Town council critics must be responsible, warns Keighley mayor

Town council critics must be responsible, warns Keighley mayor

Keighley Mayor Councillor Graham Mitchell, left, is joined by Deputy Mayor Cllr Javaid Akhtar, right, and Cllr Brian Morris, chairman of allotments and landscapes, as the Town Hall Square clean-up begins (7636357)

Graham Mitchell in his role as a member of Keighley Bus Museum

Keighley mayor Councillor Graham Mitchell says town councillors should be proud of what they have achieved

First published in News

OPPONENTS of Keighley Town Council are to be allowed to film meetings following a law change.

But town mayor Graham Mitchell has called on the council’s “fiercest critics” to act responsibly when broadcasting footage.

He demanded that the townspeople – who have previously demanded the right to film meetings – do not doctor the videos they have shot.

He claimed some footage of Keighley Council meetings had been “reprocessed” in recent weeks to misrepresent what had taken place.

He said: “Some may argue that such deliberate misrepresentation by film is nothing more than harmless fun.

“But to many members and officers it is deeply offensive, vindictive, actually quite cruel, and a possible breach of their human rights.

“It is certainly an unwarranted attack on councillors, who are ordinary human beings with normal feelings and sensitivities, doing their best to serve the common good.”

Coun Mitchell made his comments at last Thursday’s meeting of Keighley Town Council, calling for respect from the council’s fiercest critics.

He outlined provisions in the Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014, which he said were due come into force on August 6 this year.

He said the regulations would allow, for the first time, the public to use modern technology and communication tools to report meetings in real-time.

Coun Mitchell said: “Her Majesty’s Government intends to ensure transparency in Local Government, something which our critics have always stated was their aim, and I have no problem with that.

“However, many local councils throughout the country have responded to the consultation with their concerns at the potential for selective editing of film and tampering with recordings.

“In extreme cases this vilifies and personally attacks specific elected members and officers.

“Such representation misrepresentation is not a true expression of transparency because it no longer represents the actuality of the meeting.”

Comments (41)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:30pm Thu 17 Jul 14

MarkPullen says...

Surely if the minutes of any meeting are recorded on paper it leads to the possibility of comments by individual councillors to be omitted - especially during energetic debate?

Whilst I agree that it would be unfortunate for recorded audio/visual to be edited in such a way to change the proceedings it must be also recognised that minutes are an abbreviated record as well.

I would suggest that KTC consider recording their meetings themselves - without the need to employ a professional organisation - and then share these via the website to allow comparisons to be made.
Surely if the minutes of any meeting are recorded on paper it leads to the possibility of comments by individual councillors to be omitted - especially during energetic debate? Whilst I agree that it would be unfortunate for recorded audio/visual to be edited in such a way to change the proceedings it must be also recognised that minutes are an abbreviated record as well. I would suggest that KTC consider recording their meetings themselves - without the need to employ a professional organisation - and then share these via the website to allow comparisons to be made. MarkPullen
  • Score: -3

1:54am Sat 19 Jul 14

Always a 708 Skinhead says...

Windows moviemaker is a free, easy to use video editing program. Audacity is also free and can help to enhance muffled audio. When you have completed editing your raw footage and selected the relevant frames along with any added transitions, you can upload your completed visual report direct to youtube from the program.
If councillors are upset when viewing themselves on film, then they should refrain from acting in inappropriate ways.
Windows moviemaker is a free, easy to use video editing program. Audacity is also free and can help to enhance muffled audio. When you have completed editing your raw footage and selected the relevant frames along with any added transitions, you can upload your completed visual report direct to youtube from the program. If councillors are upset when viewing themselves on film, then they should refrain from acting in inappropriate ways. Always a 708 Skinhead
  • Score: 2

5:36am Sat 19 Jul 14

Always a 708 Skinhead says...

The article starts of by stating that "Opponents of Keighley Town council are to be allowed to film meetings following a law change'. So is this an accurate portrayal of events in this report?
The Law change makes no mention of allowing opponents of the council to record events, it makes provisions for any person attending a council meeting to record proceedings for the purpose of reporting
So this means that KTC considers any member of the Public who attends and records a meeting as their opponent then?
Not a very balanced attitude to take as Public Servants.
It then reveals mayor Mitchell's concerns about footage being edited which has been written by editing his speech from a council meeting? Can anyone else see the paradox in this?
As for the mayor demanding anything from the Public, he is a Public servant, making demands of those he serves is not within his remit, besides, as one of the culprits responsible for provoking the change in legislation due to his refusal to follow government guidelines then same rules apply Dickie.
Unless there is a change in the Law, people are free to edit and report what ever portion of footage they see fit. That's what reporting is, selecting the relevant information from the data collected and presenting it in a concise format for the viewer to digest.
Such representation not only ensures transparency but should help maintain some much needed decorum at the actuality of the meeting.

Tick Tock
The article starts of by stating that "Opponents of Keighley Town council are to be allowed to film meetings following a law change'. So is this an accurate portrayal of events in this report? The Law change makes no mention of allowing opponents of the council to record events, it makes provisions for any person attending a council meeting to record proceedings for the purpose of reporting So this means that KTC considers any member of the Public who attends and records a meeting as their opponent then? Not a very balanced attitude to take as Public Servants. It then reveals mayor Mitchell's concerns about footage being edited which has been written by editing his speech from a council meeting? Can anyone else see the paradox in this? As for the mayor demanding anything from the Public, he is a Public servant, making demands of those he serves is not within his remit, besides, as one of the culprits responsible for provoking the change in legislation due to his refusal to follow government guidelines then same rules apply Dickie. Unless there is a change in the Law, people are free to edit and report what ever portion of footage they see fit. That's what reporting is, selecting the relevant information from the data collected and presenting it in a concise format for the viewer to digest. Such representation not only ensures transparency but should help maintain some much needed decorum at the actuality of the meeting. Tick Tock Always a 708 Skinhead
  • Score: 0

4:41pm Sat 19 Jul 14

abh59 says...

easily solved they could broadcast their own unedited footage
easily solved they could broadcast their own unedited footage abh59
  • Score: 0

5:01pm Sat 19 Jul 14

Ian-Holt Roberts says...

MarkPullen wrote:
Surely if the minutes of any meeting are recorded on paper it leads to the possibility of comments by individual councillors to be omitted - especially during energetic debate?

Whilst I agree that it would be unfortunate for recorded audio/visual to be edited in such a way to change the proceedings it must be also recognised that minutes are an abbreviated record as well.

I would suggest that KTC consider recording their meetings themselves - without the need to employ a professional organisation - and then share these via the website to allow comparisons to be made.
The Mayor is full of you know what ,at no time was the filming of the council edited ,and he knows that During some of the filming we had problems with the sound ,remember we were amateurs as such we placed background music on the films for effect and where possible printed on screen the words .The council did obtain prices for filming and if memory serves me correctly the figure was £ 10,000 ,Again I am sure we advised them of a cheaper way of doing this .It will be interesting to see how certain councilors now react to the filming as a number stated they would not be filmed ,not a problem for some of the councilors who had only attended 1 or 2 meetings.
[quote][p][bold]MarkPullen[/bold] wrote: Surely if the minutes of any meeting are recorded on paper it leads to the possibility of comments by individual councillors to be omitted - especially during energetic debate? Whilst I agree that it would be unfortunate for recorded audio/visual to be edited in such a way to change the proceedings it must be also recognised that minutes are an abbreviated record as well. I would suggest that KTC consider recording their meetings themselves - without the need to employ a professional organisation - and then share these via the website to allow comparisons to be made.[/p][/quote]The Mayor is full of you know what ,at no time was the filming of the council edited ,and he knows that During some of the filming we had problems with the sound ,remember we were amateurs as such we placed background music on the films for effect and where possible printed on screen the words .The council did obtain prices for filming and if memory serves me correctly the figure was £ 10,000 ,Again I am sure we advised them of a cheaper way of doing this .It will be interesting to see how certain councilors now react to the filming as a number stated they would not be filmed ,not a problem for some of the councilors who had only attended 1 or 2 meetings. Ian-Holt Roberts
  • Score: -2

5:22pm Sat 19 Jul 14

Ian-Holt Roberts says...

I have no doubt Mitchell will run the meeting in a more organised way that Sally Walker did ,simply because they could not possibly be run any worse having said that I would urge any one who possibly can to gain access to a site that shows the meeting .They may attempt to act in a professional way for a short period,but their pure incompetence will soon show through .
I have no doubt Mitchell will run the meeting in a more organised way that Sally Walker did ,simply because they could not possibly be run any worse having said that I would urge any one who possibly can to gain access to a site that shows the meeting .They may attempt to act in a professional way for a short period,but their pure incompetence will soon show through . Ian-Holt Roberts
  • Score: 0

7:23pm Sat 19 Jul 14

Little Green Man says...

I don't think filming and editing of meetings is the main concern. As stated previously, editing is simple these days, it would be very easy for someone with an axe to grind or someone conducting a personal vendetta to edit a video such that remarks are made out of context and as such might lose there intended meaning.
I don't think filming and editing of meetings is the main concern. As stated previously, editing is simple these days, it would be very easy for someone with an axe to grind or someone conducting a personal vendetta to edit a video such that remarks are made out of context and as such might lose there intended meaning. Little Green Man
  • Score: -2

9:53pm Sat 19 Jul 14

Ian-Holt Roberts says...

Little Green Man wrote:
I don't think filming and editing of meetings is the main concern. As stated previously, editing is simple these days, it would be very easy for someone with an axe to grind or someone conducting a personal vendetta to edit a video such that remarks are made out of context and as such might lose there intended meaning.
LGM the reason we wanted to film was two fold ,the minuets of the meetings were not a true record of the meetings and secondly the general mismanagement of the meetings including bullying of certain members of the council who failed to conform with the inner sanctums wishes ,I do not know how easy it is to edit a video ,obviously not as easy as just failing to place comments in the minuets . Whilst I will not be involved in filming I would expect that all of the meeting may not be filmed just the part that a person finds of interest .That is any person not just cavetown ,and please note the council planed to film the meetings themselves so no problem .this should be no different to the filming that is carried out in the commons or house of lords ,where they show it all warts and all including them asleep .and that is the main concern that the people of keighley will see them for what they are ,
[quote][p][bold]Little Green Man[/bold] wrote: I don't think filming and editing of meetings is the main concern. As stated previously, editing is simple these days, it would be very easy for someone with an axe to grind or someone conducting a personal vendetta to edit a video such that remarks are made out of context and as such might lose there intended meaning.[/p][/quote]LGM the reason we wanted to film was two fold ,the minuets of the meetings were not a true record of the meetings and secondly the general mismanagement of the meetings including bullying of certain members of the council who failed to conform with the inner sanctums wishes ,I do not know how easy it is to edit a video ,obviously not as easy as just failing to place comments in the minuets . Whilst I will not be involved in filming I would expect that all of the meeting may not be filmed just the part that a person finds of interest .That is any person not just cavetown ,and please note the council planed to film the meetings themselves so no problem .this should be no different to the filming that is carried out in the commons or house of lords ,where they show it all warts and all including them asleep .and that is the main concern that the people of keighley will see them for what they are , Ian-Holt Roberts
  • Score: 0

7:20am Sun 20 Jul 14

Four-O-Clubs says...

