Length and frequency of postings

I have had a very busy week so far, and have only just  caught up with the postings on this site. Delays are created if individuals post often and at great length. Sometimes a long posting with expertise and new information is necessary and helpful but endless long postings saying similar things are not.

I will have to simply delete some long postings from people who have already written in on the topic. I do delete long postings with references to sites I do not know and have not the time to read, and long postings with questionable allegations about people, companies and institutions.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

46 Comments

  1. alan jutson
    Posted January 13, 2017 at 10:34 am | Permalink

    John

    Can only hope you are fully engaged (in the background perhaps) on driving some common sense solutions and requirements into the so called Brexit negotiations and Leave plan.

    I live in hope !

  2. ian wragg
    Posted January 13, 2017 at 10:49 am | Permalink

    Your very tolerant John especially as the majority who post on here are Brexiteers and frustrated with the governments lack of progress.
    You make some very salient points but sometimes appear to be a straw blowing in the wind when the government does diametrically opposite things too which are beneficial.
    The foreign aid budget is one example and the continued destruction of the armed forces .
    We have problems with the NHS and social care but continue to waste £billions on unnecessary projects abroad.
    Rationing social care whilst giving aid to nuclear powers is obscene.

  3. Anonymous
    Posted January 13, 2017 at 10:51 am | Permalink

    So long as you keep posting Newmania’s comments.

    No-one puts a better case as to why we were right to vote Leave. He also proves that there is a visceral contempt for this country’s working class among EU supporting folk.

    • Anonymous
      Posted January 14, 2017 at 12:42 am | Permalink

      https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jan/13/eu-negotiator-wants-special-deal-over-access-to-city-post-brexit

      A rare link from me. Perhaps the naysayers among us would like to read it.

      Now get behind your country !

      • libertarian
        Posted January 14, 2017 at 11:20 am | Permalink

        Exactly

        Oh and Snapchat have decided to locate their European HQ in London

        So lets recap Newmania, Sam Stoner, Ed Mahoney Peter v L etc etc

        Thats now the UK economy growing
        Economy grew 0.6% since July
        Employment at its highest ever 32 million
        Unemployment falling 4.8%
        Investment growing
        wages growing
        FTSE 100 up
        FTSE 250 up
        Construction is up index since July 56.1
        Extra £15billion of overseas investment in UK since Brexit vote
        Glaxo is investing a further £275m in UK
        Macdonalds is to create 5,000 new jobs
        Softbank is to create 3,000 new jobs

        400,000 new job vacancies added since Brexit vote

        The sectors with the biggest job vacancy rises since Brexit vote are
        Education & Training up 28% Accountancy up 24% Construction up 21%
        There has even been an 8% rise in City jobs !

        At the front of the queue for FTA’s with
        USA
        NZ
        India,
        Australia etc

        Facebook, Amazon, Google, Apple, Snapchat all relocating their HQ’s to London

        ( not one bank has moved any operations to anywhere in Europe)

        The EU needs a special deal to allow THEM access to the City of London

        Aside from Germany the UK paid more into the EU than the other 26 countries combined , someones in for a big financial shock when we leave!

        Do you know what, I think the EU is in BIG trouble and they really ought to try to negotiate nicely with the UK in case we abandon them completely

        • hefner
          Posted January 16, 2017 at 4:03 pm | Permalink

          You forgot: Sterling has dropped by 10-12-15 % and makes our exports so much more desirable, and as said by Ph. Hammond the UK might become more of a tax haven, and might even aim at reproducing for the UK the wealth distribution on Tortola, BVI.

  4. a-tracy
    Posted January 13, 2017 at 11:30 am | Permalink

    It’s your blog to do with as you choose. Any of my posts held up or cancelled are fine with me. If others complain they are free to set up their own blog.

  5. Narrow shoulders
    Posted January 13, 2017 at 12:32 pm | Permalink

    Seems very reasonable.

    Many of your posters’ lengthy posts are hugely informative and are worth waiting for you to moderate. I often go back forum or five days to read the more contemplative postings.

    Others…….

    Could you speak to your web developer to find a way to highlight new postings on the older pages? I know the site is funded by you so cost is an issue but a recent postings search or section would save trawling down postings.

    On the more hopeful side it would be great to be able to filter by poster name too.

    • Narrow shoulders
      Posted January 13, 2017 at 12:33 pm | Permalink

      Filter out that is

    • Caterpillar
      Posted January 13, 2017 at 9:54 pm | Permalink

      I’d like to agree with Narrow Shoulders here on filtering and searching when reading older posts. I too go back and read older posts, also I sometimes go back and wonder what a regular contributor has previously commented.

