Surgeries II
(NOTE - this post was updated at 14:08 27 July in order to clarify the difference between 'Local Issues' and the 'Community News' pamphlets.)
Well, that certainly put a cat among the pigeons...
On Monday I published this post on Anne Milton's failure to publicise surgery details and anonymous 'contributors' came from out of the woodwork to defend Anne's position.
Well, actually, what they mostly did was attack mine. Their 'arguments' ranged from unsubstantiated claims that I'm a member of the Liberal Democrats to assurances that the appointment policy was due in part to unstable people like me wanting to do the poor woman harm. They even went on to suggest that I was the thin edge of the terror wedge. But they did nothing to disprove my actual point.
Well, they *almost* did, but I'll get onto that foot-in-mouth moment in a jiffy. Firstly, here is what has been established so far:
FACT #1 - Anne Milton had a 'no appointment' policy when she held psudo-surgeries before the election, but she has an appointment policy now.
Best defence from the Miltonites: Now she's a 'high profile' MP, she is a target. Sue Doughty required appointments. Wahhhh!
FACT #2 - Anne Milton publicised her pseudo-surgeries heavily - even to the point of advertising in the Surrey Ad - before the election, but has failed to do so now she's been elected.
Best defence from the Miltonites: Two anonymous contributors (make that 3 - see below) claimed to have received literature through their letterbox that contained surgery details. Again, I'll get onto that in a jiffy.
FACT #3 - Upon becoming an MP, Anne Milton did not go anywhere near the lengths Sue Doughty once went to to publicise her advice surgeries. Within weeks of becoming our MP, Sue Doughty put out posters showing dates and localities and the number to call to book an appointment and had them distributed to local public libraries and/or posted on public noticeboards. Anne Milton has failed to do the same.
Best defence from the Miltonites: A suggestion that 'Lib-Dem thugs' had been tearing Anne Milton's surgery notices down.... but no claim that they were published or put there in the first place.
FACT #4 - Anne Milton does not mention the current availability of surgeries on her website (unless you count the references made to them in PDF versions of Conservative leaflets that 'tomtom' argues put them 'in the public domain') and she certainly doesn't list dates and locations as many other MPs do.
Best defence from the Miltonites: "What other MP's (sic) do is their business."
On that last point, I'd just like to say that this makes Anne less than extraordinary. In fact, it makes her efforts seem less than ordinary. Moving on...
All of these 'defences' were buried amongst a load of accusatory hyperbole and diversion. When asked to put up or shut up on any particular claim or accusation (be it on-topic or not), they failed to put up... then failed to shut up. One anonymous contributor was so intent on disrupting debate, he (or she) had to be moderated. Then the new diversion was a load of bull about the right to free speech. Anonymous contributions are welcome on this site, but if you make a claim or accusation, you had better be prepared to back it up with evidence, see it investigated, or at the very least put your name to it.
Now, as I type this and prepare to address the aforementioned mystery-pamphlet, another anonymous Miltonite has piped up and claimed to have received this same literature outlining surgery details. So that's three people, all of them stolid supporters of Anne Milton, and all recipients of this same mysterious pamphlet. That they refuse to show me.
I'd very much like to see a copy of this pamphlet and/or learn more about where it was distributed, as circumstances would suggest that they were delivered only to members of the Conservative Party and/or members of Guildford Conservatives.
If this is the case, then the MP who pledged to serve *all* of Guildford has just been caught out giving her Tory supporters preferential treatment on advice surgeries.
I've seen a few different versions of the local Tory newsletter 'Local Issues', and they do mention surgeries. You can also see another circular sent to some residents of Bramley here, and yes, this also contains the following message: Anne holds regular surgeries. To make an appointment please call 01483 300330.
No dates, no details... but enough, you may argue, to be informed enough to ask about dates and locations. (*If* you were lucky enough to receive this and/or if you've signed up for the Guildford Conservatives. But you *definitely* will have received these details if you were a happy recipient of the former, which is a Guildford Conservatives newsletter.)