Little Green Man wrote:
I don't think filming and editing of meetings is the main concern. As stated previously, editing is simple these days, it would be very easy for someone with an axe to grind or someone conducting a personal vendetta to edit a video such that remarks are made out of context and as such might lose there intended meaning.
It's not worth worrying about if people do some "creative" editing. What's the worst that can happen? A few people see it on youtube and either agree or disagree with it. Local council politics isn't likely to go viral. Live streaming of meetings, direct to youtube is the best solution to that problem, anyway. Abh59 said exactly the same thing a few posts up. That way, at least, the raw footage is always available for comparison.

Councillors are politicians, though. Not everybody is going to agree with them all the time and sometimes there is going to be public backlash. It doesn't help when some councillors treat the public as if they were subordinates. Only adds fuel to the fire, in my opinion. They should just deal with it and get over it.

For the Mayor to play the victim card, by claiming human rights breaches, is an insult to the millions of people of people who genuinely are on the receiving end of horrible, human rights abuse. I bet if you asked any of them if they could choose between an out of context video of themselves or a day in their life, they'd choose the video every time.
[quote][p][bold]Little Green Man[/bold] wrote: I don't think filming and editing of meetings is the main concern. As stated previously, editing is simple these days, it would be very easy for someone with an axe to grind or someone conducting a personal vendetta to edit a video such that remarks are made out of context and as such might lose there intended meaning.[/p][/quote]It's not worth worrying about if people do some "creative" editing. What's the worst that can happen? A few people see it on youtube and either agree or disagree with it. Local council politics isn't likely to go viral. Live streaming of meetings, direct to youtube is the best solution to that problem, anyway. Abh59 said exactly the same thing a few posts up. That way, at least, the raw footage is always available for comparison. Councillors are politicians, though. Not everybody is going to agree with them all the time and sometimes there is going to be public backlash. It doesn't help when some councillors treat the public as if they were subordinates. Only adds fuel to the fire, in my opinion. They should just deal with it and get over it. For the Mayor to play the victim card, by claiming human rights breaches, is an insult to the millions of people of people who genuinely are on the receiving end of horrible, human rights abuse. I bet if you asked any of them if they could choose between an out of context video of themselves or a day in their life, they'd choose the video every time. Four-O-Clubs
  • Score: 2

2:01pm Sun 20 Jul 14

Little Green Man says...

Four-O-Clubs wrote:
Little Green Man wrote:
I don't think filming and editing of meetings is the main concern. As stated previously, editing is simple these days, it would be very easy for someone with an axe to grind or someone conducting a personal vendetta to edit a video such that remarks are made out of context and as such might lose there intended meaning.
It's not worth worrying about if people do some "creative" editing. What's the worst that can happen? A few people see it on youtube and either agree or disagree with it. Local council politics isn't likely to go viral. Live streaming of meetings, direct to youtube is the best solution to that problem, anyway. Abh59 said exactly the same thing a few posts up. That way, at least, the raw footage is always available for comparison.

Councillors are politicians, though. Not everybody is going to agree with them all the time and sometimes there is going to be public backlash. It doesn't help when some councillors treat the public as if they were subordinates. Only adds fuel to the fire, in my opinion. They should just deal with it and get over it.

For the Mayor to play the victim card, by claiming human rights breaches, is an insult to the millions of people of people who genuinely are on the receiving end of horrible, human rights abuse. I bet if you asked any of them if they could choose between an out of context video of themselves or a day in their life, they'd choose the video every time.
True, but creative editing in the wrong hands can be extremely destructive and while I don't support anything the council have done (current or past) I can understand their point of view when you consider the seriously personal attacks they have received (justified or not) that someone might twist their words further - its not a big deal to cut a few words off the start or end of a sentence to create a completely different impression. Considering the lack of respect by some here for the laws on what you can and cannot say in print I wouldn't put it past some of them to do something like that.
[quote][p][bold]Four-O-Clubs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Little Green Man[/bold] wrote: I don't think filming and editing of meetings is the main concern. As stated previously, editing is simple these days, it would be very easy for someone with an axe to grind or someone conducting a personal vendetta to edit a video such that remarks are made out of context and as such might lose there intended meaning.[/p][/quote]It's not worth worrying about if people do some "creative" editing. What's the worst that can happen? A few people see it on youtube and either agree or disagree with it. Local council politics isn't likely to go viral. Live streaming of meetings, direct to youtube is the best solution to that problem, anyway. Abh59 said exactly the same thing a few posts up. That way, at least, the raw footage is always available for comparison. Councillors are politicians, though. Not everybody is going to agree with them all the time and sometimes there is going to be public backlash. It doesn't help when some councillors treat the public as if they were subordinates. Only adds fuel to the fire, in my opinion. They should just deal with it and get over it. For the Mayor to play the victim card, by claiming human rights breaches, is an insult to the millions of people of people who genuinely are on the receiving end of horrible, human rights abuse. I bet if you asked any of them if they could choose between an out of context video of themselves or a day in their life, they'd choose the video every time.[/p][/quote]True, but creative editing in the wrong hands can be extremely destructive and while I don't support anything the council have done (current or past) I can understand their point of view when you consider the seriously personal attacks they have received (justified or not) that someone might twist their words further - its not a big deal to cut a few words off the start or end of a sentence to create a completely different impression. Considering the lack of respect by some here for the laws on what you can and cannot say in print I wouldn't put it past some of them to do something like that. Little Green Man
  • Score: -3

3:04pm Sun 20 Jul 14

Ian-Holt Roberts says...

Little Green Man wrote:
Four-O-Clubs wrote:
Little Green Man wrote:
I don't think filming and editing of meetings is the main concern. As stated previously, editing is simple these days, it would be very easy for someone with an axe to grind or someone conducting a personal vendetta to edit a video such that remarks are made out of context and as such might lose there intended meaning.
It's not worth worrying about if people do some "creative" editing. What's the worst that can happen? A few people see it on youtube and either agree or disagree with it. Local council politics isn't likely to go viral. Live streaming of meetings, direct to youtube is the best solution to that problem, anyway. Abh59 said exactly the same thing a few posts up. That way, at least, the raw footage is always available for comparison.

Councillors are politicians, though. Not everybody is going to agree with them all the time and sometimes there is going to be public backlash. It doesn't help when some councillors treat the public as if they were subordinates. Only adds fuel to the fire, in my opinion. They should just deal with it and get over it.

For the Mayor to play the victim card, by claiming human rights breaches, is an insult to the millions of people of people who genuinely are on the receiving end of horrible, human rights abuse. I bet if you asked any of them if they could choose between an out of context video of themselves or a day in their life, they'd choose the video every time.
True, but creative editing in the wrong hands can be extremely destructive and while I don't support anything the council have done (current or past) I can understand their point of view when you consider the seriously personal attacks they have received (justified or not) that someone might twist their words further - its not a big deal to cut a few words off the start or end of a sentence to create a completely different impression. Considering the lack of respect by some here for the laws on what you can and cannot say in print I wouldn't put it past some of them to do something like that.
LGM Your words Considering the lack of respect by some ETC applies to the councilors as shown on numerous occasions including threatening and vile e mails .the cavetown group was and is still just a group of local people attempting to have this council act in an honest and open way ,They have not in the past or intend in the future to cut a few words off any comments ,to so do would completely undermine all they are attempting to achieve.Regarding (Considering the lack of respect by some here for the laws you can and can not say in print) being on the out side you do not know how true your words are ,however they do not apply to the cavetown members .
[quote][p][bold]Little Green Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Four-O-Clubs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Little Green Man[/bold] wrote: I don't think filming and editing of meetings is the main concern. As stated previously, editing is simple these days, it would be very easy for someone with an axe to grind or someone conducting a personal vendetta to edit a video such that remarks are made out of context and as such might lose there intended meaning.[/p][/quote]It's not worth worrying about if people do some "creative" editing. What's the worst that can happen? A few people see it on youtube and either agree or disagree with it. Local council politics isn't likely to go viral. Live streaming of meetings, direct to youtube is the best solution to that problem, anyway. Abh59 said exactly the same thing a few posts up. That way, at least, the raw footage is always available for comparison. Councillors are politicians, though. Not everybody is going to agree with them all the time and sometimes there is going to be public backlash. It doesn't help when some councillors treat the public as if they were subordinates. Only adds fuel to the fire, in my opinion. They should just deal with it and get over it. For the Mayor to play the victim card, by claiming human rights breaches, is an insult to the millions of people of people who genuinely are on the receiving end of horrible, human rights abuse. I bet if you asked any of them if they could choose between an out of context video of themselves or a day in their life, they'd choose the video every time.[/p][/quote]True, but creative editing in the wrong hands can be extremely destructive and while I don't support anything the council have done (current or past) I can understand their point of view when you consider the seriously personal attacks they have received (justified or not) that someone might twist their words further - its not a big deal to cut a few words off the start or end of a sentence to create a completely different impression. Considering the lack of respect by some here for the laws on what you can and cannot say in print I wouldn't put it past some of them to do something like that.[/p][/quote]LGM Your words Considering the lack of respect by some ETC applies to the councilors as shown on numerous occasions including threatening and vile e mails .the cavetown group was and is still just a group of local people attempting to have this council act in an honest and open way ,They have not in the past or intend in the future to cut a few words off any comments ,to so do would completely undermine all they are attempting to achieve.Regarding (Considering the lack of respect by some here for the laws you can and can not say in print) being on the out side you do not know how true your words are ,however they do not apply to the cavetown members . Ian-Holt Roberts
  • Score: 0

3:05pm Sun 20 Jul 14

Ian-Holt Roberts says...

Four-O-Clubs wrote:
Little Green Man wrote:
I don't think filming and editing of meetings is the main concern. As stated previously, editing is simple these days, it would be very easy for someone with an axe to grind or someone conducting a personal vendetta to edit a video such that remarks are made out of context and as such might lose there intended meaning.
It's not worth worrying about if people do some "creative" editing. What's the worst that can happen? A few people see it on youtube and either agree or disagree with it. Local council politics isn't likely to go viral. Live streaming of meetings, direct to youtube is the best solution to that problem, anyway. Abh59 said exactly the same thing a few posts up. That way, at least, the raw footage is always available for comparison.

Councillors are politicians, though. Not everybody is going to agree with them all the time and sometimes there is going to be public backlash. It doesn't help when some councillors treat the public as if they were subordinates. Only adds fuel to the fire, in my opinion. They should just deal with it and get over it.

