Post by Joe K on Sept 19, 2014 14:57:31 GMT
Rashly, last week, I tried to delete a post on the previous entry of this name, but picked the wrong box and actually deleted the entire thread. The proboards help forum assured me that the page couldn't be recovered, but I had a few of the facts, thanks to the Youtube clip I posted. I had hoped that if I held on for a bit, someone might think I took the page down deliberately and, if they'd taken screen-shots, like our friend Gary, post them up to embarrass me, helping me out instead. No such luck, it seems, so here we are...
I posted the comment above in the middle of June, waited a week, and them emailed Sarah Cuthbert, at cuthberts@parliament.uk, on the 19th, to ask why it had not been published.
I had no response, so on the 28th, I sent this:
Hi again,
Four days after I sent the email below, having received no answer from you (and I can't recall the last time that I did), I visited your office and asked you for an explanation. You acted as if you weren't even aware of having been sent the email, or of the problems with comments on the blog, despite the fact that I have raised this issue before, but said that the person who manages the blog wasn't in, but would check it when he/she (I don't know their gender, and maybe you don't either, judging by your present apparent level of awareness) did come in. Not that a physical presence in the office should be required to moderate a site.
It is now a further five days since my visit, making 16 days since I posted my comment. I shall pay another visit this week, and I will have two questions:
Why has my comment still not been moderated?
Why do you not respond to my emails, and are you actually blocking them?
Joe Kilker
So I would have visited the office on the 23rd (combining it with a trip to the city council offices, I recall). It was then that Cuthbert claimed that a member of staff who 'managed' the blog was not presently in the office, but since then, Graham has contradicted this, saying he manages the blog himself.
I'll have to check the dates later, but some two or three weeks after the 23rd, I visited again to check on developments. I received more claims that Cuthbert didn't really know anything about that sort of thing, but also a promise that she would 'get on with it'
Then, a month after the last email, I wrote this:
Hi,
So, it's been well over a week now, and still nothing from you. No explanation for the moderation failure (which I have visited your office about twice now), and no explanation as to why you aren't responding to my emails.
In fact, I had to find out for myself, just now, that your email address has changed from cuthberts@parliament.uk. This must have happened quite recently, as I've only just started getting the failed post notifications, so will you tell me when you received the last email from me, to confirm which you've missed?
It would have been immediately after this that I again visited the office, but this time took my Z1 and a tripod and sat it down in front of the intercom to record this clip:
Conversation with Richard Graham's secretary, Aug 29th, starting at 4:21pm
This is the accompanying text:
Again, anyone watching this without knowing the background will probably consider my own contributions to the discussion to be arsier than Cuthbert's, assuming they even pick up on her increasingly waspish tone. So to clarify, this began on June 12th, 2014. I posted this comment:
'This was all necessary, surely, because the city council were forbidden to borrow money to fund home repairs and new homes. So the crucial question is, why was it wrong for them to do this, but fine for Gloucester City Homes, which used to be, in fact still is, under the council’s control?
'It’s very droll, these remarks about getting all this for the price of a few cups of tea, but what is the real cost, when the years of complaints by tenants about GCH’s poor performance are swept under the carpet to get that precious approval?'
to this blog entry: richardgraham.org/housing-minister-kris-hopkins-comes-to-gloucester-city-homes/
If the link doesn't work, the back story can be found on the General Board of trollhunterx.proboards.com/
The comment has remained, unmoderated but not deleted, since that day. Promises to speak to the person running Graham's blog, a subsequent promise to 'get on with it' a month later (and that was over a month ago, now), all have been broken, and now Cuthbert claims complete ignorance about everything, even how I might make a complaint about my MP, or her. If she actually manages to keep her latest promise about information on complaints, she just might salvage something from this, but I highly doubt that she will. For purposes of alleging harassment to justify a block, it might be problematic, emailing someone who she *has* actually blocked email from, I would suspect.
This is the truth behind Richard 'thousands of cases' Graham. Brush-off Central at 2 College Street (2nd Floor).
These are the two comment I then posted on the Youtube page:
It turns out, supposedly, that Sarah Cuthbert knew nothing about my emails to her being blocked because Richard Graham did it, without telling her (and, naturally, without telling me). Now that's something I would tell an employee, so as not to make a liar of her. Mind, Graham also claims he manages his blog and no-one else, so Cuthbert had spun a line about someone else being in charge of it.
Despite this deviousness, incompetence, or combination of the two, apparently I'm the one to blame for Cuthbert feeling 'harassed' (Graham's words) because I had to visit his offices after receiving no reply to my emails.