None of these anonymous contributors seem willing to confirm it, but it would certainly appear that one of these items this is the literature they're referring to.
And when the implications of what they'd inadvertently revealed hit them - that's when the anonymous Miltonites went well and truly batshit. It was Diversion City.
They ducked, they dived, they questioned my sanity and called this a hate campaign... before finally settling on the suggestion that perhaps Anne was putting out literature about surgery details region by region, and they just haven't reached letterboxes in my area yet. Unless, of course, you've signed up for the Guildford Conservatives.
They even suggested that I wasn't doing my part because I failed to publish those details here on this website (when Anne has clearly published them on her website somewhere in the back pages stashed inside a range of PDF files).
I can do better than that, folks... but first I'd like to point out that when I called Anne Milton's office on Monday and requested future surgery dates, only one was available (if you want to book an appointment for this date, please call 01483 300330):
12th of August at Sutherland Memorial Hall
I was assured that no further dates would be set until Anne came back from holiday.
So, if a pamphlet arrives on my doorstep outlining these dates:
Surgeries are arranged by appointment through Anne Milton's office in Guildford. To book an appointment at one of Annes surgeries please call 01483 300330 or email anne@annemilton.com Anne's next Surgeries are: 8th July - Bramley Village Hall, Hall Road, Bramley. - (17.15 - 19.00) 15th July - Guildford Conservative Association, 15 London Road, Guildford. GU1 2AA (09.00 - 11.00) 22nd July - Guildford Borough Council Offices, Meillmead - (16.00 - 18.00)
... then it's a bit sodding late, because it's now the 27th of July and my flux capacitor is in the shop for repairs.
If a pamphlet magically arrives with new dates in the next week/month, then it's the A281 all over again. Anne Milton will have promised, suggested, claimed or provided a certain level of service before the election, and then failed to deliver the same after she was elected... until she was shamed into doing so.
In my view, Milton has tried to bluff her way through and minimise her workload by simply reducing the number of people who were aware of surgeries being held in their area at a suitable time/date. Unless of course, they're members of Guildford Conservatives, in which case they've had a fair shot of finding out the details for themselves.
Now, onto me doing my bit.... here's my draft for a poster promoting the only available date we have at the moment:
If anyone from Anne's office wishes me to revise the design or content before publication and distribution, then they have but to ask. Of course, I could simply publish it here and claim that this offer was in the public domain, but I'll do the polite thing and email them directly.
If they fail to get back to me within 3 days, then I'll have to assume that we're good to go. Unless one of Anne Milton's supporters (sorry, best make that 'independent observers') wishes to have a say. In which case, they will need to make their requests for revision directly via email. For security reasons, natch.
Well, that certainly put a cat among the pigeons...
On Monday I published this post on Anne Milton's failure to publicise surgery details and anonymous 'contributors' came from out of the woodwork to defend Anne's position.
Well, actually, what they mostly did was attack mine. Their 'arguments' ranged from unsubstantiated claims that I'm a member of the Liberal Democrats to assurances that the appointment policy was due in part to unstable people like me wanting to do the poor woman harm. They even went on to suggest that I was the thin edge of the terror wedge. But they did nothing to disprove my actual point.
Well, they *almost* did, but I'll get onto that foot-in-mouth moment in a jiffy. Firstly, here is what has been established so far:
FACT #1 - Anne Milton had a 'no appointment' policy when she held psudo-surgeries before the election, but she has an appointment policy now.
Best defence from the Miltonites: Now she's a 'high profile' MP, she is a target. Sue Doughty required appointments. Wahhhh!
FACT #2 - Anne Milton publicised her pseudo-surgeries heavily - even to the point of advertising in the Surrey Ad - before the election, but has failed to do so now she's been elected.
Best defence from the Miltonites: Two anonymous contributors (make that 3 - see below) claimed to have received literature through their letterbox that contained surgery details. Again, I'll get onto that in a jiffy.