For the Mayor to play the victim card, by claiming human rights breaches, is an insult to the millions of people of people who genuinely are on the receiving end of horrible, human rights abuse. I bet if you asked any of them if they could choose between an out of context video of themselves or a day in their life, they'd choose the video every time.
I could not have put it any better .
[quote][p][bold]Four-O-Clubs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Little Green Man[/bold] wrote: I don't think filming and editing of meetings is the main concern. As stated previously, editing is simple these days, it would be very easy for someone with an axe to grind or someone conducting a personal vendetta to edit a video such that remarks are made out of context and as such might lose there intended meaning.[/p][/quote]It's not worth worrying about if people do some "creative" editing. What's the worst that can happen? A few people see it on youtube and either agree or disagree with it. Local council politics isn't likely to go viral. Live streaming of meetings, direct to youtube is the best solution to that problem, anyway. Abh59 said exactly the same thing a few posts up. That way, at least, the raw footage is always available for comparison. Councillors are politicians, though. Not everybody is going to agree with them all the time and sometimes there is going to be public backlash. It doesn't help when some councillors treat the public as if they were subordinates. Only adds fuel to the fire, in my opinion. They should just deal with it and get over it. For the Mayor to play the victim card, by claiming human rights breaches, is an insult to the millions of people of people who genuinely are on the receiving end of horrible, human rights abuse. I bet if you asked any of them if they could choose between an out of context video of themselves or a day in their life, they'd choose the video every time.[/p][/quote]I could not have put it any better . Ian-Holt Roberts
  • Score: 3

4:24pm Sun 20 Jul 14

Little Green Man says...

Ian-Holt Roberts wrote:
Little Green Man wrote:
Four-O-Clubs wrote:
Little Green Man wrote:
I don't think filming and editing of meetings is the main concern. As stated previously, editing is simple these days, it would be very easy for someone with an axe to grind or someone conducting a personal vendetta to edit a video such that remarks are made out of context and as such might lose there intended meaning.
It's not worth worrying about if people do some "creative" editing. What's the worst that can happen? A few people see it on youtube and either agree or disagree with it. Local council politics isn't likely to go viral. Live streaming of meetings, direct to youtube is the best solution to that problem, anyway. Abh59 said exactly the same thing a few posts up. That way, at least, the raw footage is always available for comparison.

Councillors are politicians, though. Not everybody is going to agree with them all the time and sometimes there is going to be public backlash. It doesn't help when some councillors treat the public as if they were subordinates. Only adds fuel to the fire, in my opinion. They should just deal with it and get over it.

For the Mayor to play the victim card, by claiming human rights breaches, is an insult to the millions of people of people who genuinely are on the receiving end of horrible, human rights abuse. I bet if you asked any of them if they could choose between an out of context video of themselves or a day in their life, they'd choose the video every time.
True, but creative editing in the wrong hands can be extremely destructive and while I don't support anything the council have done (current or past) I can understand their point of view when you consider the seriously personal attacks they have received (justified or not) that someone might twist their words further - its not a big deal to cut a few words off the start or end of a sentence to create a completely different impression. Considering the lack of respect by some here for the laws on what you can and cannot say in print I wouldn't put it past some of them to do something like that.
LGM Your words Considering the lack of respect by some ETC applies to the councilors as shown on numerous occasions including threatening and vile e mails .the cavetown group was and is still just a group of local people attempting to have this council act in an honest and open way ,They have not in the past or intend in the future to cut a few words off any comments ,to so do would completely undermine all they are attempting to achieve.Regarding (Considering the lack of respect by some here for the laws you can and can not say in print) being on the out side you do not know how true your words are ,however they do not apply to the cavetown members .
I didn't say anything about Cavetown, nor did I say that some councillors weren't guilty either - just making a general point based on how these conversations have gone before.
[quote][p][bold]Ian-Holt Roberts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Little Green Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Four-O-Clubs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Little Green Man[/bold] wrote: I don't think filming and editing of meetings is the main concern. As stated previously, editing is simple these days, it would be very easy for someone with an axe to grind or someone conducting a personal vendetta to edit a video such that remarks are made out of context and as such might lose there intended meaning.[/p][/quote]It's not worth worrying about if people do some "creative" editing. What's the worst that can happen? A few people see it on youtube and either agree or disagree with it. Local council politics isn't likely to go viral. Live streaming of meetings, direct to youtube is the best solution to that problem, anyway. Abh59 said exactly the same thing a few posts up. That way, at least, the raw footage is always available for comparison. Councillors are politicians, though. Not everybody is going to agree with them all the time and sometimes there is going to be public backlash. It doesn't help when some councillors treat the public as if they were subordinates. Only adds fuel to the fire, in my opinion. They should just deal with it and get over it. For the Mayor to play the victim card, by claiming human rights breaches, is an insult to the millions of people of people who genuinely are on the receiving end of horrible, human rights abuse. I bet if you asked any of them if they could choose between an out of context video of themselves or a day in their life, they'd choose the video every time.[/p][/quote]True, but creative editing in the wrong hands can be extremely destructive and while I don't support anything the council have done (current or past) I can understand their point of view when you consider the seriously personal attacks they have received (justified or not) that someone might twist their words further - its not a big deal to cut a few words off the start or end of a sentence to create a completely different impression. Considering the lack of respect by some here for the laws on what you can and cannot say in print I wouldn't put it past some of them to do something like that.[/p][/quote]LGM Your words Considering the lack of respect by some ETC applies to the councilors as shown on numerous occasions including threatening and vile e mails .the cavetown group was and is still just a group of local people attempting to have this council act in an honest and open way ,They have not in the past or intend in the future to cut a few words off any comments ,to so do would completely undermine all they are attempting to achieve.Regarding (Considering the lack of respect by some here for the laws you can and can not say in print) being on the out side you do not know how true your words are ,however they do not apply to the cavetown members .[/p][/quote]I didn't say anything about Cavetown, nor did I say that some councillors weren't guilty either - just making a general point based on how these conversations have gone before. Little Green Man
  • Score: -1

9:17pm Sun 20 Jul 14

jimmy k says...

glad to see paranoia is still about in a certain facebook group,as you said lgm you didn't make any comment aboutcavetown just a common sense general point.ive visited that keighley forum site on facebook 99%topics on there were about ktc put on by the usual half dozen suspects,it should be called cavetown(2),at least it stops them clogging up and ruining these threads.
glad to see paranoia is still about in a certain facebook group,as you said lgm you didn't make any comment aboutcavetown just a common sense general point.ive visited that keighley forum site on facebook 99%topics on there were about ktc put on by the usual half dozen suspects,it should be called cavetown(2),at least it stops them clogging up and ruining these threads. jimmy k
  • Score: -6

10:48am Mon 21 Jul 14

Ian-Holt Roberts says...

jimmy k wrote:
glad to see paranoia is still about in a certain facebook group,as you said lgm you didn't make any comment aboutcavetown just a common sense general point.ive visited that keighley forum site on facebook 99%topics on there were about ktc put on by the usual half dozen suspects,it should be called cavetown(2),at least it stops them clogging up and ruining these threads.
Jimmy K paranoia most certainly does not apply to myself simply because I am not a member of cavetown or the Keighley Forum site which is as I understand it open to any one with a view to comment on .If as you say 99% of the topics are about KTC put on by the usual half a dozen then fine that is what they want to discuss. You could easily say that it is the same on this site with half a dozen people in the main commenting the most .it is not to long ago that one of the regular's was adding posts on this site simply to have the number of posts go over the 400 mark. I totally agree that threads were clogged up and ruined ,but by both parties ,this resulted in the neutrals either switching off or alternatively joining in and causing mischief .For the past few months the threads on this site have not involved the KTC resulting in a drop of comments on the forum you ask to ask why ,is it because the threads are boring ?. With regards LGM who I enjoy reading his comments I believe he knows exactly what he is saying and how it will be interpreted and as such replied accordingly .
[quote][p][bold]jimmy k[/bold] wrote: glad to see paranoia is still about in a certain facebook group,as you said lgm you didn't make any comment aboutcavetown just a common sense general point.ive visited that keighley forum site on facebook 99%topics on there were about ktc put on by the usual half dozen suspects,it should be called cavetown(2),at least it stops them clogging up and ruining these threads.[/p][/quote]Jimmy K paranoia most certainly does not apply to myself simply because I am not a member of cavetown or the Keighley Forum site which is as I understand it open to any one with a view to comment on .If as you say 99% of the topics are about KTC put on by the usual half a dozen then fine that is what they want to discuss. You could easily say that it is the same on this site with half a dozen people in the main commenting the most .it is not to long ago that one of the regular's was adding posts on this site simply to have the number of posts go over the 400 mark. I totally agree that threads were clogged up and ruined ,but by both parties ,this resulted in the neutrals either switching off or alternatively joining in and causing mischief .For the past few months the threads on this site have not involved the KTC resulting in a drop of comments on the forum you ask to ask why ,is it because the threads are boring ?. With regards LGM who I enjoy reading his comments I believe he knows exactly what he is saying and how it will be interpreted and as such replied accordingly . Ian-Holt Roberts
  • Score: -2

10:50am Mon 21 Jul 14

Always a 708 Skinhead says...

jimmy k wrote:
glad to see paranoia is still about in a certain facebook group,as you said lgm you didn't make any comment aboutcavetown just a common sense general point.ive visited that keighley forum site on facebook 99%topics on there were about ktc put on by the usual half dozen suspects,it should be called cavetown(2),at least it stops them clogging up and ruining these threads.
When you say 'clogging up and ruining these threads.' You really mean the lack of a thread on any of the KN articles and just the occasional comment right?
I can't recall any article running into double digits recently......until now.
Tick Tock
[quote][p][bold]jimmy k[/bold] wrote: glad to see paranoia is still about in a certain facebook group,as you said lgm you didn't make any comment aboutcavetown just a common sense general point.ive visited that keighley forum site on facebook 99%topics on there were about ktc put on by the usual half dozen suspects,it should be called cavetown(2),at least it stops them clogging up and ruining these threads.[/p][/quote]When you say 'clogging up and ruining these threads.' You really mean the lack of a thread on any of the KN articles and just the occasional comment right? I can't recall any article running into double digits recently......until now. Tick Tock Always a 708 Skinhead
  • Score: 0

10:54am Mon 21 Jul 14

MarkPullen says...

Ian-Holt Roberts wrote:
jimmy k wrote:
glad to see paranoia is still about in a certain facebook group,as you said lgm you didn't make any comment aboutcavetown just a common sense general point.ive visited that keighley forum site on facebook 99%topics on there were about ktc put on by the usual half dozen suspects,it should be called cavetown(2),at least it stops them clogging up and ruining these threads.
Jimmy K paranoia most certainly does not apply to myself simply because I am not a member of cavetown or the Keighley Forum site which is as I understand it open to any one with a view to comment on .If as you say 99% of the topics are about KTC put on by the usual half a dozen then fine that is what they want to discuss. You could easily say that it is the same on this site with half a dozen people in the main commenting the most .it is not to long ago that one of the regular's was adding posts on this site simply to have the number of posts go over the 400 mark. I totally agree that threads were clogged up and ruined ,but by both parties ,this resulted in the neutrals either switching off or alternatively joining in and causing mischief .For the past few months the threads on this site have not involved the KTC resulting in a drop of comments on the forum you ask to ask why ,is it because the threads are boring ?. With regards LGM who I enjoy reading his comments I believe he knows exactly what he is saying and how it will be interpreted and as such replied accordingly .
I believe the Keighley Forum group on Facebook requires you to "join" to place comments/posts but that is not a requirement to view.

