Reply To: Update from DH

[Interested Bystander]

Siderite wrote:

Just Iron wrote:

Deereyme66 wrote:

Agree with those points Westyorksiron. I’m more interested in engaging with posts like that in the future that raise sensible points rather than these stupid witch hunts regarding particular posters and attempting to find out posters real names and quietening doubters

We’ve had the ‘burning torches’ and now it’s ‘witch hunts’ by folks who aren’t ‘sensible,’ Deerey. Just recently you professed to be ‘confused’ as to whether I believe in free speech. I know … from you and other posters..that there are some bad ‘uns on Twitter and Facebook. But, at the risk of triggering outrage, you are coming across a bit ‘puritanical’ at present. A good few on here ..NI, IA , Ironfromafar and others..have accepted concerns but find the relentless negativity of a few posters clearly with an agenda tiresome to the pint of nauseating.
Have another look at my reply to Westyorks. Is my first point about DH and dealing with emerging debt invalid?
Is my concluding point about possible scenarios without DH not worthy of consideration?
Let’s not berate others for doing what any of us ..including you .. can slip into.

I can understand the curiosity about those who have taken an interest in the club; I am interested myself. I can understand how this can be tiring. However, some of the questioning of IB has been a bit like a ‘witch hunt’ and I don’t think it is vital. Ultimately, the person with a position of power is Hilton, not IB. I am not saying people have no right to question IB, and I suspect DM isn’t either, but people are allowed to disagree with what they see as a misguided effort. I see no free speech issue here.

The increased spotlight on me coincides with the news of the CCJs. They are not interested in me. Their sole interest is to ensure their judgement is not cast into further doubt.

As you have correctly pointed out, there is only one individual who has ignored payment requests from creditors which has resulted in these CCJs being granted and it is not me. On a related subject, did you see the thread over on Facebook featuring the parent of one of the young lads who has not been paid? Shameful.

There was no Peter Swann, IE or IB to blame when Jewsons Ltd and Rushcliffe Borough Council served their winding up petitions!