FACT #3 - Upon becoming an MP, Anne Milton did not go anywhere near the lengths Sue Doughty once went to to publicise her advice surgeries. Within weeks of becoming our MP, Sue Doughty put out posters showing dates and localities and the number to call to book an appointment and had them distributed to local public libraries and/or posted on public noticeboards. Anne Milton has failed to do the same.
Best defence from the Miltonites: A suggestion that 'Lib-Dem thugs' had been tearing Anne Milton's surgery notices down.... but no claim that they were published or put there in the first place.
FACT #4 - Anne Milton does not mention the current availability of surgeries on her website (unless you count the references made to them in PDF versions of Conservative leaflets that 'tomtom' argues put them 'in the public domain') and she certainly doesn't list dates and locations as many other MPs do.
Best defence from the Miltonites: "What other MP's (sic) do is their business."
On that last point, I'd just like to say that this makes Anne less than extraordinary. In fact, it makes her efforts seem less than ordinary. Moving on...
All of these 'defences' were buried amongst a load of accusatory hyperbole and diversion. When asked to put up or shut up on any particular claim or accusation (be it on-topic or not), they failed to put up... then failed to shut up. One anonymous contributor was so intent on disrupting debate, he (or she) had to be moderated. Then the new diversion was a load of bull about the right to free speech. Anonymous contributions are welcome on this site, but if you make a claim or accusation, you had better be prepared to back it up with evidence, see it investigated, or at the very least put your name to it.
Now, as I type this and prepare to address the aforementioned mystery-pamphlet, another anonymous Miltonite has piped up and claimed to have received this same literature outlining surgery details. So that's three people, all of them stolid supporters of Anne Milton, and all recipients of this same mysterious pamphlet. That they refuse to show me.
I'd very much like to see a copy of this pamphlet and/or learn more about where it was distributed, as circumstances would suggest that they were delivered only to members of the Conservative Party and/or members of Guildford Conservatives.
If this is the case, then the MP who pledged to serve *all* of Guildford has just been caught out giving her Tory supporters preferential treatment on advice surgeries.
I've seen a few different versions of the local Tory newsletter 'Local Issues', and they do mention surgeries. You can also see another circular sent to some residents of Bramley here, and yes, this also contains the following message: Anne holds regular surgeries. To make an appointment please call 01483 300330.
No dates, no details... but enough, you may argue, to be informed enough to ask about dates and locations. (*If* you were lucky enough to receive this and/or if you've signed up for the Guildford Conservatives. But you *definitely* will have received these details if you were a happy recipient of the former, which is a Guildford Conservatives newsletter.)
None of these anonymous contributors seem willing to confirm it, but it would certainly appear that one of these items this is the literature they're referring to.
And when the implications of what they'd inadvertently revealed hit them - that's when the anonymous Miltonites went well and truly batshit. It was Diversion City.
They ducked, they dived, they questioned my sanity and called this a hate campaign... before finally settling on the suggestion that perhaps Anne was putting out literature about surgery details region by region, and they just haven't reached letterboxes in my area yet. Unless, of course, you've signed up for the Guildford Conservatives.
They even suggested that I wasn't doing my part because I failed to publish those details here on this website (when Anne has clearly published them on her website somewhere in the back pages stashed inside a range of PDF files).
I can do better than that, folks... but first I'd like to point out that when I called Anne Milton's office on Monday and requested future surgery dates, only one was available (if you want to book an appointment for this date, please call 01483 300330):
12th of August at Sutherland Memorial Hall
I was assured that no further dates would be set until Anne came back from holiday.
So, if a pamphlet arrives on my doorstep outlining these dates:
Surgeries are arranged by appointment through Anne Milton's office in Guildford. To book an appointment at one of Annes surgeries please call 01483 300330 or email anne@annemilton.com Anne's next Surgeries are: 8th July - Bramley Village Hall, Hall Road, Bramley. - (17.15 - 19.00) 15th July - Guildford Conservative Association, 15 London Road, Guildford. GU1 2AA (09.00 - 11.00) 22nd July - Guildford Borough Council Offices, Meillmead - (16.00 - 18.00)
... then it's a bit sodding late, because it's now the 27th of July and my flux capacitor is in the shop for repairs.