      I do like the current simple format but the functions that would help are

      1) Show both the contributed and published time at top.
      2) Just show first four lines of each post with a more button to show all.
      2) Filter by most recent published within each article.
      3) Search a contributor to see all his/her past comments.
      4) Possibly filter out as suggested by Narrow Shoulders

      If nothing can be done, it doesn’t matter it is still good.

      • rose
        Posted January 14, 2017 at 9:07 pm | Permalink

        Do you use “File” and then “Find on this page”?

  6. Lifelogic
    Posted January 13, 2017 at 12:33 pm | Permalink

    Interesting to see that even a speech by Amber Rudd seems to have been recorded as a “hate crime”. This as the definition of one is clearly absurd. I think we can safely assume that all the claims relating to huge increases in “hate crime” are complete nonsense.

    Have the police not got anything better to do with their time? Real & serious crime seems so often to be virtually ignored or given only very superficial investigation.

    • Colin Hart
      Posted January 13, 2017 at 4:05 pm | Permalink

      It was recorded as a ‘non-crime hate incident’ in line with guidance from the National Police Chiefs’ Council following a complaint to police by an Oxford professor who hadn’t even heard the speech. Orwellian or what?

      • James Matthews
        Posted January 14, 2017 at 9:18 pm | Permalink

        Perhaps this category could be reclassified as victimless paranoiac incidents.

    • Leslie Singleton
      Posted January 13, 2017 at 4:53 pm | Permalink

      Dear Lifelogic–Not the Police’s fault–If I understand correctly, just one single person has to complain, that’s all–Utterly ridiculous of course

    • acorn
      Posted January 13, 2017 at 5:10 pm | Permalink

      LL, I have lost count of the number of things you hate, be it IHT ratters; green crap whatsits. Today, I at least expected the whole nine yards of hate, for the Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon green crap project.

      Let me wind you up a bit. 320 MW installed capacity with a 20% annual load factor! £4,000 per kW installed overnight capital cost. A utility scale wind farm; and, at today’s prices, a utility scale Solar PV farm, connected to Lithium-Ion batteries, would be cheaper.

      • acorn
        Posted January 13, 2017 at 6:16 pm | Permalink

        You should know by now that my mission on this site is to rebut Conservative Neo-liberalism. I am well aware, that Redwoodians wake-up every morning with the red mist of hate in their eyes for immigrants and the EU in total. Unfortunately, there is no cure for that. Sadly, even outside the EU, that red mist of hate, will still be there; looking for a new target.

        Anyway, it would really be good to get ONS data based on MMT principles. That is “cash” accounting. An approach that reflects the way the currency issuer, the Treasury, actually spends its currency into the private sector economy, without imputing things that don’t actually happen in Households. The latter being the currency users.

        There has been a minor breakthrough with:

        https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personalandhouseholdfinances/incomeandwealth/articles/alternativemeasuresofrealhouseholdsdisposableincomeandthesavingratio/dec2016

        One day, it will become obvious that a currency issuing government has unlimited spending power in its own currency. That power only limited by the resources available to buy from its own private sector.

        • Martyn G
          Posted January 13, 2017 at 9:04 pm | Permalink

          I cannot speak for others but I find your accusation that all those who voted for exit from the EU are red-eyed, immigrant and EU haters. A hate crime you have expressed, perhaps?
          I voted out for one simple reason – I want to be governed by those we have elected and who are not bound to obey every edict, in ever-increasing numbers, by the unelected, undemocratic EU commissioners, answerable to no one. Immigration is, of course, an issue but only one amongst many whilst we remain embedded in the EU.
          I entirely agree with your closing para and have long done so, because it is the basis of how the world works. It is also another damning failure of those unfortunate nations (other perhaps than Germany) who have embraced the Euro. They are, literally, prisoners to a currency based on commonality of widely disparate nations economies with no means of balancing the disparities, hence widespread unemployment – particularly amongst the youth of their nations.

        • Anonymous
          Posted January 14, 2017 at 12:25 am | Permalink

          Rot.

          (Succinct enough, Dr Redwood ?)

        • Lifelogic
          Posted January 14, 2017 at 2:48 pm | Permalink

          I approve of a lot of the immigration. Some immigration is clearly beneficial but low paid. low skilled immigration (with attached liabilities) is generally rather bad and a net liability.

          We should take only the beneficial immigration as needed and even then perhaps without a commitment to take them for evermore.

          Is this too hard a concept for the remainiacs to follow? Why does it have to be all or nothing?

          • acorn
            Posted January 15, 2017 at 9:25 am | Permalink

            LL you say “… only the beneficial immigration as needed …”.

