Maybe he is going to join Lucy Coward (ex-LBC breakfast show newsreader) over there.

In that case all the cliquey foamar stuff go to the general discussion thread because it's not LBC related and "rules is rules, like it or lump it". I expect the self-appointed moderators will be reporting those posts to the DigitalSpy police because "if the thread goes off-topic, we risk losing the thread altogether."

It's the LBC Chit-Chat thread.

'Chitchat':

Roget: small talk, gossip,

Cambridge Dictionary: informal conversation about unimportant matters.

Oxford Dictionary: to talk of inconsequential matters.

Couldn't find a single definition of it as heavyweight political punditry.

One half of the posters on this thread seem to think that the other half are all joined-at-the-hip, best of friends, cliquey and non-welcoming to new posters. The other half think that everyone else is a mixture of anyone on the far left of Dennis Skinner and anyone on the far right of Margaret Thatcher (substitute any name you like that fits the criteria depending on how you are feeling on a certain day). That is genuinely something someone said to me the other day after the first foray onto this thread, it quite upset me to hear it and I wonder if this is a truth universally acknowledged

But how is the cliquey foamar stuff related to LBC? I think some people are being very selective about what should be allowed on here, you even chose to highlight "chit chat" rather than LBC, so do I assume that non-LBC related stuff is ok on here?

I've got no idea what they mean. I only joined the thread a couple of months back, and I've never found any problem with it. Obviously long-term posters know each other better, that's fine with me, but I've had a lot more courtesy and sensible discussion on this thread than I've had on many others. It's a public forum, for goodness sake, if you post on it, people will sometimes disagree with you. If posters don't like that, they'd best confine their opinions to their intimate family circle.

All right - it's the LBC Chit Chat thread

This is getting very childish but I'm happy to keep it going if you are. Why don't we reset to where we were a few months ago and carry as normal?

I posted a while back and true to my style/bad style and uncensored views got a ban.It seems a few on here are a bit precious and get offended when a post does not fit in with their way of thinking.Reminds me of the sort who because they go to the same pub for years have to always sit in the same chair and lose it if someone else sits in it.:yawn:Not sure if it's an age thing or perhaps some of them should get out more.A sensible post or not so sensible post about LBC would have to include all topics and politics is one of them.As long as bad language is not used let everyone have a view...I enjoy Susan Bookbinder for the time she is on yet some on here make comments which seem very personal...Fine,but don't moan if it comes back in your direction...Meanwhile ID? Really????:yawn::yawn::yawn:

Jenny Bore-net coming back?:yawn:

Their point was they found the animosity for fellow posters beyond the scope of a public forum discussion.

Personally I have never had a problem myself, it was the view of someone who wandered in here ..

Pot, kettle, black?

LBC is it losing the plot ?

They should try some of the Discussion threads if they think this one's bad.

I have no interest in carrying this on; I only wanted to make the point of the inconsistency of banning comment on issues that are discussed on LBC whilst happily allowing endless posts on other non-LBC stuff that is only of interest to a small inner circle on this thread. It never bothered me previously, I just ignored those posts, but I do wonder what motivates someone to report one type of post because they think it's not LBC related but is happy with others that by any stretch of the imagination have nothing to do with the station or it's output.

Or the Dr Who thread!

Yes you must be right . Hope he's swotted up on all the great composer goss !

You can't possibly compare the occasional one-line post about a long running thread joke to a 200+ word analysis of the merits of PIP versus DLA. or 300+ words on the political leaning of the BBC. I'm not surprised visitors are frightened off!

You'd think that TV critic Kevin O'Sullivan would know how to pronounce Richard Briers surname.

Dare i say it... I quite enjoyed Petrie today. It's the first time i have really listened to her and ok she was banging on about benefits as she does a lot but her arguments were solid and not all against benefits claimants. I will certainly be listening to her again.

Of course

Who's been reporting posts?

I didn't read either of those which is usually my approach regarding posts that don't interest me. If people want to chat about something they think is relevant then that's fine, let them and anyone who is interested can read them and those that aren't can skip over them and instead post something they find interesting.


I don't know but I suspect someone did which is what prompted the DigitalSpy police to post a warning on this thread.

Well, before anyone points the finger, it wasn't me!!

What is a Foamar? If it's not against the rules to ask.

It maybe - I'll check !!!!

I think if you think the word 'anorak' then you won't be far wrong. I think it came about from FM (listener). Else it is people foaming at the mouth about controversial subjects