If a pamphlet magically arrives with new dates in the next week/month, then it's the A281 all over again. Anne Milton will have promised, suggested, claimed or provided a certain level of service before the election, and then failed to deliver the same after she was elected... until she was shamed into doing so.
In my view, Milton has tried to bluff her way through and minimise her workload by simply reducing the number of people who were aware of surgeries being held in their area at a suitable time/date. Unless of course, they're members of Guildford Conservatives, in which case they've had a fair shot of finding out the details for themselves.
Now, onto me doing my bit.... here's my draft for a poster promoting the only available date we have at the moment:
If anyone from Anne's office wishes me to revise the design or content before publication and distribution, then they have but to ask. Of course, I could simply publish it here and claim that this offer was in the public domain, but I'll do the polite thing and email them directly.
If they fail to get back to me within 3 days, then I'll have to assume that we're good to go. Unless one of Anne Milton's supporters (sorry, best make that 'independent observers') wishes to have a say. In which case, they will need to make their requests for revision directly via email. For security reasons, natch.
Labels: inaction
Your point is?
Prove that only Tories are getting leaflets or shut up. Nothing more needs to be said. I will patiently wait to get my copy.
Posted by
Leanord Nimmo |
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 1:35:00 PM
- | -
I can't fault either your reasoning or your conclusions, which I think are both correct.It's pretty cynical (and unethical)for Milton to restrict surgery access only to Party members and sympathisers, but that indeed appears to be what is happening. (Sue Doughty's surgeries, as is customary amongst MPs generally, were open to all constituents, of any Party or none. Of course there was an 'appointments' system, but it was certainly open to all comers, and we tried to make it as "user-friendly" as was possible.)
A point of extra inside information that rather reinforces your conclusions. All three major Parties have software that will easily sift leaflets / letters for delivery only to selected recipients. The hierarchy of 'sift' would be something as follows (in ascending order of magnitude / number of recipients):
(a) local Party members only
(b) Members and known active sympathisers
(c) (b) plus dormant activists
(d) all those canvassed who say they will definitely or probably vote for the Party ('Defs + Probs')
(e) every voter in the constituency EXCEPT those who - when canvassed - said they would positively not vote for the Party.
It strikes me that local Tories may have done just this type of sift or 'filter', taking either (d) or (e) as their model, to circulate Milton's surgery details, along with presumably a cloying "isn't she marvellous' leaflet that might well not be on their central website.
Just a thought....
Posted by
lambethlad |
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 1:40:00 PM
- | -
Nimmo:
On-topic, so I'll allow it.
I draw m'learned friend's attention to the following words and passages;
"If this is the case..."
"None of these anonymous contributors seem willing to confirm it, but it would certainly appear that this is the literature they're referring to."
"In my view..."
And I would think - as tomtom, voice-mail and Suzamme brought it up, the onus is on them to clarify matters.
And I'm still waiting for my copy, too.
PS - I take it by your focus on this single point that you accept all of the posted facts as fact?
Posted by
Tim |
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 1:43:00 PM
- | -
cuckoo! cuckoo! cuckoo!
So having established, Anne does the same as the previous Mp in terms of appointments, is promoting her surgeries on a number of websites, and in leaflets presumably going out to electors. Your only real gripe is she hasnt got them on notice boards!
Bonkers.