Graham's arrogance in thinking that he can put such constraints on his constituents without any notification is right up there with his previous triumphs in parking on DYLs during his election campaign and breaking Commons rules by taking a selfie of himself in the House, not to mention turning up late for a debate he requested, leading to it being cancelled. Oh, I just did mention it...
And at the surgery, Graham was very vague about why he didn't want comments on his blog. He got some abusive comments apparently, but then, they weren't all abusive (or he would surely have reported them?), and yet he couldn't explain why the latter weren't being published either. It seems to me that he's just like Parmjit Dhanda before him. That is, starting to allow comments creates a precedent for future critical, but polite, comments, so best to ban then from the outset.
And the second comment:
Graham did, however, give me a letter in which he purported to answer my query about the city council and Gloucester City Homes' questionable independent status, but (and this is being charitable) it was a case of missing the target, but hitting the tree. The tree was, certainly, that the council can't borrow any more money, because it has borrowed all it can, and been forbidden to borrow more. The target, though, was an explanation of why it's legitimate to create a proxy company so that it can borrow more, with the blessing of our MP, when that proxy has demonstrated the same level of ineptitude and duplicity that the council did before. That target was ignored.
Some may have heard a 'File on 4' report entitled 'The Accountancy Kings', where it was revealed that personnel would move from jobs in consultancy firms like Capita to direct employment with councils, give business to the firms, and then move back again. I wonder how much back and forth goes on between the city council and GCH?
richardgraham.org/community-surgery-friday-12th-september/
And that's pretty much it for now. To establish how much of Cuthbert's purported ignorance is genuine, I have sent Graham an email, asking him precisely when he imposed this email block, without, in typically arrogant fashion, informing his secretary, and having received no reply, said on Twitter that I'd be dropping into the office no later than today. I may in fact be too busy to do that, but at least further delay will further dilute already lame accusations of harassment of staff.
0 Responses to Housing Minister Kris Hopkins comes to Gloucester City Homes
Joe Kilker on June 12, 2014 at 1:53 pm
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
This was all necessary, surely, because the city council were forbidden to borrow money to fund home repairs and new homes. So the crucial question is, why was it wrong for them to do this, but fine for Gloucester City Homes, which used to be, in fact still is, under the council’s control?
It’s very droll, these remarks about getting all this for the price of a few cups of tea, but what is the real cost, when the years of complaints by tenants about GCH’s poor performance are swept under the carpet to get that precious approval?
richardgraham.org/housing-minister-kris-hopkins-comes-to-gloucester-city-homes/
Joe Kilker on June 12, 2014 at 1:53 pm
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
This was all necessary, surely, because the city council were forbidden to borrow money to fund home repairs and new homes. So the crucial question is, why was it wrong for them to do this, but fine for Gloucester City Homes, which used to be, in fact still is, under the council’s control?
It’s very droll, these remarks about getting all this for the price of a few cups of tea, but what is the real cost, when the years of complaints by tenants about GCH’s poor performance are swept under the carpet to get that precious approval?
richardgraham.org/housing-minister-kris-hopkins-comes-to-gloucester-city-homes/
I posted the comment above in the middle of June, waited a week, and them emailed Sarah Cuthbert, at cuthberts@parliament.uk, on the 19th, to ask why it had not been published.
I had no response, so on the 28th, I sent this:
Hi again,
Four days after I sent the email below, having received no answer from you (and I can't recall the last time that I did), I visited your office and asked you for an explanation. You acted as if you weren't even aware of having been sent the email, or of the problems with comments on the blog, despite the fact that I have raised this issue before, but said that the person who manages the blog wasn't in, but would check it when he/she (I don't know their gender, and maybe you don't either, judging by your present apparent level of awareness) did come in. Not that a physical presence in the office should be required to moderate a site.
It is now a further five days since my visit, making 16 days since I posted my comment. I shall pay another visit this week, and I will have two questions:
Why has my comment still not been moderated?
Why do you not respond to my emails, and are you actually blocking them?
Joe Kilker
So I would have visited the office on the 23rd (combining it with a trip to the city council offices, I recall). It was then that Cuthbert claimed that a member of staff who 'managed' the blog was not presently in the office, but since then, Graham has contradicted this, saying he manages the blog himself.
I'll have to check the dates later, but some two or three weeks after the 23rd, I visited again to check on developments. I received more claims that Cuthbert didn't really know anything about that sort of thing, but also a promise that she would 'get on with it'
Then, a month after the last email, I wrote this:
Hi,
So, it's been well over a week now, and still nothing from you. No explanation for the moderation failure (which I have visited your office about twice now), and no explanation as to why you aren't responding to my emails.
