Drainage: The water has to go somewhere!

This forum is for Garden Law problems that don't fit into the other categories. Please treat it with respect.

Moderator: Angelisle

Post Reply
Rosenberg
Posts: 286
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:08 pm

Re: Neighbour's quadcopter camera over my garden

Post by Rosenberg » Sun Jun 23, 2019 1:56 pm

Alyson: I was suggesting that both arborlad and myself should call it a day. Consequently, I've been absent from this forum since 4th June. Unfortunately, though, it seems that arborlad and co. can't control themselves, so I thought I'd sign in again to say a friendly hello to everyone who has perpetuated this thread (and others) while I've been gone. (Sorry if that annoys you, but, hey, Rosenberg happens!)

In viewtopic.php?f=6&t=8490&start=15 arborlad made some further silly accusations:
arborlad wrote: One of the biggest problems you're going to have in convincing me you are in the right and the neighbour is in the wrong, is your own wrongdoing started long before you started this thread - before you moved in - before you even purchased and in various ways and in varying degrees - is continuing to this day!!!
I'm not going to have a big problem, arborlad, because, quite simply, I don't need to convince you of anything. You seem to think you are sitting in judgement here. You aren't; you are an insignificant individual who seems to spend his days obsessively logging in to an online forum in a desperate search for some kind of respect or validation, whilst simultaneously being terrified that someone will get the better of him. Is that why you resort to deliberately misreading (to put it generously) your perceived foe's posts, and concocting ludicrously unfounded accusations?

A case in point is the second half of your sentence. You know nothing of what happened before I moved in to my current home, before I purchased it, or before I started the thread you referenced. Yet you pretend that you do so that you can accuse me of some unspecified "wrongdoing" at that time. That's very sad and transparent behaviour, arborlad.
Last edited by Rosenberg on Sun Jun 23, 2019 2:05 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Rosenberg
Posts: 286
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:08 pm

Re: Neighbour's quadcopter camera over my garden

Post by Rosenberg » Sun Jun 23, 2019 1:58 pm

Morgan Sweet wrote: It is a pleasure to read the posts from Rosenberg since they are all written with a command of the English language. May I suggest some of the problems he is experiencing with one particular forum contributor is due to the latter's probable ability to read written English but inability to comprehend the written English language. This clear lack of comprehension leads to inaccurate assumptions.
Thank you Morgan Sweet. Regarding your other comment about not wanting me as a neighbour, I don't know enough about you to reciprocate that sentiment (or not) - but I haven't taken offence anyway. Sadly, not everyone wants a naturist from a minority ethnic, sexual and religious background living next door to them, whatever the quality of said naturist's written English.


In a reply to Morgan Sweet:
arborlad wrote: There's a dwindling number of people in the Rosenberg Appreciation Society - you are one, Rosenberg another and the third selfimploded and she is no more!!!...
None of my real-life friends has "selfimploded [sic]" recently, so I guess you are referring to 'nothingtodowithme' - a forum member who agreed with me once several years ago about something not-very-important that I don't now recall. Why can't you just let it go arborlad? People really aren't ganging up on you!


In a reply to arborlad:
Morgan Sweet wrote: ...You are beginning to show an element in your responses of a persecutory delusion.
I was thinking much the same.

Rosenberg
Posts: 286
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:08 pm

Re: Neighbour's quadcopter camera over my garden

Post by Rosenberg » Sun Jun 23, 2019 2:00 pm

Clifford Pope wrote: ... his sentence ... has an un-English ring to it. Perhaps he is American, or watches a lot of American films - in this country I think we would say "as if" rather than "like".
Only if you're one of the proletariat, CP! I might say "as though" in that context, but never "as if" - I don't live on an East London council estate! Nevertheless, I'm flattered that my favourite amateur psychoanalyst (re: your earlier, now deleted, post) has chosen to speculate upon my ethnic origin as well. Your conclusion, CP, based upon a single word that I used in a single clause of a single sentence in a single post of a single thread, is astounding. It is also, unsurprisingly, wrong. I'm not American and I don't watch an inordinate number of American films. Have another wild guess. You never know: maybe it'll be third time lucky (but I doubt it).


In a reply to Morgan Sweet:
Collaborate wrote: Given how appallingly rude OP quickly became in this thread your choosing to comment on his use of English and your statement that you thought his posts a pleasure to read is beyond comprehension.

Presumably if Mein Kampf was well written you'd have found that a pleasure to read too.
I wondered how long it would be before someone compared me to Hitler. Amusingly ironic, don't you think.

liveinpeace
Posts: 153
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2017 11:29 am
Number of Posts per Page: 10
Number of topics per page: 10

Re: Neighbour's quadcopter camera over my garden

Post by liveinpeace » Sun Jun 23, 2019 2:11 pm

the only reason I would not want you as a neighbour is because you are coming across as rather unhinged.