I would ask your self, and any one else who's remotely interested, this question, and you will see what an utter load of nonsense this is:
Imagine your an MP. In a seat that you just won only months ago. By 347 votes. You've been elected, and are starting to have surgeries. Who woudl you tell about them? Your party members or the electorate? Woudlnt you tell as many as you could, so that they come and visit you, and you can show them what a great MP you are, how hard your working and have the opportunity to help them and correspond with them (there by being pretty sure (i woudl have thought) of a fair chance of some converts, on the personal vote basis. Would you really just invite party members who are already 'converted' to come and see you. I know i wouldn't. I'd tell as many as i could, and hope that tonnes of people turned up.
Please seek help 'Tim'.
Posted by
tomtom |
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 2:21:00 PM
- | -
Woudlnt you tell as many as you could, so that they come and visit you, and you can show them what a great MP you are, how hard your working and have the opportunity to help them and correspond with them
I would.... there's no telling what Anne would do, but her past form doesn't work in her favour.
So having established, Anne does the same as the previous Mp in terms of appointments
No appointments before. Appointments after. That is what we established. Also, she comes up sub-par when compared to many other MPs – many of whom are from her own party.
is promoting her surgeries on a number of websites
I have yet to establish how the dates made their way to the *single* website cranleighvillage.net - and any mention of surgeries is *buried* in hers. 'Promoting' is not the word I would use.
and in leaflets presumably going out to electors
Presumably... but only to *some* of them - which ones?
Your only real gripe is she hasnt got them on notice boards!
No, it's not a single 'gripe' as you put it - but I'm glad you brought it up. Wouldn't this be far more efficient than delivering literature to 40K houses (or perhaps just a few thousand, or a few hundred)?
Posted by
Tim |
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 2:32:00 PM
- | -
But politics isnt about what's most efficient. It's about whats most effective. And if i was in a marginal seat as an mp, i would want to make sure as many of those 78,000 people who are going to decide if i stay there as MP, find out that i'm doing surgeries, on their behalf. Considering she beat a Lib Dem i would guess she knows a bit about politics.
Posted by
tomtom |
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 2:50:00 PM
- | -
ef·fi·cient (ĭ-fĭsh'ənt)
adj.
1. Acting directly to produce an *effect*: an efficient cause. See synonyms at *effective*.
2. Acting or producing *effectively* with a minimum of waste, expense, or unnecessary effort.
And a lot of this seems to be about what you would do. And the literature didn't reach 78,000 people, now did it?
Posted by
Tim |
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 2:57:00 PM
- | -
Her Reigate track record as councillor strongly suggests that she is naturally much more effective with (and at home among) her own supporters. She did not do well in the pre-election all-candidate debates in Guildford,unlike Labour's Karen Landles, who clearly relishes the cut-and-thrust of debate. So I tend on balance to "buy" the theory that she might be trying to 'pack' her surgeries with like-minded followers. Much easier to photo them and get 'useful' quotes, after all. Real problem-case constituents can be a tougher, less co-operative bunch.
Posted by
lambethlad |
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 2:58:00 PM
- | -
I'm trying to bring in another series of comments from a largely unrelated post in order to keep matters on-topic.
tomtom has confirmed that the literature he referred to when he claimed he had received surgery details thought his letterbox was the 'Local Issues' one.
I responded with the following questions, and would hope that tomtom is kind enough to reply to the first two here (instead of there):
So it's 'Local Issues' that you refer to (tomtom). Good. Glad we cleared that up.
1. You were given numerous opportunities to point this out yesterday, but you did not. I wonder why.
2. And why do you receive 'Local Issues', tomtom?
3. I have spoken to a number of people I know locally and none of them have received the 'community' pamphlet. Has *anybody* reading this received one of these?
4. Voice-mail? Suzamme? Would *You* care to inform us which pamphlet(s) you were referring to?
Posted by
Tim |
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 3:15:00 PM
- | -
Of course, happily, but could i ask, if you are asking a question, as i believ you are in 1, can you put a question mark. It makes it easier for those of us with little intellect and fading eyes.
With reference to 1, i don't recall being asked yesterday, hopefully the aforementioned ? will help.
With reference to 2, i suspect i received it because i live there, and some one delivered it to my house.
