Posts

I just get the feeling there is something they're (police) not telling the public. Reading the words on the tell/net they talk about 'safe return' 'bring her back' and 'fetch her back'.....like they know someone has taken her and they are awaiting them to bring her back. Just thought it was a bit odd, as usually you don't read words like 'bring her back' when a kid has gone missing. Or maybe i'm just over-analysing it!

I always knew these domains wouldn't last long.

They're almost saturated anyway and now Google has made a mint from unsuspecting people who thought buying an EMD and wasting a few more quid on Google ads, they want rid of the spammy domains hosting the mostly spammy content.

I have been surprised how some people can become so nasty or downright rude and unprofessional. It gives you an insight as to how these people must really be at home/work. They clearly cannot communicate a disagreement effectively. They start hissing, swearing, threatening...and don't realise how silly they look and how they have suddenly lost all credibility from the forum and the mods.

Also, we have always known that when certain people are caught out, or picked up on a fault, their reaction to being confronted is to react with anger in order to deflect it back on to others.

I wouldn't ever bother with any explanation; it usually only serves to allow them to argue more, rather than take in what you have taken the time to explain to them. Bottom line is, most users want to behave however they like on your website, and when you pull them up and tell them what you do and more importantly, don't allow on your website, they get the hump on.

Oh and even ore bizarre, it's obvious the forum owner created the rules not the mods, yet when the mods follow the rues and apply them, the member gets the hump on with the mod! Why don't they ever write and complain to the forum owner about their rules? Do they really think a bunch of mods gets to run a forum how they want to? Mods that ignore the forum owners rules?

I have a virtual office business.....you have just given me an idea to add a new service....a Virtual Boss....only

Yes that's true, I didn't comment on the pap's side of things, but somehow they seem to get paid for photographing the most normal things simply because it's a celeb. Walking on a beach, shopping in Waitrose, you name it.

Seems though that people want to buy these magazines that are crammed with these type of photos, hardly any editorial. If the mags didn't sell, they wouldn't get paid for taking them. It is all back to greed/money.

The media in general makes it money from other people's lives, good or bad, preferably bad.

I think if you don't want to run the risk, you simply don't take it.

Private is only private if you are sure it is in fact private. If there were gaps in the trees in my holiday home and I was famous, I wouldn't take the risk.

Private to me means a secure private area, such as like in a walled, locked area, not just a private holiday home that, because it's isolated must mean nobody's around. As a normal person I would think about if I want the potential to be seen. If I think there's a remote chance, as future king's wife, I would cover up.

I think if you want to have your privacy like a.n.other normal citizen has a right to, you also expose yourself to anything that can happen to a.n.other normal citizen, especially a celeb one. It's part of the role.

I do agree a person should expect privacy however, being unbiased about it, I also think that as a publicly funded royal, there comes with it a few rules of expectation of how one conducts oneself.

For example, if you work for say, London Met Police, and you are top dog commissioner, female, and got caught topless, what view would their employer take? Employees are sacked for bringing their company into disrepute, take her from The Apprentice, rolling in the corn with a married man, and got sacked I believe. Probably on own time as well, but there you go. It happens. Just another view.

Personally though, I couldn't care less what she does to a degree. I don't think a line was crossed at all by her, but I do believe they should live with an action they take.

I really cannot be bothered with you.

Bizarre experience of the day. Ho hum!

Lunch break? What's that?

@flyerexpert, you are choosing to read into my words using your own interpretation to suit.

The only time I mention SEO in my OP is when I say that clients should ask "is it included?" - in case clients think it automatically should be and it isn't (usually).

You have kept going on and on about SEO not me. It's almost like you want to argue with me over something that, as a web design company, we feel is the right thing to advise people.

Fine, if you feel there are other things that should be added to the list, add them, but like I say, don't come to the forum insulting others people's advice as if you know best and we are all wrong. That is so arrogant.

I am talking simply about avoiding cowboy web designers in the first instance. Over and above that, you then choose who is best to work with based on what they offer as part of their pitch/quote.