I just love this forum.
How is Harry wrong for making an assumption about Liverpool shop owners being Scousers but then Philip gets applauded for guessing that they are not?
div>
I just love this forum.
How is Harry wrong for making an assumption about Liverpool shop owners being Scousers but then Philip gets applauded for guessing that they are not?
div>
I chose those smilies because they looked the closest i could find to confusion. The name they are tagged with had nothing to do with it.
And yes i did read the highlighted part.
what does the photographers think of these taken by me last Saturday on my camera phone. I thought they looked ok but a bit amateurish.
Possibly because it's quite possible that he made the wrong assumption.
But that aside, yes, possibly (that word again) the shop owners were just looking for a better pay day which possibly (oh no) might have been justified because I don't know how much they were offered, only that the others all left ages ago
That was my point exactly.
You don't know and he doesn't know. Your guess should be as good as his. But seniority here takes precedent again.
I'm not part of YoLiverpool's inner circle so i'll just take shut up and watch from the side lines.
I don't care what anyone else thinks about my opinion - but for what it is worth I thought it stubborn and selfish that those scruffy shops have held up progress. The front of that station should be transformed into a smart entrance for Lime st station. It should have been done long ago.
I always look at that scruffy block every time I'm on the bus going down to Roe st. I looked at it this morning.
It is disgraceful that those shops are STILL there.
Hello Rodders, please read Harry's assumption again.
''Some of your precious Liverpool people are to blame for the Lime Street station debacle.
The owners of the scruffy shops on the concourse did all they could to hold the city to ransom.''
That's a huge assumption. A dig at scousers when it's not known they are. 'Hold the city to ransom' when it's not known they did, that could be libelous in fact.
There is no 'senior' precedent here or inner circle, my opinion is no better than yours but knowing the area concerned I was reckoning on one assumption being nearer the mark than the other that's all.
I had to delete my last post as I got mixed up there with Harry & Rodders
I'm coming down with a cold I think, and my head is muzzy !! That's my excuse for making mistakes
yes Ged, it could well be a dig at Scousers.
If I was in charge tho' - I'd have swept those shops away long ago !!
it's terrible that progress is halted.
I don't want yet another thread on this usually fine web site getting hijacked by another petty squabble.
I maybe over reacted to a small issue but it seems to me to happen all to often. I only brought it up because i felt one member's assumption was being trashed by 2 others assumptions with nobody having any evidence. I realize that thats the whole point of this forum and free speech but i guess it just riled me.
Bookmarks