As a comment to 4; i would hazard a guess that due to the fact that Suzannequoted the same words as appeared on teh one i received she reeived a very similar thing, it woudl appear from guildford conservatives wesbite that the leaflets post May 2005 have a box in that is common to them all, and contains the text both Suzanne and myself have.
Just as a point of clarification what is the 'Community' pamhplet you refer to in 3?
Posted by
tomtom |
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 4:22:00 PM
- | -
Tim,
It's your site; your accusations; your spin on events. You need to prove that local issues leaflets are being sent exclusively to Tory members or accept your claims are wrong.
It is not for us residents and electors to prove anything to the contrary, when we in fact have nothing to do with what the Tories are or aren't doing.
Whether we support the Tories or not is a private matter and I would ask that you respect peoples right to privacy. Ironic you and the Liberals oppose ID Cards yet are obsessed with personalities and identity.
Oh, and silence or non rebuttal does not equate to an acceptance of your point of view. It means: you are unsuccesful in bullying people into providing you with information; the point is not worth responding to as it's groundless, irrelevant, crackers, boring or may prolong a debate unnecrssarily.
Posted by
Voice Mail |
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 4:34:00 PM
- | -
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
Posted by
tomtom |
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 4:49:00 PM
- | -
Re: deleted comment
You know the line you crossed tomtom. Don't cross it again.
Posted by
Tim |
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 4:57:00 PM
- | -
The 'community' pamphlet refers to a range of pamphlets not unlike this one.
tomtom, why not just come out and say that you received the 'Local Issues' pamphlet because you're a member of Guildford Conservatives?
Posted by
Tim |
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 5:01:00 PM
- | -
Thats the same leaflet (virtually)as the one i got. Except for its a Bramley version, one called local issues, one called community news!
What's the big deal?
Posted by
tomtom |
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 5:08:00 PM
- | -
They are two very different and distinct publications and you know it... and why not just come out and say that you received the 'Local Issues' pamphlet because you're a member of Guildford Conservatives?
Posted by
Tim |
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 5:09:00 PM
- | -
These postings are completely lost on me. I haven't received any of the leaflets. Perhaps that's because I live in the LibDemsville part of town.
Posted by
Gasbill |
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 5:23:00 PM
- | -
I suspect that you won't have received 'Local Issues' because it's a subscription-only newsletter.
The other type of pamphlet... well, we've yet to work out who got those and why. And who didn't get them and why.
One thing's for sure so far... if you were a member of Guildford Conservatives, you *definitely* had (some) surgery details delivered to your door.
Posted by
Tim |
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 5:42:00 PM
- | -
voice-mail:
Sorry, I missed your comment.
On the contrary, it was you who claimed to have proved a point with these newsletters you received - but you *still* won't give any further details as tomtom has. It's up to you to prove your point... but you seem strangely reluctant to do so.
Whether we support the Tories or not is a private matter and I would ask that you respect peoples right to privacy.
Oh, give me strength.
I repeat:
Anonymous contributions are welcome on this site, but if you make a claim or accusation, you had better be prepared to back it up with evidence, see it investigated, or at the very least put your name to it.
And - as you point out - it is *my* site. My rules. And you can't even bitch about that, because those same rules are pretty much universal in online communities.
People who read this website have the right to know if certain opinions are driven by political allegiance - or perhaps direct employment. And you agree with this point - otherwise you wouldn't be so keen to hang a Lib-Dem label on me.
You have my name, and you have my word. You have access to my website where my past behaviour over 3+ years shows a fair (if sometimes tough) approach to all parties.
With you, on the other hand, we only have your word. And it's not worth much on its own.
Now, just in case you missed the 12th request... you've seen this (community pamphlet) and are aware of the Local Issue version, perhaps you would care to explain which one you were referring to when you said you had received surgery details through your letterbox.
Posted by
Tim |
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 6:24:00 PM
- | -
I think the matter is resolved. From what I'm reading in this post and other posts, it appears Tory branch leaflets are being distributed in a number (I presume all) of areas, with a common editorial and a local editorial content.
