Parking Down By 8,000 At Country Parks
January 13, 2019 at 1:23 am #161740
Funnily enough Plaid have been blamed for leaking the numbers. So I imagine there’s more than a few councillors / officers etc… less than happy behind the scenes of Clr Bithell has kicked off publicly about it.
So many emotive topics in Wrexham.January 13, 2019 at 11:51 am #161741
Blimey,throw a six to start,it’s still just a walk..
It’s not just a quick walk for everyone in Llay and surrounding areas. The Gresford Road estates are quite a long walk and the new estates will be even further. People walking their dogs want to walk in the park and NOT to the park. People with young children have to take them as it is not just across the road and is to far to let them go by them selves. The WCBC should pay for and maintain the play areas or otherwise not charge for parking.January 13, 2019 at 6:45 pm #161768
Katy, I apologize for thinking that you are a dog walker. I can assure you that I an not a councillor or a member of any political party. In fact I can’t get my head around why people stand as independent councillors and then join a group and vote accordingly. Surely that’s not being independent, but I digress. I also have no connection with the council. Someone down our road works for them I presume as I’ve seen a van left outside overnight but I don’t know what they do, I just say hello if I ever pass them in the street.
I’m just someone who’s fed up with false statemens and stating them as facts. If Childoubt had said parking down 6,000, you wouldn’t have heard a dickybird from me. Although wrong I’d allow rounding up ( I presume you know what rounding up means). But they couldn’t and just keep digging a hole for themselves.
Now back to you. Whats with the personal attacks against me. I struggle with this, I struggle with that, I lack the intelligence…. which is quite laughable but also sad that you should stoop so low. Says a lot about you I’m afraid. When you’re losing an argument etc….
I have no idea why you bring up percentages either which I find strange as until then this topic didn’t mention them. So I will ask you the same question as I asked Childoubt, can you point me to where it says that parking is down by 8,000 ? I have a feeling I will be waiting an awfully long time.
Edit, I do know why you brought up percentages. You know that the 8,000 figure doesn’t exist anywhere, apart from in this topic’s headline, so deflect the question, bring something else in and try and discredit me by questioning my intelligence.
And when you show me where this figure is perhaps you could be so good as to say what connection you have with a council and/or Childoubt. I bid you good day.January 13, 2019 at 9:34 pm #161773
Although wrong I’d allow rounding up ( I presume you know what rounding up means). But they couldn’t and just keep digging a hole for themselves.
Now back to you. Whats with the personal attacks against me. I struggle with this, I struggle with that, I lack the intelligence…. which is quite laughable but also sad that you should stoop so low. Says a lot about you I’m afraid
LOL, condescending, aloof and positively rude.
Of course you’re nothing to do with the council…….
P.S. It’s ChillDoubt, note the double l.January 13, 2019 at 10:56 pm #161774
zingerParticipantJanuary 14, 2019 at 9:14 am #161782
BigBrother: The essence of this debate is that ChillDoubt has said visitor/parking numbers are down since parking charges were implemented. You argued that they were down REGARDLESS (your choice of emphasis) of charging. This was not true based on the figures being debated that were clear for you to see. You say you are ‘fed up with false statemens(sic) and stating them as facts’, but you are happy to do this yourself.
If you want to argue around accidentally using the word parking instead of visitors in the title, to avoid and deflect from the essence of the debate, then good for you. If it were possible to correct thread titles, then i am sure ChillDoubt would update it to keep you happy. Will you update your inaccurate replies also?
Percentages are essential to properly understand differences in figures.January 14, 2019 at 10:42 am #161785
Although using your own flawed logic that charging was only introduced half way through Q2, this would create a total reduction in cars parking of (4829/2=2414)+5920 = 8334. So using your own logic, and your gracious acceptance of rounding, ChillDoubts headline is in fact totally accurate.January 14, 2019 at 8:42 pm #161819
Councillor Katy, finally, albeit through gritted teeth, you agree that I was correct all along. ChillDoubt’s heading is wrong. That’s all I wanted to hear. If ChillDoubt had said they had made a mistake it would have been fine, matter closed, but they didn’t. They tried to justify that they were correct, even though WE both know that they were wrong. Which brings us to the crux of the matter. Spreading false information, whether accidentally or not, should be brought to people’s attention which was my only intention. If not it can then be seen as being true which leads us down a slippery path, you only have to see what’s happening across the pond.
Matter closed, or is it ?
Because, Councillor Katy, you now come back with figures that you have manipulated to prove your point. Instead of using one quarter’s figures you have actually used one full quarter plus half of another quarter’s figures to get somewhere near 8,000. It would be laughable but for the fact that I presume you may hold a position of trust. This topic is really just something rather petty, a good job it’s not something important. I find it strange as you come across as someone who believes that they are good with figures so how on earth could you get something so simple so wrong ?
While I’m on a roll I note that once again katy you try and ridicule me in a post, a sign that I am correct if ever there was one, but unfortunately you’re not very good at it. If you’re going to quote me I suggest that you use actual quotation marks, not single ones, if you wish to be correct. There should also have been a space before you used “(sic)”. You have to laugh, trying to emphasize ONE spelling mistake but in doing so making two grammatical errors yourself. You’re a gift that keeps on giving. For future reference, when referring to yourself in a sentence it should be “I” and not “i”. We can all be clever if we want to.
ChillDoubt, once again, apologies with the spelling. I am confused though. If you look back at the previous posts you will see that I haven’t said that you struggle with this, struggle with that, lack the intelligence, etc. In fact, if you look properly you will see that it is katy who has posted that about me. No apologies necessary. I took katy’s slights as a desperate measure on their behalf. They’re not someone who’s company I would enjoy being in, that’s for sure. I need a drink, hot chocolate obviously. Hopefully this is the end of the topic.January 15, 2019 at 12:41 am #161835
ChillDoubt, once again, apologies with the spelling. I am confused though. If you look back at the previous posts you will see that I haven’t said that you struggle with this, struggle with that, lack the intelligence, etc. In fact, if you look properly you will see that it is katy who has posted that about me.
I know they weren’t aimed at me, I was just pointing out your general condescending manner and attitude with all posters.
Furthermore, if you’re going to hand out grammar/spelling lessons you might want to look at some of the ‘Americanised’ words and their selling that have been evident in your posts.
Just sayin’.January 15, 2019 at 11:28 am #161838
BigBrother: I hear that taking regular walks in the countryside can be good for mental health (you might have to pay for the privilege though)
The parking charges came in half way through one quarter, so you can only use half of that quarter to get accurate results.
I think I have really touched a nerve suggesting you may be a councillor. Are you going to tell us who you really are?
Complaint? Please use the report post tools or contact Wrexham.com .
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.