It is not exactly "open to anyone" as I believe that some members of the public have been blocked by the group admins - something which they are entitled to do.
[quote][p][bold]Ian-Holt Roberts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmy k[/bold] wrote: glad to see paranoia is still about in a certain facebook group,as you said lgm you didn't make any comment aboutcavetown just a common sense general point.ive visited that keighley forum site on facebook 99%topics on there were about ktc put on by the usual half dozen suspects,it should be called cavetown(2),at least it stops them clogging up and ruining these threads.[/p][/quote]Jimmy K paranoia most certainly does not apply to myself simply because I am not a member of cavetown or the Keighley Forum site which is as I understand it open to any one with a view to comment on .If as you say 99% of the topics are about KTC put on by the usual half a dozen then fine that is what they want to discuss. You could easily say that it is the same on this site with half a dozen people in the main commenting the most .it is not to long ago that one of the regular's was adding posts on this site simply to have the number of posts go over the 400 mark. I totally agree that threads were clogged up and ruined ,but by both parties ,this resulted in the neutrals either switching off or alternatively joining in and causing mischief .For the past few months the threads on this site have not involved the KTC resulting in a drop of comments on the forum you ask to ask why ,is it because the threads are boring ?. With regards LGM who I enjoy reading his comments I believe he knows exactly what he is saying and how it will be interpreted and as such replied accordingly .[/p][/quote]I believe the Keighley Forum group on Facebook requires you to "join" to place comments/posts but that is not a requirement to view. It is not exactly "open to anyone" as I believe that some members of the public have been blocked by the group admins - something which they are entitled to do. MarkPullen
  • Score: 0

11:06am Mon 21 Jul 14

Ian-Holt Roberts says...

MarkPullen wrote:
Ian-Holt Roberts wrote:
jimmy k wrote:
glad to see paranoia is still about in a certain facebook group,as you said lgm you didn't make any comment aboutcavetown just a common sense general point.ive visited that keighley forum site on facebook 99%topics on there were about ktc put on by the usual half dozen suspects,it should be called cavetown(2),at least it stops them clogging up and ruining these threads.
Jimmy K paranoia most certainly does not apply to myself simply because I am not a member of cavetown or the Keighley Forum site which is as I understand it open to any one with a view to comment on .If as you say 99% of the topics are about KTC put on by the usual half a dozen then fine that is what they want to discuss. You could easily say that it is the same on this site with half a dozen people in the main commenting the most .it is not to long ago that one of the regular's was adding posts on this site simply to have the number of posts go over the 400 mark. I totally agree that threads were clogged up and ruined ,but by both parties ,this resulted in the neutrals either switching off or alternatively joining in and causing mischief .For the past few months the threads on this site have not involved the KTC resulting in a drop of comments on the forum you ask to ask why ,is it because the threads are boring ?. With regards LGM who I enjoy reading his comments I believe he knows exactly what he is saying and how it will be interpreted and as such replied accordingly .
I believe the Keighley Forum group on Facebook requires you to "join" to place comments/posts but that is not a requirement to view.

It is not exactly "open to anyone" as I believe that some members of the public have been blocked by the group admins - something which they are entitled to do.
Mark I was not aware of that ,it seams strange that you can observe what is being said but can not comment ,whilst I was indeed on the site at the onset I came of it as I viewed it as a political soap box for ukip not something I wanted to participate in .
[quote][p][bold]MarkPullen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ian-Holt Roberts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmy k[/bold] wrote: glad to see paranoia is still about in a certain facebook group,as you said lgm you didn't make any comment aboutcavetown just a common sense general point.ive visited that keighley forum site on facebook 99%topics on there were about ktc put on by the usual half dozen suspects,it should be called cavetown(2),at least it stops them clogging up and ruining these threads.[/p][/quote]Jimmy K paranoia most certainly does not apply to myself simply because I am not a member of cavetown or the Keighley Forum site which is as I understand it open to any one with a view to comment on .If as you say 99% of the topics are about KTC put on by the usual half a dozen then fine that is what they want to discuss. You could easily say that it is the same on this site with half a dozen people in the main commenting the most .it is not to long ago that one of the regular's was adding posts on this site simply to have the number of posts go over the 400 mark. I totally agree that threads were clogged up and ruined ,but by both parties ,this resulted in the neutrals either switching off or alternatively joining in and causing mischief .For the past few months the threads on this site have not involved the KTC resulting in a drop of comments on the forum you ask to ask why ,is it because the threads are boring ?. With regards LGM who I enjoy reading his comments I believe he knows exactly what he is saying and how it will be interpreted and as such replied accordingly .[/p][/quote]I believe the Keighley Forum group on Facebook requires you to "join" to place comments/posts but that is not a requirement to view. It is not exactly "open to anyone" as I believe that some members of the public have been blocked by the group admins - something which they are entitled to do.[/p][/quote]Mark I was not aware of that ,it seams strange that you can observe what is being said but can not comment ,whilst I was indeed on the site at the onset I came of it as I viewed it as a political soap box for ukip not something I wanted to participate in . Ian-Holt Roberts
  • Score: 3

11:10am Mon 21 Jul 14

MarkPullen says...

Ian-Holt Roberts wrote:
MarkPullen wrote:
Ian-Holt Roberts wrote:
jimmy k wrote:
glad to see paranoia is still about in a certain facebook group,as you said lgm you didn't make any comment aboutcavetown just a common sense general point.ive visited that keighley forum site on facebook 99%topics on there were about ktc put on by the usual half dozen suspects,it should be called cavetown(2),at least it stops them clogging up and ruining these threads.
Jimmy K paranoia most certainly does not apply to myself simply because I am not a member of cavetown or the Keighley Forum site which is as I understand it open to any one with a view to comment on .If as you say 99% of the topics are about KTC put on by the usual half a dozen then fine that is what they want to discuss. You could easily say that it is the same on this site with half a dozen people in the main commenting the most .it is not to long ago that one of the regular's was adding posts on this site simply to have the number of posts go over the 400 mark. I totally agree that threads were clogged up and ruined ,but by both parties ,this resulted in the neutrals either switching off or alternatively joining in and causing mischief .For the past few months the threads on this site have not involved the KTC resulting in a drop of comments on the forum you ask to ask why ,is it because the threads are boring ?. With regards LGM who I enjoy reading his comments I believe he knows exactly what he is saying and how it will be interpreted and as such replied accordingly .
I believe the Keighley Forum group on Facebook requires you to "join" to place comments/posts but that is not a requirement to view.

It is not exactly "open to anyone" as I believe that some members of the public have been blocked by the group admins - something which they are entitled to do.
Mark I was not aware of that ,it seams strange that you can observe what is being said but can not comment ,whilst I was indeed on the site at the onset I came of it as I viewed it as a political soap box for ukip not something I wanted to participate in .
From my observations it seems that UKIP are now finding the Keighley Forum group a very uncomfortable place soapbox to balance upon!

Cllr Fletcher has withdrawn from the group in recent weeks and the remaining members are, by affiliation to KTC, subject to close to a constant barrage of questioning and interrogation.

I don't sympathise with them as they seem to fail to differentiate their FB personas from their status as an individual and that of a Councillor.
[quote][p][bold]Ian-Holt Roberts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MarkPullen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ian-Holt Roberts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmy k[/bold] wrote: glad to see paranoia is still about in a certain facebook group,as you said lgm you didn't make any comment aboutcavetown just a common sense general point.ive visited that keighley forum site on facebook 99%topics on there were about ktc put on by the usual half dozen suspects,it should be called cavetown(2),at least it stops them clogging up and ruining these threads.[/p][/quote]Jimmy K paranoia most certainly does not apply to myself simply because I am not a member of cavetown or the Keighley Forum site which is as I understand it open to any one with a view to comment on .If as you say 99% of the topics are about KTC put on by the usual half a dozen then fine that is what they want to discuss. You could easily say that it is the same on this site with half a dozen people in the main commenting the most .it is not to long ago that one of the regular's was adding posts on this site simply to have the number of posts go over the 400 mark. I totally agree that threads were clogged up and ruined ,but by both parties ,this resulted in the neutrals either switching off or alternatively joining in and causing mischief .For the past few months the threads on this site have not involved the KTC resulting in a drop of comments on the forum you ask to ask why ,is it because the threads are boring ?. With regards LGM who I enjoy reading his comments I believe he knows exactly what he is saying and how it will be interpreted and as such replied accordingly .[/p][/quote]I believe the Keighley Forum group on Facebook requires you to "join" to place comments/posts but that is not a requirement to view. It is not exactly "open to anyone" as I believe that some members of the public have been blocked by the group admins - something which they are entitled to do.[/p][/quote]Mark I was not aware of that ,it seams strange that you can observe what is being said but can not comment ,whilst I was indeed on the site at the onset I came of it as I viewed it as a political soap box for ukip not something I wanted to participate in .[/p][/quote]From my observations it seems that UKIP are now finding the Keighley Forum group a very uncomfortable place soapbox to balance upon! Cllr Fletcher has withdrawn from the group in recent weeks and the remaining members are, by affiliation to KTC, subject to close to a constant barrage of questioning and interrogation. I don't sympathise with them as they seem to fail to differentiate their FB personas from their status as an individual and that of a Councillor. MarkPullen
  • Score: 1

11:23am Mon 21 Jul 14

Ian-Holt Roberts says...

MarkPullen wrote:
Ian-Holt Roberts wrote:
MarkPullen wrote:
Ian-Holt Roberts wrote:
jimmy k wrote:
glad to see paranoia is still about in a certain facebook group,as you said lgm you didn't make any comment aboutcavetown just a common sense general point.ive visited that keighley forum site on facebook 99%topics on there were about ktc put on by the usual half dozen suspects,it should be called cavetown(2),at least it stops them clogging up and ruining these threads.
Jimmy K paranoia most certainly does not apply to myself simply because I am not a member of cavetown or the Keighley Forum site which is as I understand it open to any one with a view to comment on .If as you say 99% of the topics are about KTC put on by the usual half a dozen then fine that is what they want to discuss. You could easily say that it is the same on this site with half a dozen people in the main commenting the most .it is not to long ago that one of the regular's was adding posts on this site simply to have the number of posts go over the 400 mark. I totally agree that threads were clogged up and ruined ,but by both parties ,this resulted in the neutrals either switching off or alternatively joining in and causing mischief .For the past few months the threads on this site have not involved the KTC resulting in a drop of comments on the forum you ask to ask why ,is it because the threads are boring ?. With regards LGM who I enjoy reading his comments I believe he knows exactly what he is saying and how it will be interpreted and as such replied accordingly .
I believe the Keighley Forum group on Facebook requires you to "join" to place comments/posts but that is not a requirement to view.

It is not exactly "open to anyone" as I believe that some members of the public have been blocked by the group admins - something which they are entitled to do.
Mark I was not aware of that ,it seams strange that you can observe what is being said but can not comment ,whilst I was indeed on the site at the onset I came of it as I viewed it as a political soap box for ukip not something I wanted to participate in .
From my observations it seems that UKIP are now finding the Keighley Forum group a very uncomfortable place soapbox to balance upon!

