Bells on Sunday

POINT OF ORDER

Could we have some clarification on whether any titles bestowed under the reign of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II have returned to the Crown, and therefore must be bestowed anew?
 
Bell No. 530: Annabelle (2014)

DociollFGZLh1TF6RbRfiA.jpg
 
It was made in good faith, and I used the full and proper wording. Can I appeal this please?
No.

It is a strict liability offense. All bells are posted in good faith. We are all under professional duty to make sure our bells are not repeatious. Also, you have not apologised or shown shame.
 
No.

It is a strict liability offense. All bells are posted in good faith. We are all under professional duty to make sure our bells are not repeatious. Also, you have not apologised or shown shame.

Bell No. 77, the bell I am meant to have repeated, is 'Jelly Belly'. There was no picture and therefore no way of knowing exactly what this referred to, however if it was the jelly bean it would refer to the brand, or as Madison has previously stated the mascot of the company who is called Jelly Belly. Bell No. 524 was The Jelly Belly Candy Company, i.e. the company as a whole. It is not a repeat of bell no. 77.

The only person who should be apologising or showing shame is you. I respect you as a gymnast and a doctor, but right now I sadly cannot respect you in your capacity as Royal Arbiter Of The Bell. Please do the right thing and correct the above at your soonest convenience.
 
Last edited:
Bell no. 535 - Logan Bell

avatar2.jpg.v1687955472


Very hard to find a picture of this gentleman where he is not getting fisted
 
Thank you for acknowledging that Bell No. 524 is valid, Madison
 
This really has been one of the most scandalous days in Bells on Sunday in a long time.
 
Bell No. 77, the bell I am meant to have repeated, is 'Jelly Belly'. There was no picture and therefore no way of knowing exactly what this referred to, however if it was the jelly bean it would refer to the brand, or as Madison has previously stated the mascot of the company who is called Jelly Belly. Bell No. 524 was The Jelly Belly Candy Company, i.e. the company as a whole. It is not a repeat of bell no. 77.

The only person who should be apologising or showing shame is you. I respect you as a gymnast and a doctor, but right now I sadly cannot respect you in your capacity as Royal Arbiter Of The Bell. Please do the right thing and correct the above at your soonest convenience.
We are all familiar with the services which Epke performed in the field of bell enumeration to be named Royal Arbiter. Frankly, your questioning of his judgment belittles that sacrifice and you should be ashamed.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom