On 15 Jan 2011 at 12:32pm lovage wrote:
after reading this weeks local about the theatres being referbed i also heard they are closing down poile ward for good witch was not in the report doze anyone else know anything about it.
On 15 Jan 2011 at 2:44pm Cynic wrote:
Sorry lovage but i don't understand most of the words.
On 15 Jan 2011 at 2:54pm TeeHee wrote:
poile ward doze WTF u tawkin abort?
On 15 Jan 2011 at 4:06pm popeye wrote:
I dont know what you lot are on, but I wouldn"t mind some of it Ha Ha!
On 15 Jan 2011 at 5:39pm rosebud wrote:
I sold it to them Mr Popeye. It's wonderful stuff and at a big discount on London prices. You've seen the effect and I have plenty more where that came from !!"Guaranteed to blow your mind" The Daily Mail.
On 15 Jan 2011 at 5:50pm Cynic wrote:
Strong stuff rosebud. Lovage seems to have fallen asleep.
On 15 Jan 2011 at 6:36pm rosebud wrote:
Unfortunately Cynic, that is one of the side effects. I have something else on offer though that will counteract this. "Guaranteed to wake you up after your mind has been blown" -The Mail on Sunday. Mr Lovage was unable to afford both and is thus now incapacitated.
On 15 Jan 2011 at 6:42pm Deelite wrote:
The drugs don't work anymore.
Anytime.
On 15 Jan 2011 at 6:53pm rosebud wrote:
Excuse me Deelite, if the Mail Group recommend it then it must surely work. You only have to read the above posts to realise this. Or maybe it's time you got yourself some slippers and a pipe and curled up in front of Bagpuss. ( not that I'm dissing Bagpuss and slippers and pipes. I was once a user of all three)
On 15 Jan 2011 at 7:12pm Cynic wrote:
Rosebud if I take one drug with another drug am i correct in thinking that is called a 'coalition'?
On 15 Jan 2011 at 7:48pm rosebud wrote:
It is indeed and should therefore be approached with some caution ! We've seen what CAN happen if such an event takes place and is abused. Coalitions of the above type are however perfectly safe if taken with some respect and knowledge of the constituent parts. I think you are perhaps alluding to another type of "coalition", one that has been in the forefront of our minds in recent months. I'm sure we can all sleep peacefully in the knowledge that they have upmost respect for the constituent parts ( Are you sure this right? Are you on something? Ed).
On 15 Jan 2011 at 9:49pm explorer wrote:
l think none of you are lewes born as you would be concerned about what is going on with victoria hospital (whats it all about)
On 16 Jan 2011 at 11:38am Deelite wrote:
It's not about concern for the hospital (and certainly nothing to do with being Lewes-born!). No one understood what he/she was talking about. It would have helpful if the original poster had included key words like "Victoria" and "Hospital. Being a bit less lazy and taking a little care with grammar, punctuation and capitalisation would also make his/her posts easier to understand.
On 16 Jan 2011 at 11:39am popeye wrote:
I think you are wrong there explorer, its just that we could not decipher what lovage was on about. No disrespect lovage but you must read over what you put before you send it. And as for you explorer you are not very clear yourself ie ( whats it all about )
On 16 Jan 2011 at 11:48am popeye wrote:
Apologies all round, I have just re-read what lovage wrote and this time the penny has dropped. As for Poille ward being closed down I would certainly want to know why myself. And as for you explorer you could have at least explained what lovage meant instead of jumping down our throats.
On 16 Jan 2011 at 2:11pm I agree with... wrote:
Explorer, I knew exactly what lovage was talking about but then I was born in Lewes. As for his spelling and grammar, I believe I have said this before but I don't see why people have to criticise other people's posts (unless of course the post is about spelling, grammar etc.).
Get a grip and find something else to do rather than pull people apart when they have tried to make an effort on here!!
On 16 Jan 2011 at 3:27pm Deelite wrote:
But he/she didn't make an effort. It's readers that had to make the effort to attempt to understand what they had so lazily posted. Criticism is entirely fair.
On 16 Jan 2011 at 3:38pm popeye wrote:
Hi Mr or Mrs (I agree with), So you knew exactly what lovage was trying to say, bully for you. I totally agree with Delittle, its you Mr or Mrs funny name that wants to get a grip and stop criticizing people that are trying to make this forum readable. So you reckon that people who are born in Lewes can decipher bad English well once again bully for you.
On 16 Jan 2011 at 3:40pm Had you finished.... wrote:
Only I noticed your last sentence ended with a comma?!
On 16 Jan 2011 at 3:44pm So I am guessing.. wrote:
That you believe we should only allow people on here if they are perfectly literate, I am understanding enough to work out what they are trying to say as I realise there are a lot of people with an opinion that may have problems with spelling etc.
Shame on you for being so up yourself!!