Cllr Fletcher has withdrawn from the group in recent weeks and the remaining members are, by affiliation to KTC, subject to close to a constant barrage of questioning and interrogation.

I don't sympathise with them as they seem to fail to differentiate their FB personas from their status as an individual and that of a Councillor.
Strange that you say people are refused entry to the forum yet a man who boasted having sex with a married women and at the same time loosing a condom was allowed to stay on . Mark I do not know if any site will be recording or showing the recordings on site but if so I would urge you to gain access to observe the way the council is run, for once the council have forgot the cameras are there then you may get a glimpse of how this council is run .
[quote][p][bold]MarkPullen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ian-Holt Roberts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MarkPullen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ian-Holt Roberts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmy k[/bold] wrote: glad to see paranoia is still about in a certain facebook group,as you said lgm you didn't make any comment aboutcavetown just a common sense general point.ive visited that keighley forum site on facebook 99%topics on there were about ktc put on by the usual half dozen suspects,it should be called cavetown(2),at least it stops them clogging up and ruining these threads.[/p][/quote]Jimmy K paranoia most certainly does not apply to myself simply because I am not a member of cavetown or the Keighley Forum site which is as I understand it open to any one with a view to comment on .If as you say 99% of the topics are about KTC put on by the usual half a dozen then fine that is what they want to discuss. You could easily say that it is the same on this site with half a dozen people in the main commenting the most .it is not to long ago that one of the regular's was adding posts on this site simply to have the number of posts go over the 400 mark. I totally agree that threads were clogged up and ruined ,but by both parties ,this resulted in the neutrals either switching off or alternatively joining in and causing mischief .For the past few months the threads on this site have not involved the KTC resulting in a drop of comments on the forum you ask to ask why ,is it because the threads are boring ?. With regards LGM who I enjoy reading his comments I believe he knows exactly what he is saying and how it will be interpreted and as such replied accordingly .[/p][/quote]I believe the Keighley Forum group on Facebook requires you to "join" to place comments/posts but that is not a requirement to view. It is not exactly "open to anyone" as I believe that some members of the public have been blocked by the group admins - something which they are entitled to do.[/p][/quote]Mark I was not aware of that ,it seams strange that you can observe what is being said but can not comment ,whilst I was indeed on the site at the onset I came of it as I viewed it as a political soap box for ukip not something I wanted to participate in .[/p][/quote]From my observations it seems that UKIP are now finding the Keighley Forum group a very uncomfortable place soapbox to balance upon! Cllr Fletcher has withdrawn from the group in recent weeks and the remaining members are, by affiliation to KTC, subject to close to a constant barrage of questioning and interrogation. I don't sympathise with them as they seem to fail to differentiate their FB personas from their status as an individual and that of a Councillor.[/p][/quote]Strange that you say people are refused entry to the forum yet a man who boasted having sex with a married women and at the same time loosing a condom was allowed to stay on . Mark I do not know if any site will be recording or showing the recordings on site but if so I would urge you to gain access to observe the way the council is run, for once the council have forgot the cameras are there then you may get a glimpse of how this council is run . Ian-Holt Roberts
  • Score: 0

11:29am Mon 21 Jul 14

MarkPullen says...

Ian-Holt Roberts wrote:
MarkPullen wrote:
Ian-Holt Roberts wrote:
MarkPullen wrote:
Ian-Holt Roberts wrote:
jimmy k wrote:
glad to see paranoia is still about in a certain facebook group,as you said lgm you didn't make any comment aboutcavetown just a common sense general point.ive visited that keighley forum site on facebook 99%topics on there were about ktc put on by the usual half dozen suspects,it should be called cavetown(2),at least it stops them clogging up and ruining these threads.
Jimmy K paranoia most certainly does not apply to myself simply because I am not a member of cavetown or the Keighley Forum site which is as I understand it open to any one with a view to comment on .If as you say 99% of the topics are about KTC put on by the usual half a dozen then fine that is what they want to discuss. You could easily say that it is the same on this site with half a dozen people in the main commenting the most .it is not to long ago that one of the regular's was adding posts on this site simply to have the number of posts go over the 400 mark. I totally agree that threads were clogged up and ruined ,but by both parties ,this resulted in the neutrals either switching off or alternatively joining in and causing mischief .For the past few months the threads on this site have not involved the KTC resulting in a drop of comments on the forum you ask to ask why ,is it because the threads are boring ?. With regards LGM who I enjoy reading his comments I believe he knows exactly what he is saying and how it will be interpreted and as such replied accordingly .
I believe the Keighley Forum group on Facebook requires you to "join" to place comments/posts but that is not a requirement to view.

It is not exactly "open to anyone" as I believe that some members of the public have been blocked by the group admins - something which they are entitled to do.
Mark I was not aware of that ,it seams strange that you can observe what is being said but can not comment ,whilst I was indeed on the site at the onset I came of it as I viewed it as a political soap box for ukip not something I wanted to participate in .
From my observations it seems that UKIP are now finding the Keighley Forum group a very uncomfortable place soapbox to balance upon!

Cllr Fletcher has withdrawn from the group in recent weeks and the remaining members are, by affiliation to KTC, subject to close to a constant barrage of questioning and interrogation.

I don't sympathise with them as they seem to fail to differentiate their FB personas from their status as an individual and that of a Councillor.
Strange that you say people are refused entry to the forum yet a man who boasted having sex with a married women and at the same time loosing a condom was allowed to stay on . Mark I do not know if any site will be recording or showing the recordings on site but if so I would urge you to gain access to observe the way the council is run, for once the council have forgot the cameras are there then you may get a glimpse of how this council is run .
The problem(?) of FB is that groups are ultimately created and owned by an individual who then allows others certain rights - either as an administrator or member.

It is very dangerous to offer a totally "open" FB group as this would mean no restrictions on membership or posts/comments unless they failed to meet the T&Cs of FB itself.

There's open and then there's open!!

I'm keen to see if their behaviour becomes more appropriate to that of an elected body or whether they continue to display the attitude accused of by others.
[quote][p][bold]Ian-Holt Roberts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MarkPullen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ian-Holt Roberts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MarkPullen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ian-Holt Roberts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmy k[/bold] wrote: glad to see paranoia is still about in a certain facebook group,as you said lgm you didn't make any comment aboutcavetown just a common sense general point.ive visited that keighley forum site on facebook 99%topics on there were about ktc put on by the usual half dozen suspects,it should be called cavetown(2),at least it stops them clogging up and ruining these threads.[/p][/quote]Jimmy K paranoia most certainly does not apply to myself simply because I am not a member of cavetown or the Keighley Forum site which is as I understand it open to any one with a view to comment on .If as you say 99% of the topics are about KTC put on by the usual half a dozen then fine that is what they want to discuss. You could easily say that it is the same on this site with half a dozen people in the main commenting the most .it is not to long ago that one of the regular's was adding posts on this site simply to have the number of posts go over the 400 mark. I totally agree that threads were clogged up and ruined ,but by both parties ,this resulted in the neutrals either switching off or alternatively joining in and causing mischief .For the past few months the threads on this site have not involved the KTC resulting in a drop of comments on the forum you ask to ask why ,is it because the threads are boring ?. With regards LGM who I enjoy reading his comments I believe he knows exactly what he is saying and how it will be interpreted and as such replied accordingly .[/p][/quote]I believe the Keighley Forum group on Facebook requires you to "join" to place comments/posts but that is not a requirement to view. It is not exactly "open to anyone" as I believe that some members of the public have been blocked by the group admins - something which they are entitled to do.[/p][/quote]Mark I was not aware of that ,it seams strange that you can observe what is being said but can not comment ,whilst I was indeed on the site at the onset I came of it as I viewed it as a political soap box for ukip not something I wanted to participate in .[/p][/quote]From my observations it seems that UKIP are now finding the Keighley Forum group a very uncomfortable place soapbox to balance upon! Cllr Fletcher has withdrawn from the group in recent weeks and the remaining members are, by affiliation to KTC, subject to close to a constant barrage of questioning and interrogation. I don't sympathise with them as they seem to fail to differentiate their FB personas from their status as an individual and that of a Councillor.[/p][/quote]Strange that you say people are refused entry to the forum yet a man who boasted having sex with a married women and at the same time loosing a condom was allowed to stay on . Mark I do not know if any site will be recording or showing the recordings on site but if so I would urge you to gain access to observe the way the council is run, for once the council have forgot the cameras are there then you may get a glimpse of how this council is run .[/p][/quote]The problem(?) of FB is that groups are ultimately created and owned by an individual who then allows others certain rights - either as an administrator or member. It is very dangerous to offer a totally "open" FB group as this would mean no restrictions on membership or posts/comments unless they failed to meet the T&Cs of FB itself. There's open and then there's open!! I'm keen to see if their behaviour becomes more appropriate to that of an elected body or whether they continue to display the attitude accused of by others. MarkPullen
  • Score: -3

11:50am Mon 21 Jul 14

Always a 708 Skinhead says...

The Transdev webpage has the following information-
The Brontë Scenic Tour returns for 2014, running every Sunday and Bank Holiday Monday from Sunday 4th May until Monday 25th August.
Route 812 is run by Transdev in Keighley for the Worth Valley Joint Transport Committee, with financial support from Metro; Haworth, Cross Roads & Stanbury Parish Council; Keighley Town Council; Oxenhope Parish Council; Scar Top Pine Ltd. and Worth Valley District Ward Councillors.
So it would suggest that the bus route incorporates Keighley? Well it does in a fashion, according to the time table it departs Kly Bus Station at 10:50 am and returns there at 5:40pm.
Inbetween these times it runs from Haworth KWVR Station to Scar Top and back.
So the situation is that KTC are paying £1115 for a bus that leaves Keighley in the morning and returns in the evening every Sunday and Bank Holiday Monday over the Summer?
But wait.
There is more....
As well as Service 812- The Bronte Scenic Tour, there is also the 822 Service- The Bronte Country Tour!
This service runs every Saturday & Sunday between 27 Jul to 31 Aug and takes in the following attractions over 2 hours.
East Riddlesden Hall
Cliffe Castle Museum + Park
Police Museum (Satudays only)
Keighley Worth Valley Railway
Museum of Rail Travel
Ingrow Loco Museum
Bronte Parsonage Museum
This service uses an open top bus supplied by the The Keighley Bus Museum Trust and driven by mayor Mitchell in his beloved role as Bus Driver.
I do not know at this stage what if any funding this tour receives from KTC, but if you ask me neither of these services should be receiving council funds at a time when they have been instructed to cut back on unnecessary expenses.
I would say that a loss making bus route in a different Parish falls into the ' unnecessary expenses" catergory.
http://www.thetelegr
aphandargus.co.uk/ne
ws/11348688.Open_top
ped_bus_will_take_th
e_scenic_route_for_B
ronte_Country_tour/
The Transdev webpage has the following information- The Brontë Scenic Tour returns for 2014, running every Sunday and Bank Holiday Monday from Sunday 4th May until Monday 25th August. Route 812 is run by Transdev in Keighley for the Worth Valley Joint Transport Committee, with financial support from Metro; Haworth, Cross Roads & Stanbury Parish Council; Keighley Town Council; Oxenhope Parish Council; Scar Top Pine Ltd. and Worth Valley District Ward Councillors. So it would suggest that the bus route incorporates Keighley? Well it does in a fashion, according to the time table it departs Kly Bus Station at 10:50 am and returns there at 5:40pm. Inbetween these times it runs from Haworth KWVR Station to Scar Top and back. So the situation is that KTC are paying £1115 for a bus that leaves Keighley in the morning and returns in the evening every Sunday and Bank Holiday Monday over the Summer? But wait. There is more.... As well as Service 812- The Bronte Scenic Tour, there is also the 822 Service- The Bronte Country Tour! This service runs every Saturday & Sunday between 27 Jul to 31 Aug and takes in the following attractions over 2 hours. East Riddlesden Hall Cliffe Castle Museum + Park Police Museum (Satudays only) Keighley Worth Valley Railway Museum of Rail Travel Ingrow Loco Museum Bronte Parsonage Museum This service uses an open top bus supplied by the The Keighley Bus Museum Trust and driven by mayor Mitchell in his beloved role as Bus Driver. I do not know at this stage what if any funding this tour receives from KTC, but if you ask me neither of these services should be receiving council funds at a time when they have been instructed to cut back on unnecessary expenses. I would say that a loss making bus route in a different Parish falls into the ' unnecessary expenses" catergory. http://www.thetelegr aphandargus.co.uk/ne ws/11348688.Open_top ped_bus_will_take_th e_scenic_route_for_B ronte_Country_tour/ Always a 708 Skinhead
  • Score: 2