In fact, I had to find out for myself, just now, that your email address has changed from cuthberts@parliament.uk. This must have happened quite recently, as I've only just started getting the failed post notifications, so will you tell me when you received the last email from me, to confirm which you've missed?
It would have been immediately after this that I again visited the office, but this time took my Z1 and a tripod and sat it down in front of the intercom to record this clip:
Conversation with Richard Graham's secretary, Aug 29th, starting at 4:21pm
This is the accompanying text:
Again, anyone watching this without knowing the background will probably consider my own contributions to the discussion to be arsier than Cuthbert's, assuming they even pick up on her increasingly waspish tone. So to clarify, this began on June 12th, 2014. I posted this comment:
'This was all necessary, surely, because the city council were forbidden to borrow money to fund home repairs and new homes. So the crucial question is, why was it wrong for them to do this, but fine for Gloucester City Homes, which used to be, in fact still is, under the council’s control?
'It’s very droll, these remarks about getting all this for the price of a few cups of tea, but what is the real cost, when the years of complaints by tenants about GCH’s poor performance are swept under the carpet to get that precious approval?'
to this blog entry: richardgraham.org/housing-minister-kris-hopkins-comes-to-gloucester-city-homes/
If the link doesn't work, the back story can be found on the General Board of trollhunterx.proboards.com/
The comment has remained, unmoderated but not deleted, since that day. Promises to speak to the person running Graham's blog, a subsequent promise to 'get on with it' a month later (and that was over a month ago, now), all have been broken, and now Cuthbert claims complete ignorance about everything, even how I might make a complaint about my MP, or her. If she actually manages to keep her latest promise about information on complaints, she just might salvage something from this, but I highly doubt that she will. For purposes of alleging harassment to justify a block, it might be problematic, emailing someone who she *has* actually blocked email from, I would suspect.
This is the truth behind Richard 'thousands of cases' Graham. Brush-off Central at 2 College Street (2nd Floor).
These are the two comment I then posted on the Youtube page:
It turns out, supposedly, that Sarah Cuthbert knew nothing about my emails to her being blocked because Richard Graham did it, without telling her (and, naturally, without telling me). Now that's something I would tell an employee, so as not to make a liar of her. Mind, Graham also claims he manages his blog and no-one else, so Cuthbert had spun a line about someone else being in charge of it.
Despite this deviousness, incompetence, or combination of the two, apparently I'm the one to blame for Cuthbert feeling 'harassed' (Graham's words) because I had to visit his offices after receiving no reply to my emails.
Graham's arrogance in thinking that he can put such constraints on his constituents without any notification is right up there with his previous triumphs in parking on DYLs during his election campaign and breaking Commons rules by taking a selfie of himself in the House, not to mention turning up late for a debate he requested, leading to it being cancelled. Oh, I just did mention it...
And at the surgery, Graham was very vague about why he didn't want comments on his blog. He got some abusive comments apparently, but then, they weren't all abusive (or he would surely have reported them?), and yet he couldn't explain why the latter weren't being published either. It seems to me that he's just like Parmjit Dhanda before him. That is, starting to allow comments creates a precedent for future critical, but polite, comments, so best to ban then from the outset.
And the second comment:
Graham did, however, give me a letter in which he purported to answer my query about the city council and Gloucester City Homes' questionable independent status, but (and this is being charitable) it was a case of missing the target, but hitting the tree. The tree was, certainly, that the council can't borrow any more money, because it has borrowed all it can, and been forbidden to borrow more. The target, though, was an explanation of why it's legitimate to create a proxy company so that it can borrow more, with the blessing of our MP, when that proxy has demonstrated the same level of ineptitude and duplicity that the council did before. That target was ignored.
Some may have heard a 'File on 4' report entitled 'The Accountancy Kings', where it was revealed that personnel would move from jobs in consultancy firms like Capita to direct employment with councils, give business to the firms, and then move back again. I wonder how much back and forth goes on between the city council and GCH?
richardgraham.org/community-surgery-friday-12th-september/
And that's pretty much it for now. To establish how much of Cuthbert's purported ignorance is genuine, I have sent Graham an email, asking him precisely when he imposed this email block, without, in typically arrogant fashion, informing his secretary, and having received no reply, said on Twitter that I'd be dropping into the office no later than today. I may in fact be too busy to do that, but at least further delay will further dilute already lame accusations of harassment of staff.
changing society. #Anonymous Love computers and #politics. Email me ztack55@riseup.net #LegionOps