On 16 Jan 2011 at 4:01pm popeye wrote:
Not another name, I cant keep up with you. You sound like one of those people that must win a discussion so ok! you've won. Now get on and do something useful. Sometimes you can give constructive criticism like using spellcheck for example. In fact I have used it three times whilst writing this. And if you knew me you would find that I am the last person that is up himself.
On 16 Jan 2011 at 4:40pm Deelite wrote:
It's not about being perfectly literate, it's about being lazy and selfish. Too lazy to use punctuation and capitalisation and selfish in that they expect the people reading the post to spend all the effort working out what he/she has said.
The subject of his/her post was rightly ignored by all. If the original poster wants to start a discussion the least they can do is make the effort to ensure their post is intelligible.
All browsers either have spell checkers built in or as freely downloadable add-ons. The original poster would benefit from one.
On 16 Jan 2011 at 6:24pm tom wrote:
wel said explorer
On 16 Jan 2011 at 7:28pm I dont live in lewes... wrote:
Agree with Tom & Explorer. I understood what the original poster meant but then again I was born & bred in Lewes.
I sum tymes use spelin mistooks just to grab peoples atenchun.
I don't think that makes me lazy or selfish.
Maybe the grammatically correct that walk amongst us could become more accepting of others writing styles, and if what ever reason they don't understand an item they could seek explanation rather than offer up their wisdom at the original poster's expense.
PhilX
On 16 Jan 2011 at 7:54pm popeye wrote:
Get over it and move on
On 16 Jan 2011 at 9:06pm Mme Bovary wrote:
Popeye - I don't often disagree with you, but I think in this case it is a bit too easy to brush people aside and say "Get over it and move on". When someone's feelings are hurt, or they feel they have been unjustly criticised, then they do need a bit of sympathy before they can move on.
With regard to bad spelling, you might enjoy reading Nigel Molesworth, "Down with Skool" (as any fule kno).
Actually, I'm not even sure I spelt Skool correctly.
On 16 Jan 2011 at 10:02pm lovage wrote:
I thought it was time to step in. I started this thread with a genuine concern for the hospital. Also to try an experiment with bad spelling and grammar. There were only a few people with the guts to step in and help me, albeit a bit harsh. The rest of you not only thought it wrong but decided to have a go at the ones that were trying to help. This attitude if I was a bad speller would not have helped me or others like it. Take heed you Lewes born and bred people.
On 17 Jan 2011 at 9:39am Deelite wrote:
QED. As you admit. The post was not written by someone who "just" could not spell but by someone who could write better if they'd taken a lttle care (or in your case, if they'd wanted to). As you admit to *deliberately* writing very badly you have validated the criticisms above (well mine anyway).
Strange sort of experiment. I hope you learnt something, even if it was only that there is an obvious difference between posts exhibiting bad spelling and those that are written to be deliberately obscure.
On 17 Jan 2011 at 10:06am popeye wrote:
To deep for me. Im off. Take care all and lets hope Poile ward stays.
On 17 Jan 2011 at 11:50am tom wrote:
sod the spelling just keep to the point .
On 17 Jan 2011 at 12:46pm Cynic wrote:
Well done lovage, you've sabotaged what could have been a useful discussion by playing silly games. I'd use a different name next time if I were you otherwise we'll just ignore you.
On 17 Jan 2011 at 1:07pm jrsussex wrote:
Lovage - Your 1st post is largely pointless, if you are concerned about closure of a ward at the hospital then you need to be clearar and to the point if you wish to muster support. Your 2nd post is a poor excuse for the 1st. There are those who cannot spell, read or write very well. There are also those among us, I have been guilty of it, that type faster than we are capable of, thus we create typo's, and do not check our grammar or spelling properly. Having been educated in a secondary modern school my grammar is not perfect, for which I apologise if it upsets you.
On 17 Jan 2011 at 1:57pm Cynic wrote:
Points well made jrsussex.
On 17 Jan 2011 at 3:34pm bastian wrote:
Can I answer the question that may have been posed poorly but is never-the-less important,I have heard that the ward inwhich the elderly reside is to close,with their movement to meadow lodge,and no redundancies.This will mean less need for agency night staff.We must fight to keep our hospital at all costs.Minor surgary and A and E will still be open for use,but if you really want to keep the hospital open get the tories out of power...
On 17 Jan 2011 at 4:41pm popeye wrote:
Well done bastian, a sensible post at last. I certainly wont vote for the tories next time round.
On 18 Jan 2011 at 12:26am Corker wrote:
Nothing to do with the tories, the problem with the NHS are due to many problems (and it has been in decline for years, so don't blame the tories).
It is terribly sad that a good local resource (Poile Ward) is to be lost - how moving the service to an adjacent building equates baffles me?
On 18 Jan 2011 at 10:46am popeye wrote:
I am not blaming the tories, I just said I wont be voting for them next time round.