1:02pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Always a 708 Skinhead says...

I cannot seem to find a figure for the amount which Haworth, Cross Roads & Stanbury Parish Council contribute to this service apart from this amount in the March minutes of the PC- Bronte Country Partnership £100.00 Membership 2013 Although as some of what they state are minutes are actually agendas on their website perhaps the similarity with KTC regards to secrecy is prevalent in this Parish as well...
I cannot seem to find a figure for the amount which Haworth, Cross Roads & Stanbury Parish Council contribute to this service apart from this amount in the March minutes of the PC- Bronte Country Partnership £100.00 Membership 2013 Although as some of what they state are minutes are actually agendas on their website perhaps the similarity with KTC regards to secrecy is prevalent in this Parish as well... Always a 708 Skinhead
  • Score: 1

1:13pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Ian-Holt Roberts says...

MarkPullen wrote:
Ian-Holt Roberts wrote:
MarkPullen wrote:
Ian-Holt Roberts wrote:
MarkPullen wrote:
Ian-Holt Roberts wrote:
jimmy k wrote:
glad to see paranoia is still about in a certain facebook group,as you said lgm you didn't make any comment aboutcavetown just a common sense general point.ive visited that keighley forum site on facebook 99%topics on there were about ktc put on by the usual half dozen suspects,it should be called cavetown(2),at least it stops them clogging up and ruining these threads.
Jimmy K paranoia most certainly does not apply to myself simply because I am not a member of cavetown or the Keighley Forum site which is as I understand it open to any one with a view to comment on .If as you say 99% of the topics are about KTC put on by the usual half a dozen then fine that is what they want to discuss. You could easily say that it is the same on this site with half a dozen people in the main commenting the most .it is not to long ago that one of the regular's was adding posts on this site simply to have the number of posts go over the 400 mark. I totally agree that threads were clogged up and ruined ,but by both parties ,this resulted in the neutrals either switching off or alternatively joining in and causing mischief .For the past few months the threads on this site have not involved the KTC resulting in a drop of comments on the forum you ask to ask why ,is it because the threads are boring ?. With regards LGM who I enjoy reading his comments I believe he knows exactly what he is saying and how it will be interpreted and as such replied accordingly .
I believe the Keighley Forum group on Facebook requires you to "join" to place comments/posts but that is not a requirement to view.

It is not exactly "open to anyone" as I believe that some members of the public have been blocked by the group admins - something which they are entitled to do.
Mark I was not aware of that ,it seams strange that you can observe what is being said but can not comment ,whilst I was indeed on the site at the onset I came of it as I viewed it as a political soap box for ukip not something I wanted to participate in .
From my observations it seems that UKIP are now finding the Keighley Forum group a very uncomfortable place soapbox to balance upon!

Cllr Fletcher has withdrawn from the group in recent weeks and the remaining members are, by affiliation to KTC, subject to close to a constant barrage of questioning and interrogation.

I don't sympathise with them as they seem to fail to differentiate their FB personas from their status as an individual and that of a Councillor.
Strange that you say people are refused entry to the forum yet a man who boasted having sex with a married women and at the same time loosing a condom was allowed to stay on . Mark I do not know if any site will be recording or showing the recordings on site but if so I would urge you to gain access to observe the way the council is run, for once the council have forgot the cameras are there then you may get a glimpse of how this council is run .
The problem(?) of FB is that groups are ultimately created and owned by an individual who then allows others certain rights - either as an administrator or member.

It is very dangerous to offer a totally "open" FB group as this would mean no restrictions on membership or posts/comments unless they failed to meet the T&Cs of FB itself.

There's open and then there's open!!

I'm keen to see if their behaviour becomes more appropriate to that of an elected body or whether they continue to display the attitude accused of by others.
Mark under Mitchell it will improve simply because he has some knowledge of how a meeting should be run having been the mayor previously ,in addition the majority of the councilors are in awe of him . whilst I have not attended the last 2 council meetings I would assure you that the attitude you are referring to is correct .
[quote][p][bold]MarkPullen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ian-Holt Roberts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MarkPullen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ian-Holt Roberts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MarkPullen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ian-Holt Roberts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmy k[/bold] wrote: glad to see paranoia is still about in a certain facebook group,as you said lgm you didn't make any comment aboutcavetown just a common sense general point.ive visited that keighley forum site on facebook 99%topics on there were about ktc put on by the usual half dozen suspects,it should be called cavetown(2),at least it stops them clogging up and ruining these threads.[/p][/quote]Jimmy K paranoia most certainly does not apply to myself simply because I am not a member of cavetown or the Keighley Forum site which is as I understand it open to any one with a view to comment on .If as you say 99% of the topics are about KTC put on by the usual half a dozen then fine that is what they want to discuss. You could easily say that it is the same on this site with half a dozen people in the main commenting the most .it is not to long ago that one of the regular's was adding posts on this site simply to have the number of posts go over the 400 mark. I totally agree that threads were clogged up and ruined ,but by both parties ,this resulted in the neutrals either switching off or alternatively joining in and causing mischief .For the past few months the threads on this site have not involved the KTC resulting in a drop of comments on the forum you ask to ask why ,is it because the threads are boring ?. With regards LGM who I enjoy reading his comments I believe he knows exactly what he is saying and how it will be interpreted and as such replied accordingly .[/p][/quote]I believe the Keighley Forum group on Facebook requires you to "join" to place comments/posts but that is not a requirement to view. It is not exactly "open to anyone" as I believe that some members of the public have been blocked by the group admins - something which they are entitled to do.[/p][/quote]Mark I was not aware of that ,it seams strange that you can observe what is being said but can not comment ,whilst I was indeed on the site at the onset I came of it as I viewed it as a political soap box for ukip not something I wanted to participate in .[/p][/quote]From my observations it seems that UKIP are now finding the Keighley Forum group a very uncomfortable place soapbox to balance upon! Cllr Fletcher has withdrawn from the group in recent weeks and the remaining members are, by affiliation to KTC, subject to close to a constant barrage of questioning and interrogation. I don't sympathise with them as they seem to fail to differentiate their FB personas from their status as an individual and that of a Councillor.[/p][/quote]Strange that you say people are refused entry to the forum yet a man who boasted having sex with a married women and at the same time loosing a condom was allowed to stay on . Mark I do not know if any site will be recording or showing the recordings on site but if so I would urge you to gain access to observe the way the council is run, for once the council have forgot the cameras are there then you may get a glimpse of how this council is run .[/p][/quote]The problem(?) of FB is that groups are ultimately created and owned by an individual who then allows others certain rights - either as an administrator or member. It is very dangerous to offer a totally "open" FB group as this would mean no restrictions on membership or posts/comments unless they failed to meet the T&Cs of FB itself. There's open and then there's open!! I'm keen to see if their behaviour becomes more appropriate to that of an elected body or whether they continue to display the attitude accused of by others.[/p][/quote]Mark under Mitchell it will improve simply because he has some knowledge of how a meeting should be run having been the mayor previously ,in addition the majority of the councilors are in awe of him . whilst I have not attended the last 2 council meetings I would assure you that the attitude you are referring to is correct . Ian-Holt Roberts
  • Score: 0

1:32pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Ian-Holt Roberts says...

Thmore I read the comments of Mitchell the more annoyed I become (COUNCILORS WHO ARE ORDINARY HUMAN BEINGS WITH NORMAL FEELINGS AND SENSITIVITIES ) .Is this the same councilors who refereed to the general pubic as swivel eyed loons, lunatics ,prevented them having a table at the local gala field had the general public unlawfully escorted from the council chamber ,etc etc and are the cause of 54 objections being investigated by the external auditors ,ordinary human beings is not a word I would use .
Thmore I read the comments of Mitchell the more annoyed I become (COUNCILORS WHO ARE ORDINARY HUMAN BEINGS WITH NORMAL FEELINGS AND SENSITIVITIES ) .Is this the same councilors who refereed to the general pubic as swivel eyed loons, lunatics ,prevented them having a table at the local gala field had the general public unlawfully escorted from the council chamber ,etc etc and are the cause of 54 objections being investigated by the external auditors ,ordinary human beings is not a word I would use . Ian-Holt Roberts
  • Score: 0

4:21pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Four-O-Clubs says...

Little Green Man wrote:
Four-O-Clubs wrote:
Little Green Man wrote:
I don't think filming and editing of meetings is the main concern. As stated previously, editing is simple these days, it would be very easy for someone with an axe to grind or someone conducting a personal vendetta to edit a video such that remarks are made out of context and as such might lose there intended meaning.
It's not worth worrying about if people do some "creative" editing. What's the worst that can happen? A few people see it on youtube and either agree or disagree with it. Local council politics isn't likely to go viral. Live streaming of meetings, direct to youtube is the best solution to that problem, anyway. Abh59 said exactly the same thing a few posts up. That way, at least, the raw footage is always available for comparison.

Councillors are politicians, though. Not everybody is going to agree with them all the time and sometimes there is going to be public backlash. It doesn't help when some councillors treat the public as if they were subordinates. Only adds fuel to the fire, in my opinion. They should just deal with it and get over it.