I could be wrong, but whether they are called Local Issues, Community News or the Tory Echo, they appear to have (to quote a phrase) a common thread - Anne MP invites people to voice their concerns and if they want, to arrange a surgery appointment.
If these are dropping through letterboxes across the Borough as we speak, then you will eventually get one.
This whole nonsense is a non issue.
PS: Nimmo, great to have you back out of the 'Sin Bin' cyber buddy. Look forward to your entry into this debate around 11.00pm. Hope we move on to a new string though, this is getting boring. People don't like trawling through screens of pointless text.
Posted by
Voice Mail |
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 7:07:00 PM
- | -
... says the man responsible for most of the pointless text.
You haven't answered my question, you've just danced around it.
You seem remarkably reluctant to answer a straightforward question on what you describe as a non-issue.
And, and has been pointed out before... They are two very different and distinct publications and you know it.
Which was it that you claimed you received - the Tory newsletter 'Local Issues' or the 'community' pamphlet that has reached an unknown number of people?
PS - Nimmo isn't out of the Sin Bin. He was allowed this one post becuase it managed to stay on-topic.
Posted by
Tim |
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 7:40:00 PM
- | -
Look forward to your entry into this debate around 11.00pm.
Yes, well, good luck with that. Given the presence of spammers and what tomtom tried to intimidate me with this afternoon, I think it best to shut down for the evening rather than let you dictate when I have to turn up on my own website.
Cheers.
PS - I look forward to your answer in the morning.
Posted by
Tim |
Wednesday, July 27, 2005 8:06:00 PM
- | -
Right, and we're back on.
Voice-mail, tomtom, please stop abusing the system. Doing so places this very open comments system in jeopardy.
Also, please stop wasting my time.
voice-mail: Which was it that you claimed you received - the Tory newsletter 'Local Issues' or the 'community' pamphlet that has reached an unknown number of people?
tomtom: why not just come out and say that you received the 'Local Issues' pamphlet because you're a member of Guildford Conservatives?
Posted by
Tim |
Thursday, July 28, 2005 9:07:00 AM
- | -
I've just stumbled on your website & wish I hadn't - what a load of biased rubbish!
I get communications from Anne Milton, not because I've subscribed to anything that I know of, but presumably just as part of her aim to keep in touch with her constituents - and some of you would probably be the first to complain if we never heard from her following her election (like a certain Sue Doughty, I seem to remember)
Posted by
womaninthestreet |
Wednesday, November 23, 2005 2:04:00 PM
- | -
Dear womaninthestreet,
1. People might be inclined to take you more seriously if you actually put a valid name/profile behind your opinion - especially with a nickname like that (Milton is now notorious for having campaign/team members pose and 'people in the street'). What *you* are saying could very well be biased rubbish.
2. My tracking shows a series of hits to 'surgery-related' posts via *Parliament* servers just before your comment was made.
3. You get letters you didn't ask for? How lucky you are.
4. Did you actually read the related posts? The whole *point* is that your average Joe did not hear a peep from Milton following the election (unless they were - maybe - one of the lucky few or - definitely - a Conservative). Unlike Sue Doughty, who had things like surgeries running - for everyone - after a couple of weeks.
5. I'm not sure what Sue Doughty's track record was on events/groups, but I can tell you that Anne Milton declined many an invitation following the election... almost as if she felt she didn't need these people any more.
Posted by
Tim |
Wednesday, November 23, 2005 2:26:00 PM
- | -
Whoops. Allow me to retract No. 2 - and possibly some of No.1
A deeper dig into stats shows me that womaninthestreet is actually contacting us via the servers of the University Of Surrey (131.227.166.111) and that she found this website by looking for contact details for Anne Milton.
Here you go:
http://www.guildfordconservatives.com/section/4/
Posted by
Tim |
Wednesday, November 23, 2005 2:34:00 PM
- | -