clause (S.17, subsection 3/c/ii) of the 1995 Act, . . it turns out that the boats that are 'houseboats' when it suits C&RT and its dishonest lawyers and management for them to be, aren't really 'houseboats' at all, . . or at least NOT when the Government's Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy tells the Trust's professional liars that 'houseboats' on its waters ARE ELIGIBLE for the £400 EBSS fuel payments. Now, . . . why could that be, I wonder ?
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Mar 15, 2023 17:42:44 GMT
What is a 'houseboat' ?
A 'houseboat' is what most people - the people at the Government's Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy included - would call a boat that's used for residential purposes in addition to sometimes being used for cruising, . . and it's also what the professional liars at C&RT dishonestly call a self-propelled canal or river pleasure craft, if it happens to have been licensed under the CC'ing clause (S.17, subsection 3/c/ii) of the 1995 BW Act, . . and if the Trust's corrupt management have targeted the boat and its owner to be subjected to one of their specialist frauds.
The fraud is initiated by C&RT's so-called Legal & Governance Services by way of a known (to the C&RT) to be inappropriate and dishonest application to the Courts, under Part 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules, for an Order for what is technically called Declaratory and Injunctive Relief. These Court Orders are applied for under the known (to the C&RT) false pretence of needing to to apply to and to gain the authority and blessing of the Courts to enforce the statutory powers of boat removal already available to the Trust under Sections 8 and 13 (respectively) of the British Waterways Acts of 1995 and 1971 (respectively).
Having obtained such an Order, the C&RT then use it to defraud targeted CC'ers out of their boats by employing bogus Bailiffs impersonating genuine officers of the Court - a serious criminal offence - to forcibly and unlawfully disposess selected boatowners of their homes and property. These bogus Bailiffs, working for and supplied to the C&RT by a crook called Brian Clarke of Commercial Boat Services of Chester, are deployed to lie to and convince both the boat owner and the Police that they have what amounts to a Writ or Warrant of Control that entitles and authorizes them to seize and take possession of the boat named on the Court Order. Once separated from its rightful owner, the boat is spirited away and disposed of, illegally, on behalf of the C&RT, and ultimately on the instructions of its Company Secretary, Tom Deards, head of what should and would be more appropriately called the Trust's 'Illegal & Connivance Services'.
On the other side of the 'houseboat' coin, however, . . when the professional liars at C&RT are talking to the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy, the Government department that decides on the question of eligibility for the £400 EBSS fuel payment in respect of boats licensed under the CC'ing clause (S.17, subsection 3/c/ii) of the 1995 Act, . . it turns out that the boats that are 'houseboats' when it suits C&RT and its dishonest lawyers and management for them to be, aren't really 'houseboats' at all, . . or at least NOT when the Government's Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy tells the Trust's professional liars that 'houseboats' on its waters ARE ELIGIBLE for the £400 EBSS fuel payments. Now, . . . why could that be, I wonder ?We know, it's the scattergun approach that alerted us. Not got the dog to check your posts yet then. Let the brains behind the team have a say.
|
|