Rosenberg
Posts: 286
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:08 pm

Re: Neighbour's quadcopter camera over my garden

Post by Rosenberg » Sun Jun 23, 2019 2:44 pm

liveinpeace wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 2:11 pm
the only reason I would not want you as a neighbour is because you are coming across as rather unhinged.
Can you substantiate that accusation? Please be as specific as you can.

PS. I'm glad to know it's the "only reason" (very PC of you - well done!).

arborlad
Posts: 8394
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: Neighbour's quadcopter camera over my garden

Post by arborlad » Sun Jun 23, 2019 3:10 pm

Rosenberg wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 1:58 pm
, so I guess you are referring to 'nothingtodowithme' - a forum member who agreed with me once several years ago about something not-very-important that I don't now recall. Why can't you just let it go arborlad? People really aren't ganging up on you!



I feel quite sure the OP of that thread wont share that view - thankfully there were better people than you to help her!!!

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=19456
arborlad

smile...it confuses people

Rosenberg
Posts: 286
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:08 pm

Re: Neighbour's quadcopter camera over my garden

Post by Rosenberg » Sun Jun 23, 2019 3:22 pm

arborlad wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 3:10 pm
Rosenberg wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 1:58 pm
, so I guess you are referring to 'nothingtodowithme' - a forum member who agreed with me once several years ago about something not-very-important that I don't now recall. Why can't you just let it go arborlad? People really aren't ganging up on you!
I feel quite sure the OP of that thread wont share that view - thankfully there were better people than you to help her!!!

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=19456
Thanks for the link arborlad; it has saved me doing a manual search. Now that I've refreshed my memory on this topic I can confirm that a Daily Mail-reading middle-Englander panicking because some rough-looking types wanted to know the time is definitely "not-very-important". If there was anything genuinely important to panic about, the thing to do would have been to call the police there and then, not post about it later on a Garden Law forum.

arborlad
Posts: 8394
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: Neighbour's quadcopter camera over my garden

Post by arborlad » Sun Jun 23, 2019 4:45 pm

Rosenberg wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 3:22 pm
.................. I can confirm that a Daily Mail-reading middle-Englander panicking because some rough-looking types wanted to know the time is definitely "not-very-important".



Yes - I think you are deluded enough to actually believe yourself. The motive of those two scrotes was not even remotely connected to ascertaining the time :roll:
arborlad

smile...it confuses people

Rosenberg
Posts: 286
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:08 pm

Re: Neighbour's quadcopter camera over my garden

Post by Rosenberg » Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:29 pm

arborlad wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 4:45 pm
Rosenberg wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 3:22 pm
.................. I can confirm that a Daily Mail-reading middle-Englander panicking because some rough-looking types wanted to know the time is definitely "not-very-important".
Yes - I think you are deluded enough to actually believe yourself. The motive of those two scrotes was not even remotely connected to ascertaining the time :roll:
It seems you are the deluded one if you believe you can ascertain the intent of two people you have never met from nothing more than hearsay. That thread's OP didn't say a crime had occurred, just that these two people had asked for work and asked for the correct time.

Nevertheless "Judge Arborlad" has found them guilty of the most heinous crime of being "scrotes", together with everything that entails. Arborlad, you're sounding more and more like Despair, whom you frequently chastise for exactly the same kind of overly-judgemental response.

You really shouldn't be surprised that any right-thinking person would regard you (and many others on this forum) as snotty, prejudiced, Daily Mail-reading members of the Curtain-Twitching Middle-England Residents' Association.

Until such time that the OP reports that these two people have come back and actually engaged in a criminal act, it would seem only reasonable to reserve judgement.

arborlad
Posts: 8394
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: Neighbour's quadcopter camera over my garden

Post by arborlad » Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:37 pm

Rosenberg wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:29 pm

Until such time that the OP reports that these two people have come back and actually engaged in a criminal act, it would seem only reasonable to reserve judgement.



...............ever heard of crime prevention???....................you've lost the plot!!!!....................or perhaps the reason the OP didn't have to return and report a crime was she listened to wise words from knowledgeable people - not your piffle!!
Last edited by arborlad on Sun Jun 23, 2019 7:02 pm, edited 2 times in total.
arborlad

smile...it confuses people

Rosenberg
Posts: 286
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:08 pm

Re: Neighbour's quadcopter camera over my garden

Post by Rosenberg » Sun Jun 23, 2019 7:00 pm

arborlad wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:37 pm
Rosenberg wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:29 pm

Until such time that the OP reports that these two people have come back and actually engaged in a criminal act, it would seem only reasonable to reserve judgement.