            That truly is the neo-liberal, globalised “free market” solution, with a large slice of imperialism. All these emerging economies, train at great expense, their own Doctors and Nurses presumably to look after their own citizens.

            We go and steal them “as needed” for the NHS, with the promise of much white man’s Gold and no transfer fee to the source nation.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted January 13, 2017 at 9:57 pm | Permalink

        It is clear economic and engineering lunacy. Imperial college used to be a respected institution for physics and engineering. It now seems to be just another part of the green blob religion.

        And it is not “renewable” as it slows down the earth’s rotation. Long lasting, well perhaps, if you keep dredging it and renewing the very expensive walls.

        • hefner
          Posted January 16, 2017 at 12:17 pm | Permalink

          “It slows down the Earth’s rotation”. As a distinguished physicist/engineer, you should be able to come up with the actual difference in the Earth’s rotation rate that such extraction of “renewable” (your word) energy will potentially make.
          Then as a distinguished … you will be able to compute the percentage/order of magnitude of such a deceleration and define whether this is significant or not, and/or the range in years over which this is likely to have an impact.
          Or have you just swallowed that whole from your favourite “scientist” in one of your favourite scientific publications (Spectator, DT, DM, …).

          Or maybe your post was just a teaser, one never knows the extent of your humorous mind?

    • stred
      Posted January 13, 2017 at 6:22 pm | Permalink

      It does seem as though we are going through a strange time with laws and plods dedicated to hammering innocent remarks or protecting disgraceful behaviour by the rich and powerful. The new law on libel, where the winner pays costs for both sides seems incredible, rather like hate crimes or sex crime allegation being taken as proved without evidence. On the local London news a few days ago the lead item was a story about a British chap who had joined ISIS, gone to Syria cut a few heads off, done some torture and had come home to live around Paddington. The US had decided to put sanctions on him. It did not say what these were. Perhaps he is on Mr Trump’s naughty list now and is not welcome there. Just what MI6 and 5 are doing or the Met is a total blank. Perhaps they have to abide by international law and just watch him until he goes of the deep end here or goes to Europe. Perhaps they can’t be bothered, as they are too busy dealing with the Trump problem. Who knows? Is there any space available in Rampton?

    • zorro
      Posted January 13, 2017 at 7:06 pm | Permalink

      They are fulfilling their true vocation – filtering out non-politically correct views and repressing thoughtcrime…..

      zorro

  7. Mark B
    Posted January 13, 2017 at 12:40 pm | Permalink

    Thank you Mr.Redwood MP sir.

    Since I mostly post once, do not post unusually long or have links to other websites, why is it therefore that those that do let put up before me or, I do not get put up at all ?

    I do not wish to take away their freedom of speech as it were, or to tell you what is and is not appropriate on your site, which you kindly host and pay for. But I would ask other contributors to consider others, along with our kind host, before posting their content.

    Thank you.

    🙂

    Reply When I have limited time I usually just post all short ones

    • Caterpillar
      Posted January 13, 2017 at 9:58 pm | Permalink

      Mark B,

      Tradegy of the Commons.

      • Mark B
        Posted January 14, 2017 at 6:04 pm | Permalink

        Good post.

        Thanks

        🙂

  8. Atlas
    Posted January 13, 2017 at 12:56 pm | Permalink

    John,

    To save your time is it possible to have an “I agree” button on post entries? This would allow some of us who read something and feel that an indication of agreeing with the content would both inform you of general interest whilst saving you effort.

    I agree with your point about long posts – usually they can be cut down greatly in length without losing the essential points.

    • Bob
      Posted January 13, 2017 at 1:42 pm | Permalink

      I agree.

    • zorro
      Posted January 13, 2017 at 7:10 pm | Permalink

      I think that a ‘like’ or ‘dislike’ button would help cut out duplicate comments and allow contributors to focus on some new or different angle. John, I don’t think that would be too difficult to implement. I consciously keep my posts short and try and keep new content to one post per blog.

      zorro

  9. Sir Joe Soap
    Posted January 13, 2017 at 1:51 pm | Permalink

    I will keep it short and sweet
    Stoke on Trent General election votes cast:

    Tories 7’008
    UKIP 7’041
    Labour 12’220

    Tories split the Brexit vote, taking away votes from the prime Brexit party. How about Tories do us all a favour here, stand down here for the real Brexit party to win?

    • Original Richard
      Posted January 14, 2017 at 8:44 am | Permalink

      “Tories split the Brexit vote, taking away votes from the prime Brexit party. How about Tories do us all a favour here, stand down here for the real Brexit party to win?”

      Or vice versa if the Tory candidate clearly and genuinely supports Brexit.

      It was for such occasions in particular, and so that the winning candidate had a majority of the votes in general, that I believe that AV is a far better system than FPTP.

  10. forthurst
    Posted January 13, 2017 at 3:29 pm | Permalink

    Off topic posts can create large threads of their own which make it difficult to find on topic comments amongst the dross; I do not know whether JR’s view of his own blog allows him to see these threads, as such.

  11. Denis Cooper
    Posted January 13, 2017 at 5:06 pm | Permalink

    Unfortunately a bald assertion may take just a few words while the explanation of why it is wrong may take many more.

  12. pleb
    Posted January 13, 2017 at 5:50 pm | Permalink

    Don’t blow a fuse. Just blog and have ” comments off ” for a week or so. Put your feet up .
    Feel free to ignore my rubbish.

  13. ChrisS
    Posted January 13, 2017 at 6:16 pm | Permalink

    I agree with both Atlas and Narrowshoulders suggestions above.

    Why not simply place a limit of one post per contributor per topic ?
    It seems unreasonable that some contributors are allowed to post up to six separate comments on a topic.

  14. Glenn Vaughan
    Posted January 13, 2017 at 6:40 pm | Permalink

    John

    I am totally in favour of curtailing repetitive long-winded posts and would welcome being spared the frequent whinging about Cameron, Osborne, Theresa May and IHT “ratting” et.al.

    • Chris
      Posted January 13, 2017 at 7:30 pm | Permalink

      Far better left to discretion of Mr Redwood rather than some formula or limit per person. I think he does an excellent job of “editing” the Diary and every now and again he has to remind us to cut back a bit, human nature being what it is.

  15. Bert Young
    Posted January 13, 2017 at 8:28 pm | Permalink

    John , I fully endorse your request for brevity etc . May I also suggest : only one contribution on the topic you post and one reply ( if appropriate ) . Certain responders often chose to comment on other daily news items ; this is out of court in my book .

  16. Had their chips
    Posted January 13, 2017 at 11:05 pm | Permalink

    “Donald Trump RAGED on Twitter about the dossier.He gave a BARRAGE of tweets in response.”
    (Sky News.) ( There were in fact five short sentences from Trump on Twitter )

    Twitter did not mention at all what anyone said on Sky News about anything.

    JR, your blog is becoming more important if for no other reason than mainstream media has watering-canned on its chips.

  17. Gareth Jones
    Posted January 13, 2017 at 11:21 pm | Permalink

    Here’s a suggestion, John – delete any posts that use the term “Remoaners”. We all need to pull together now, whatever we voted, and there is no place nor utility for juvenile name-calling.

    • Bob
      Posted January 14, 2017 at 1:17 pm | Permalink

      @Gareth Jones
      Your comment is the only one on this thread (so far) that mentions it and so the only one that needs to be deleted.

  18. John Finn
    Posted January 13, 2017 at 11:52 pm | Permalink

    I’ll be very brief , John. Given that it appears in the Guardian, is this news significant?

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jan/13/eu-negotiator-wants-special-deal-over-access-to-city-post-brexit

    It does seem to support recent comments made by you.

  19. Cheshire Girl
    Posted January 15, 2017 at 7:50 am | Permalink

    I recall, that you have requested shorter and less frequent posts several times, but it seems that some don’t get the message.
    It’s not for me to tell others what to do, but I try to keep my posts as short as I can, to make them readable, and because I am often not so well informed as others on the subject matter. I hope that posters will take your comments on board, as I would hate for your blog to be discontinued.

  20. Dunedin
    Posted January 15, 2017 at 7:14 pm | Permalink

    Politicians sometimes talk about having a “Big Conversation” with the public, but it is usually little more than an electioneering gimmick.

    Your blog however, is the “Big Conversation” in action all year round, and I thank you for hosting this forum for exchanging views. If more elected representatives (both in the UK and abroad) held two-way communications with the voting public, then they would not find themselves so shocked and bewildered by events like the Brexit vote, the election of Mr Trump, and the rising tide of “populism” (which it seems is rapidly becoming a dirty word).

    As regards the length, frequency, repetitiveness, etc. of posting, I would suggest that a good blog is a like a good conversation.

  • About John Redwood


    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, and graduated from Magdalen College Oxford. He is a Distinguished fellow of All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has set up an investment management business, was both executive and non executive chairman of a quoted industrial PLC, and chaired a manufacturing company with factories in Birmingham, Chicago, India and China. He is the MP for Wokingham, first elected in 1987.

  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page