For the Mayor to play the victim card, by claiming human rights breaches, is an insult to the millions of people of people who genuinely are on the receiving end of horrible, human rights abuse. I bet if you asked any of them if they could choose between an out of context video of themselves or a day in their life, they'd choose the video every time.
True, but creative editing in the wrong hands can be extremely destructive and while I don't support anything the council have done (current or past) I can understand their point of view when you consider the seriously personal attacks they have received (justified or not) that someone might twist their words further - its not a big deal to cut a few words off the start or end of a sentence to create a completely different impression. Considering the lack of respect by some here for the laws on what you can and cannot say in print I wouldn't put it past some of them to do something like that.
I don't think it's edited video council need to worry about. Based on their history, no editing is really necessary. Like I said, live streaming to youtube with public access to recordings of meetings will solve any out of context stuff from doing any damage. The council should do this themselves, otherwise, what's stopping them from claiming unedited footage as edited to save face on something? The argument works both ways. Don't you think the issue should be more about creating a system of checks and balances? I get the impression, by the mayor's statement, he's more interested in being able to discredit any opposition, rather than embracing change. If any councillor doesn't want to be filmed, maybe they should consider their options as to whether they should continue in the position.
[quote][p][bold]Little Green Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Four-O-Clubs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Little Green Man[/bold] wrote: I don't think filming and editing of meetings is the main concern. As stated previously, editing is simple these days, it would be very easy for someone with an axe to grind or someone conducting a personal vendetta to edit a video such that remarks are made out of context and as such might lose there intended meaning.[/p][/quote]It's not worth worrying about if people do some "creative" editing. What's the worst that can happen? A few people see it on youtube and either agree or disagree with it. Local council politics isn't likely to go viral. Live streaming of meetings, direct to youtube is the best solution to that problem, anyway. Abh59 said exactly the same thing a few posts up. That way, at least, the raw footage is always available for comparison. Councillors are politicians, though. Not everybody is going to agree with them all the time and sometimes there is going to be public backlash. It doesn't help when some councillors treat the public as if they were subordinates. Only adds fuel to the fire, in my opinion. They should just deal with it and get over it. For the Mayor to play the victim card, by claiming human rights breaches, is an insult to the millions of people of people who genuinely are on the receiving end of horrible, human rights abuse. I bet if you asked any of them if they could choose between an out of context video of themselves or a day in their life, they'd choose the video every time.[/p][/quote]True, but creative editing in the wrong hands can be extremely destructive and while I don't support anything the council have done (current or past) I can understand their point of view when you consider the seriously personal attacks they have received (justified or not) that someone might twist their words further - its not a big deal to cut a few words off the start or end of a sentence to create a completely different impression. Considering the lack of respect by some here for the laws on what you can and cannot say in print I wouldn't put it past some of them to do something like that.[/p][/quote]I don't think it's edited video council need to worry about. Based on their history, no editing is really necessary. Like I said, live streaming to youtube with public access to recordings of meetings will solve any out of context stuff from doing any damage. The council should do this themselves, otherwise, what's stopping them from claiming unedited footage as edited to save face on something? The argument works both ways. Don't you think the issue should be more about creating a system of checks and balances? I get the impression, by the mayor's statement, he's more interested in being able to discredit any opposition, rather than embracing change. If any councillor doesn't want to be filmed, maybe they should consider their options as to whether they should continue in the position. Four-O-Clubs
  • Score: 4

5:19pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Ian-Holt Roberts says...

Four-O-Clubs wrote:
Little Green Man wrote:
Four-O-Clubs wrote:
Little Green Man wrote:
I don't think filming and editing of meetings is the main concern. As stated previously, editing is simple these days, it would be very easy for someone with an axe to grind or someone conducting a personal vendetta to edit a video such that remarks are made out of context and as such might lose there intended meaning.
It's not worth worrying about if people do some "creative" editing. What's the worst that can happen? A few people see it on youtube and either agree or disagree with it. Local council politics isn't likely to go viral. Live streaming of meetings, direct to youtube is the best solution to that problem, anyway. Abh59 said exactly the same thing a few posts up. That way, at least, the raw footage is always available for comparison.

Councillors are politicians, though. Not everybody is going to agree with them all the time and sometimes there is going to be public backlash. It doesn't help when some councillors treat the public as if they were subordinates. Only adds fuel to the fire, in my opinion. They should just deal with it and get over it.

For the Mayor to play the victim card, by claiming human rights breaches, is an insult to the millions of people of people who genuinely are on the receiving end of horrible, human rights abuse. I bet if you asked any of them if they could choose between an out of context video of themselves or a day in their life, they'd choose the video every time.
True, but creative editing in the wrong hands can be extremely destructive and while I don't support anything the council have done (current or past) I can understand their point of view when you consider the seriously personal attacks they have received (justified or not) that someone might twist their words further - its not a big deal to cut a few words off the start or end of a sentence to create a completely different impression. Considering the lack of respect by some here for the laws on what you can and cannot say in print I wouldn't put it past some of them to do something like that.
I don't think it's edited video council need to worry about. Based on their history, no editing is really necessary. Like I said, live streaming to youtube with public access to recordings of meetings will solve any out of context stuff from doing any damage. The council should do this themselves, otherwise, what's stopping them from claiming unedited footage as edited to save face on something? The argument works both ways. Don't you think the issue should be more about creating a system of checks and balances? I get the impression, by the mayor's statement, he's more interested in being able to discredit any opposition, rather than embracing change. If any councillor doesn't want to be filmed, maybe they should consider their options as to whether they should continue in the position.
Four o clubs one councilor who said he would not be filmed subsequently resigned once it was confirmed that filming would be allowed ,others also stated they did not want or would not be filmed .With 54 objections to the accounts particularly after voting to accept the accounts despite the fact that they had never been given a copy of the accounts to study I would suggest they all should consider their options .
[quote][p][bold]Four-O-Clubs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Little Green Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Four-O-Clubs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Little Green Man[/bold] wrote: I don't think filming and editing of meetings is the main concern. As stated previously, editing is simple these days, it would be very easy for someone with an axe to grind or someone conducting a personal vendetta to edit a video such that remarks are made out of context and as such might lose there intended meaning.[/p][/quote]It's not worth worrying about if people do some "creative" editing. What's the worst that can happen? A few people see it on youtube and either agree or disagree with it. Local council politics isn't likely to go viral. Live streaming of meetings, direct to youtube is the best solution to that problem, anyway. Abh59 said exactly the same thing a few posts up. That way, at least, the raw footage is always available for comparison. Councillors are politicians, though. Not everybody is going to agree with them all the time and sometimes there is going to be public backlash. It doesn't help when some councillors treat the public as if they were subordinates. Only adds fuel to the fire, in my opinion. They should just deal with it and get over it. For the Mayor to play the victim card, by claiming human rights breaches, is an insult to the millions of people of people who genuinely are on the receiving end of horrible, human rights abuse. I bet if you asked any of them if they could choose between an out of context video of themselves or a day in their life, they'd choose the video every time.[/p][/quote]True, but creative editing in the wrong hands can be extremely destructive and while I don't support anything the council have done (current or past) I can understand their point of view when you consider the seriously personal attacks they have received (justified or not) that someone might twist their words further - its not a big deal to cut a few words off the start or end of a sentence to create a completely different impression. Considering the lack of respect by some here for the laws on what you can and cannot say in print I wouldn't put it past some of them to do something like that.[/p][/quote]I don't think it's edited video council need to worry about. Based on their history, no editing is really necessary. Like I said, live streaming to youtube with public access to recordings of meetings will solve any out of context stuff from doing any damage. The council should do this themselves, otherwise, what's stopping them from claiming unedited footage as edited to save face on something? The argument works both ways. Don't you think the issue should be more about creating a system of checks and balances? I get the impression, by the mayor's statement, he's more interested in being able to discredit any opposition, rather than embracing change. If any councillor doesn't want to be filmed, maybe they should consider their options as to whether they should continue in the position.[/p][/quote]Four o clubs one councilor who said he would not be filmed subsequently resigned once it was confirmed that filming would be allowed ,others also stated they did not want or would not be filmed .With 54 objections to the accounts particularly after voting to accept the accounts despite the fact that they had never been given a copy of the accounts to study I would suggest they all should consider their options . Ian-Holt Roberts
  • Score: -1

7:00pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Ian-Holt Roberts says...

I imagine there will be problems should filming commence of the council meetings ,the main problem will be the sound .regardless of whether the meeting s are held int the main chamber or the anti rooms it will be extremely difficult to pick up every word that is spoken .I can well imagine the councilors using this as a means of suggesting editing by the ones doing the filming .
I imagine there will be problems should filming commence of the council meetings ,the main problem will be the sound .regardless of whether the meeting s are held int the main chamber or the anti rooms it will be extremely difficult to pick up every word that is spoken .I can well imagine the councilors using this as a means of suggesting editing by the ones doing the filming . Ian-Holt Roberts
  • Score: -2

8:54pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Little Green Man says...

Ian-Holt Roberts wrote:
jimmy k wrote:
glad to see paranoia is still about in a certain facebook group,as you said lgm you didn't make any comment aboutcavetown just a common sense general point.ive visited that keighley forum site on facebook 99%topics on there were about ktc put on by the usual half dozen suspects,it should be called cavetown(2),at least it stops them clogging up and ruining these threads.
Jimmy K paranoia most certainly does not apply to myself simply because I am not a member of cavetown or the Keighley Forum site which is as I understand it open to any one with a view to comment on .If as you say 99% of the topics are about KTC put on by the usual half a dozen then fine that is what they want to discuss. You could easily say that it is the same on this site with half a dozen people in the main commenting the most .it is not to long ago that one of the regular's was adding posts on this site simply to have the number of posts go over the 400 mark. I totally agree that threads were clogged up and ruined ,but by both parties ,this resulted in the neutrals either switching off or alternatively joining in and causing mischief .For the past few months the threads on this site have not involved the KTC resulting in a drop of comments on the forum you ask to ask why ,is it because the threads are boring ?. With regards LGM who I enjoy reading his comments I believe he knows exactly what he is saying and how it will be interpreted and as such replied accordingly .
You shouldn't make assumptions Ian, I made a general point that's all.
[quote][p][bold]Ian-Holt Roberts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmy k[/bold] wrote: glad to see paranoia is still about in a certain facebook group,as you said lgm you didn't make any comment aboutcavetown just a common sense general point.ive visited that keighley forum site on facebook 99%topics on there were about ktc put on by the usual half dozen suspects,it should be called cavetown(2),at least it stops them clogging up and ruining these threads.[/p][/quote]Jimmy K paranoia most certainly does not apply to myself simply because I am not a member of cavetown or the Keighley Forum site which is as I understand it open to any one with a view to comment on .If as you say 99% of the topics are about KTC put on by the usual half a dozen then fine that is what they want to discuss. You could easily say that it is the same on this site with half a dozen people in the main commenting the most .it is not to long ago that one of the regular's was adding posts on this site simply to have the number of posts go over the 400 mark. I totally agree that threads were clogged up and ruined ,but by both parties ,this resulted in the neutrals either switching off or alternatively joining in and causing mischief .For the past few months the threads on this site have not involved the KTC resulting in a drop of comments on the forum you ask to ask why ,is it because the threads are boring ?. With regards LGM who I enjoy reading his comments I believe he knows exactly what he is saying and how it will be interpreted and as such replied accordingly .[/p][/quote]You shouldn't make assumptions Ian, I made a general point that's all. Little Green Man
  • Score: 0

4:29pm Tue 22 Jul 14

OUT WITH CAVETOWN says...