...............ever heard of crime prevention???....................you've lost the plot!!!!
I've heard of "intelligence-led policing", if that's what you mean. Where would your approach fit in?

Fortunately, the English legal system is not based upon the premise of "arrest everyone who looks a bit dodgy". As I have said several times before, if the OP was in genuine fear of a crime, she should have called the police immediately. The fact that she thought it more appropriate to wait and then report it to "Judge Arborlad" on gardenlaw.co.uk, should tell you just how unimportant she really thought it was.

Why don't you approach Channel Five with a programme idea? You could jump on the day-time TV-court bandwaggon with "Judge Arborlad", a comedy figure who comes up with unjust, yet hilarious, judgements on real-world cases - you know, a bit like Judge Rinder, but incorporating no element of the law whatsoever. I'd watch it for all the times you'd don your little black death-sentence cap. Or you could try ITV: I hear they are looking for a replacement programme to suit the Jeremy Kyle demographic.
Last edited by Rosenberg on Sun Jun 23, 2019 7:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

arborlad
Posts: 8394
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: Neighbour's quadcopter camera over my garden

Post by arborlad » Sun Jun 23, 2019 7:06 pm

Rosenberg wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 7:00 pm
arborlad wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:37 pm
Rosenberg wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:29 pm

Until such time that the OP reports that these two people have come back and actually engaged in a criminal act, it would seem only reasonable to reserve judgement.



...............ever heard of crime prevention???....................you've lost the plot!!!!....................or perhaps the reason the OP didn't have to return and report a crime was she listened to wise words from knowledgeable people - not your piffle!!
Fortunately, the English legal system is not based upon the premise of "arrest everyone who looks a bit dodgy". As I have said several times before, if the OP was in genuine fear of a crime, she should have called the police immediately. The fact that she thought it more appropriate to wait and then report it to "Judge Arborlad" on gardenlaw.co.uk, should tell you just how unimportant she really thought it was.

Why don't you approach Channel Five with a programme idea? You could jump on the day-time TV-court bandwaggon with "Judge Arborlad", a comedy figure who comes up with unjust, yet hilarious, judgements on real-world cases - you know, a bit like Judge Rinder, but incorporating no element of the law whatsoever. I'd watch it for all the times you'd don your little black death-sentence cap. Or you could try ITV: I hear they are looking for a replacement programme to suit the Jeremy Kyle demographic. You'd fit in perfectly.
arborlad

smile...it confuses people

Rosenberg
Posts: 286
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:08 pm

Re: Neighbour's quadcopter camera over my garden

Post by Rosenberg » Sun Jun 23, 2019 7:13 pm

arborlad wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 7:06 pm
Rosenberg wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 7:00 pm
arborlad wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:37 pm

...............ever heard of crime prevention???....................you've lost the plot!!!!....................or perhaps the reason the OP didn't have to return and report a crime was she listened to wise words from knowledgeable people - not your piffle!!
So you are quoting yourself and rewriting your own quotes at the same time. Are you drunk? You appear to be contradicting yourself.

Morgan Sweet
Posts: 278
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 7:47 pm

Re: Neighbour's quadcopter camera over my garden

Post by Morgan Sweet » Sun Jun 23, 2019 9:50 pm

Welcome back Rosenberg. The reason that I wrote I would prefer not to have you as a neighbour is due to nothing more than I hate having to listen to other people's music.

Your suggestions, however, that one particular poster could use his talents on the television medium of communication is quite perceptive.

Rosenberg
Posts: 286
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:08 pm

Re: Neighbour's quadcopter camera over my garden

Post by Rosenberg » Sun Jun 23, 2019 11:17 pm

Morgan Sweet wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 9:50 pm
Welcome back Rosenberg. The reason that I wrote I would prefer not to have you as a neighbour is due to nothing more than I hate having to listen to other people's music.

Your suggestions, however, that one particular poster could use his talents on the television medium of communication is quite perceptive.
Thanks for the welcome Morgan Sweet. I quite understand what you mean about about the music. Most people wouldn't like it. My son, who is no longer living with us, did want to play his music quite a lot (like many teenagers), but we tried to limit the use of his hi-fi/mixer, both in volume and frequency. It was only occasional, in fact, but I do understand that not knowing when it might start and how long it might continue is one of the most annoying aspects of a noise problem so we even tried to schedule it with the neighbour so the music didn't inconvenience him. Unfortunately, the neighbour was having none of it and created quite a fuss. When I mentioned the situation on the forum, certain members did a pick-and-mix job on what I'd said in order to exaggerate the problem and make out that I was being grossly unreasonable.

Not for the first (or probably last) time was I adjudged guilty by "his honour".

Post Reply