Electric Shower gets power, doesn't work

[ban-all-sheds]

He also doesn't like excessive use of smilies, so you've p***ed him off again, well done.

No - it is true that I don't.

But he hasn't really ****ed me off - I sort of look on him with pity, as he's a bit like a primary school child who colours in his letters and adds little drawings to his work, yet thinks he can be treated like an intelligent adult.

The odds on him providing intelligent and useful contributions to this forum are pretty small - he's so hard of thinking that he believes he can "have" a part of the Building Regulations:

I'm hoping to have my Part P soon

and believes he will "soon" be able to "certificate things" even though he thinks that a voltstick is an appropriate item of test equipment to use to check if power is reaching an appliance.

Hey BAS.

Holmslaw - there was no need for that - everyone already knows how childish and pointless you are.

 

[holmslaw]

..

 

[RF Lighting]

You're such a knob BAS

 

[showerisbust]

The only forum poster I have encountered on this site who has not been helpful, and who has been rather nasty and pointlessly insulting is bas, so yes I can request - bas - that you don't reply to me any more - though I cannot make you take notice of my request.

And holmslaw, I am well amused!!!! You are a funny chap!!

 

[DetlefSchmitz]

The idea that someone, who has probably contributed more smutty and/or scatological posts here than the rest of the forum members put together, should call someone else childish defies belief.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

RF - I'd like you to take a look at this:

I used a volt stick!!!!

Also, using the Quote facility is a better way to quote and reply to other posts than just copying them and putting " " round them. That's why it's provided.

And putting [color=....][/color] at the beginning or end of a line does nothing. The Preview button is provided so that you can see what your post is going to look like - gives you the chance to change it before committing it if it isn't right.

It's what started all the attacks from the OP, holmslaw, and other forum children.

It is not rude, it is not abusive and it is not sarcastic.

But, as ever, there are some pathetic tw**s here who don't think that any hint of criticism of the way posts are made can ever be tolerated.

Well - tough luck - I don't see why people should not be asked to make their posts easy to read.

And as I have told you before, if you think for one second that I am going to sit quietly by and allow people to get away with unjustified attacks on me then you've got another think coming.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

The idea that someone, who has probably contributed more smutty and/or scatological posts here than the rest of the forum members put together, should call someone else childish defies belief.

So - are you going to prove that that allegation is truthful?

Or are you going to withdraw it and apologise?

Or are you going to make yourself look like someone who thinks it's perfectly OK to tell lies about people?

 

[holmslaw]

..

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Can you show me where I've told lies about people?

 

[cumbriahandyman]

Can you show me where I've told lies about people?

You are a thief - an utterly untrustworthy and immoral scumbag.
I strongly advise everyone to have nothing to do with you.

That was a lie for a start.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

That was directed at somebody who thought it was perfectly acceptable to register here with the full intention of immediately contravening one of the conditions he'd agreed to, who thought it was OK to take the resources of one business without paying for them in order to promote his own business.

Now - I do regard that as indicating untrustworthiness, I do regard it as theft, and I do regard businesses which deliberately incorporate stealing from others into their business practices as immoral scumbags, and I do believe that any business run by people like that cannot be trusted to behave properly in any other aspects of its activities.

You may have lower standards of probity and honesty than I and you may therefore disagree with my opinions but to accuse me of knowing that what I said was untrue and that I said it to deliberately mislead people is outrageous - you have no evidence whatsoever to justify such a charge.

If you can't tell the difference between a lie and something you disagree with then I suggest you leave this forum and find one more suited to your intellectual abilities.

 

[bernardgreen]

regard businesses which deliberately incorporate stealing from others into their business practices as immoral scumbags

If they are un-ethical in their way of doing business and making profits and there is proof of this un-ethical behaviour then give that proof.

That is a far more effective way to reduce opportunities for a repeat of the un-ethical behaviour.

But name calling and similar emotional remarks does little to reduce the opportunity for a repeat. It may even generate some sympathy for the person being insulted. Especially in people who are not aware of the un-ethical behaviour that has happened.

It also often reduces the credibility of the person who has a genuine and valid concern but has failed to express that concern calmly and with supporting facts as evidence for the concern.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

If they are un-ethical in their way of doing business and making profits and there is proof of this un-ethical behaviour then give that proof.

The proof was there at the time, which is why I made the post I did. It's now been removed by the Moderators because it was spam/freeloading.

And my post has also gone - if you try the "quote" that cumbrianotveryhandywitharationalargumentman posted you'll see that it doesn't exist, so he's clearly another of these ****s who thinks that the best interests of the forum lie in him trying to perpetuate and resurrect old and non-existent things from the past because he didn't like them in the past.

That is a far more effective way to reduce opportunities for a repeat of the un-ethical behaviour.

I've also had email and PM exchanges with people like that. Just like some of the members here they simply do not regard using up bandwidth, storage space and processing power of another businesses site without paying for it as being wrong.

But name calling and similar emotional remarks does little to reduce the opportunity for a repeat. It may even generate some sympathy for the person being insulted. Especially in people who are not aware of the un-ethical behaviour that has happened.

It can't generate sympathy for a person whose posts have been removed.

My post was transitory, it was relevant for a short while, the situation where it was relevant has gone, as has my post, but cumbrianotverybrightman has kept a copy and has decided that it was a deliberate falsehood told by me in order to deceive.

It also often reduces the credibility of the person who has a genuine and valid concern but has failed to express that concern calmly and with supporting facts as evidence for the concern.

The evidence was obvious at the time - a new poster had registered, agreed not to post adverts and immediately done just that.