See the. "Family " are still at it .
Personal & Vindictive Campaign .
Was watching Camper Van crash the trollies in Morrisons today shame he appears to be the sensible Cavetowner.
See the. "Family " are still at it . Personal & Vindictive Campaign . Was watching Camper Van crash the trollies in Morrisons today shame he appears to be the sensible Cavetowner. OUT WITH CAVETOWN
  • Score: 0

4:06am Wed 23 Jul 14

Always a 708 Skinhead says...

I had wondered what owc was upto. Seems hanging around carparks can be added to relieving himself in toilets with the aid of a wet lettuce csn be added to his list of hobbies.
I had wondered what owc was upto. Seems hanging around carparks can be added to relieving himself in toilets with the aid of a wet lettuce csn be added to his list of hobbies. Always a 708 Skinhead
  • Score: -3

4:06am Wed 23 Jul 14

Always a 708 Skinhead says...

I had wondered what owc was upto. Seems hanging around carparks can be added to relieving himself in toilets with the aid of a wet lettuce csn be added to his list of hobbies.
I had wondered what owc was upto. Seems hanging around carparks can be added to relieving himself in toilets with the aid of a wet lettuce csn be added to his list of hobbies. Always a 708 Skinhead
  • Score: -1

9:22am Wed 23 Jul 14

OUT WITH CAVETOWN says...

Always a 708 Skinhead wrote:
I had wondered what owc was upto. Seems hanging around carparks can be added to relieving himself in toilets with the aid of a wet lettuce csn be added to his list of hobbies.
Talking about wet lettuce .
A Cavetowner with the dangly bits breaks rank .
Alas not part of the "family" but that is to be expected .

Ladies and Gentlemen, I do hereby announce that I shall form a new political party and stand for the May 2015 GE for Keighley & Ilkley constituency. My name is **** XXXXX and my new party is called the Yorkshire Tea Party and I invite you all to join. I have a written manifesto.
[quote][p][bold]Always a 708 Skinhead[/bold] wrote: I had wondered what owc was upto. Seems hanging around carparks can be added to relieving himself in toilets with the aid of a wet lettuce csn be added to his list of hobbies.[/p][/quote]Talking about wet lettuce . A Cavetowner with the dangly bits breaks rank . Alas not part of the "family" but that is to be expected . Ladies and Gentlemen, I do hereby announce that I shall form a new political party and stand for the May 2015 GE for Keighley & Ilkley constituency. My name is **** XXXXX and my new party is called the Yorkshire Tea Party and I invite you all to join. I have a written manifesto. OUT WITH CAVETOWN
  • Score: 1

9:31am Wed 23 Jul 14

MarkPullen says...

OUT WITH CAVETOWN wrote:
Always a 708 Skinhead wrote:
I had wondered what owc was upto. Seems hanging around carparks can be added to relieving himself in toilets with the aid of a wet lettuce csn be added to his list of hobbies.
Talking about wet lettuce .
A Cavetowner with the dangly bits breaks rank .
Alas not part of the "family" but that is to be expected .

Ladies and Gentlemen, I do hereby announce that I shall form a new political party and stand for the May 2015 GE for Keighley & Ilkley constituency. My name is **** XXXXX and my new party is called the Yorkshire Tea Party and I invite you all to join. I have a written manifesto.
Another candidate that'll gain more votes than a certain PPC who I won't name but will say has a proven track record of failure.
[quote][p][bold]OUT WITH CAVETOWN[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Always a 708 Skinhead[/bold] wrote: I had wondered what owc was upto. Seems hanging around carparks can be added to relieving himself in toilets with the aid of a wet lettuce csn be added to his list of hobbies.[/p][/quote]Talking about wet lettuce . A Cavetowner with the dangly bits breaks rank . Alas not part of the "family" but that is to be expected . Ladies and Gentlemen, I do hereby announce that I shall form a new political party and stand for the May 2015 GE for Keighley & Ilkley constituency. My name is **** XXXXX and my new party is called the Yorkshire Tea Party and I invite you all to join. I have a written manifesto.[/p][/quote]Another candidate that'll gain more votes than a certain PPC who I won't name but will say has a proven track record of failure. MarkPullen
  • Score: 0

12:32pm Wed 23 Jul 14

Kingchaser says...

Wasn't it back in March or April that the auditors carried out their investigation? Wasn't the intended publication date of their findings supposed to be June? Doesn't seem to me that they have found anything which needs urgent attention?
Wasn't it back in March or April that the auditors carried out their investigation? Wasn't the intended publication date of their findings supposed to be June? Doesn't seem to me that they have found anything which needs urgent attention? Kingchaser
  • Score: -2

1:25pm Wed 23 Jul 14

Always a 708 Skinhead says...

Kingchaser wrote:
Wasn't it back in March or April that the auditors carried out their investigation? Wasn't the intended publication date of their findings supposed to be June? Doesn't seem to me that they have found anything which needs urgent attention?
Yes Kingchaser. There is no doubt that is exactly what the continued delay means.
'Nothing to worry about at KTC' councillors.
The relentless self promotion via the Keighley News coupled with the illustrious Tripadvisor Award have swayed the External Auditors and convinced them that all is well.
Good show chaps. As you were.
[quote][p][bold]Kingchaser[/bold] wrote: Wasn't it back in March or April that the auditors carried out their investigation? Wasn't the intended publication date of their findings supposed to be June? Doesn't seem to me that they have found anything which needs urgent attention?[/p][/quote]Yes Kingchaser. There is no doubt that is exactly what the continued delay means. 'Nothing to worry about at KTC' councillors. The relentless self promotion via the Keighley News coupled with the illustrious Tripadvisor Award have swayed the External Auditors and convinced them that all is well. Good show chaps. As you were. Always a 708 Skinhead
  • Score: 2

2:54pm Wed 23 Jul 14

Kingchaser says...

Always a 708 Skinhead wrote:
Kingchaser wrote:
Wasn't it back in March or April that the auditors carried out their investigation? Wasn't the intended publication date of their findings supposed to be June? Doesn't seem to me that they have found anything which needs urgent attention?
Yes Kingchaser. There is no doubt that is exactly what the continued delay means.
'Nothing to worry about at KTC' councillors.
The relentless self promotion via the Keighley News coupled with the illustrious Tripadvisor Award have swayed the External Auditors and convinced them that all is well.
Good show chaps. As you were.
Hook, Line and Sinker.
[quote][p][bold]Always a 708 Skinhead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kingchaser[/bold] wrote: Wasn't it back in March or April that the auditors carried out their investigation? Wasn't the intended publication date of their findings supposed to be June? Doesn't seem to me that they have found anything which needs urgent attention?[/p][/quote]Yes Kingchaser. There is no doubt that is exactly what the continued delay means. 'Nothing to worry about at KTC' councillors. The relentless self promotion via the Keighley News coupled with the illustrious Tripadvisor Award have swayed the External Auditors and convinced them that all is well. Good show chaps. As you were.[/p][/quote]Hook, Line and Sinker. Kingchaser
  • Score: 0

5:34pm Wed 23 Jul 14

jimmy k says...

i'm confused did have the auditors produced their report or not?
i'm confused did have the auditors produced their report or not? jimmy k
  • Score: -1

7:47pm Wed 23 Jul 14

Little Green Man says...

Kingchaser wrote:
Always a 708 Skinhead wrote:
Kingchaser wrote:
Wasn't it back in March or April that the auditors carried out their investigation? Wasn't the intended publication date of their findings supposed to be June? Doesn't seem to me that they have found anything which needs urgent attention?
Yes Kingchaser. There is no doubt that is exactly what the continued delay means.
'Nothing to worry about at KTC' councillors.
The relentless self promotion via the Keighley News coupled with the illustrious Tripadvisor Award have swayed the External Auditors and convinced them that all is well.
Good show chaps. As you were.
Hook, Line and Sinker.
Hook line and stinker?
[quote][p][bold]Kingchaser[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Always a 708 Skinhead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kingchaser[/bold] wrote: Wasn't it back in March or April that the auditors carried out their investigation? Wasn't the intended publication date of their findings supposed to be June? Doesn't seem to me that they have found anything which needs urgent attention?[/p][/quote]Yes Kingchaser. There is no doubt that is exactly what the continued delay means. 'Nothing to worry about at KTC' councillors. The relentless self promotion via the Keighley News coupled with the illustrious Tripadvisor Award have swayed the External Auditors and convinced them that all is well. Good show chaps. As you were.[/p][/quote]Hook, Line and Sinker.[/p][/quote]Hook line and stinker? Little Green Man
  • Score: -1

7:47pm Wed 23 Jul 14

Little Green Man says...

Kingchaser wrote:
Always a 708 Skinhead wrote:
Kingchaser wrote:
Wasn't it back in March or April that the auditors carried out their investigation? Wasn't the intended publication date of their findings supposed to be June? Doesn't seem to me that they have found anything which needs urgent attention?
Yes Kingchaser. There is no doubt that is exactly what the continued delay means.
'Nothing to worry about at KTC' councillors.
The relentless self promotion via the Keighley News coupled with the illustrious Tripadvisor Award have swayed the External Auditors and convinced them that all is well.
Good show chaps. As you were.
Hook, Line and Sinker.
Hook line and stinker?
[quote][p][bold]Kingchaser[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Always a 708 Skinhead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kingchaser[/bold] wrote: Wasn't it back in March or April that the auditors carried out their investigation? Wasn't the intended publication date of their findings supposed to be June? Doesn't seem to me that they have found anything which needs urgent attention?[/p][/quote]Yes Kingchaser. There is no doubt that is exactly what the continued delay means. 'Nothing to worry about at KTC' councillors. The relentless self promotion via the Keighley News coupled with the illustrious Tripadvisor Award have swayed the External Auditors and convinced them that all is well. Good show chaps. As you were.[/p][/quote]Hook, Line and Sinker.[/p][/quote]Hook line and stinker? Little Green Man
  • Score: -3

7:35pm Fri 25 Jul 14

Four-O-Clubs says...

jimmy k wrote:
i'm confused did have the auditors produced their report or not?
As far as I know, it was meant to be out in June, but has been delayed. So nah it hasn't come through yet. If there was nothing of interest, you'd think it would be over quickly and painlessly. We'll see though. Only time will tell. I wouldn't want to be councils shoes right now, that's for sure. Every day longer has got to add to the stress levels, unless they're in denial. Depends how sociopathic they are lol.
[quote][p][bold]jimmy k[/bold] wrote: i'm confused did have the auditors produced their report or not?[/p][/quote]As far as I know, it was meant to be out in June, but has been delayed. So nah it hasn't come through yet. If there was nothing of interest, you'd think it would be over quickly and painlessly. We'll see though. Only time will tell. I wouldn't want to be councils shoes right now, that's for sure. Every day longer has got to add to the stress levels, unless they're in denial. Depends how sociopathic they are lol. Four-O-Clubs
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree