It's quite a different stance, Marshy, than the one you took over Seann Walsh and Katya being papped in public then published in the tabloids. You thought that was fine, why is this different?

Get over it, you were banned for about ten minutes and it was never going to last more than that.

So, are you going to respond to my points refuting your whole 'people are sheep' **** or are you going to run away from an argument you know you won't win by pretending to stick me on ignore while continuing to respond to what I have to say?

Your choice but don't pretend that sticking people on ignore in a debate is anything other than an admission of defeat.

We're talking about the rules and regulations of the train Livia. The same rulebook the one about alcohol comes from.

I'll answer your question when you illustrate how on earth it's in anyway linked to what I said.

No, there isn't. They're both rules regarding travel on that train. No difference at all.

"I'm ignoring you. Goodbye forever!" :joker:

Helping to expose criminals on her majesty s trains. They are happy that the pic was taken and encourage this rather than confrontation as it could lead to stabbing.

Honestly,I couldn’t give a shiz if Abbott sniffed coke out of Jeremy Corbyn’s arse crack on the TFL line.Just as long as she NEVER gets into government.

it's a literal nightmare coming home from a late shift

Making a shiv out of that can is she?

i'm sure her majesty is stocking up on the m&s gin cocktails as we speak

It used to be the District Line for me, to East Ham. The last train was always quite an education...

Both the Metropolitian Police Service and British Transport Police will support TfL staff in enforcing this ban. Any person suspected of committing a public disorder offence in refusing to comply with this ban may therefore be arrested

where you cant be arrested for taking a photo

Nobody said it was an offence to take a photo.

It's an offence to sell that photo commercially.

They broke a rule in their giddiness to point fingers at someone else breaking a rule. Hilariously ironic.

Doubt anyone in that position would be arrested. They'd either be asked to dispose of it or, at worst, leave the train.

Arrests will be for drunk and disorderely, as that's mainly what the rule is attempting to combat.

I think their rules on photography refers to professional shoots and filming. I'm not convinced that using your phone to take a pic is against the law.

how do you know it was sold, i doubt any money changed hands for it?

So Marshy... You're absolutely fine with Diane Abbott breaking the rules, but when it comes to the person who shopped her, you become a stickler for the rules?

One doesn't cancel out the other.

Who said it cancelled anything out?

I'm pointing out the hilarious irony of someone being so eager to point fingers at Diane Abbott for breaking a rule... by breaking a rule themselves.

You then replied with some irrelevance about Sean(n) Walsh, which sounded more like a defence of them than anything I have said.

Sure Jan.

Again, it's about the use of the picture/footage. Not the equipment used to capture it.

Hmmm...I reckon, if it was Rees-Mogg, or Boris, sipping a cocktail on the underground, someone selling the picture would be much more acceptable.

I'm yet to see or hear any evidence that the picture was sold.

Quite a campaign you're on here, Marshy.

sure jan nothing

your whole argument is based on a presumption of purchase



case rejected

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/NaughtyIckyCockatoo-small.gif

And what's yours based on?

Trolling.

Case not even considered.

:joker:

No campaign love.

I pointed out an irony and yourself and LT presumed it was a justification for Abbott and then assumed it had something to do with Sean Walsh.

Both wrong I'm afraid. Sure you'll get over it.