Graham Harold, of Portslade, takes up the issue from last week's column of letter writers withholding their names and addresses.

He accuses me of having "probably forgotten" that several readers wrote complaining of too many councillors and anonymous people filling the letters page.

He says, quite rightly, that I asked in a previous column for the views of readers who - and here I disagree - responded overwhelmingly that "name and address supplied" letters should not be printed.

The numbers of anonymous writers and councillors dropped off for a while after that but now they "swamped" the page again.

Firstly, Mr Harold, there wasn't an "overwhelming" response but a few we published and secondly, until last week, I had not had another complaint along those lines. So it is obviously not the burning issue for most people that it is for you and, as I indicated last week, perhaps readers like interesting views and points, whether they're from anonymous people or not. As to swamped, taking last week as an example, there were six letters from councillors, one from an MP, 11 from the anonymous (including two with a name at least) and, wait for it, 81 from other people. A substantial majority, I think you'll agree.

Councillor (sorry Mr Harold) David Rogers (Lib Dem) thanks me for his mention in last week's column. He also points out that in last Friday's story about the cost of Sussex Police we wrongly captioned the picture of Chief Constable Ken Jones as Councillor Peter Jones, the Conservative East Sussex County Council leader who was also mentioned in the story.

Says Coun Rogers: "If full length images had been used, it would be clear that Ken Jones is tall and slim and that Peter Jones is tall and . . . um . . . not." Now now, councillor.

Falmer councillor David Neighbour says a headline in some editions last Thursday made it look like he was accusing Albion fans of hypocrisy in supporting both a national park and a football stadium when in fact he was referring only to some fellow Brighton and Hove councillors as the story, he concedes, made clear. Sorry.

Back to letters and Joan Makin, of Hove, says thanks for printing hers on Saturday but we spelt her name "Mackie". She adds that she knows her handwriting is bad but is very proud of her late husband's name. Sorry, Mrs Makin.

Muriel Hart, also of Hove, thanks us for using her recent letter but asks whether "the occasional exclamation mark" is no longer acceptable since hers were omitted. "Surely," she asks "their use conveys in print what the spoken word conveys by intonation?" Sometimes, Mrs Hart, but I usually find they are not necessary.

A story in our Worthing edition last Thursday quoted a resident saying the distance between a proposed floodlit hockey pitch in the town and the nearest house would be 15ft. In fact, the distance is 11 metres and I am grateful to Martin Stevens for spotting the error.

Mrs Lois Maddison, of Brighton, says Princess Margaret's death brought back the disgust she felt when she saw BN1 cartoonist Alex Hallatt's effort on January 30 depicting the Queen Mother with a gin and tonic. "How low can you get?" she rages, "Would he like his family and mother insulted like that?" I am sure, Mrs Maddison, that she (Alex is female) didn't mean to offend and I am sorry that she did you.

Finally, to C Hawtree, of Hove, who asks: "Which is the more witless, the various full-page poses struck by James Poulter in which he displays his appalling clothes sense or the meandering dialogue transcribed within his 'wry look at life'?

"I have yet to meet anybody who takes pleasure in this endless, sloppy parading of the Poulters and their offspring. It is pointless and painfully so. How much longer will it go on?"

Taking up your tone, Mr Hawtree, you really should get out more - there are plenty of fans out there and that's why he's staying put. I kind of know what you mean about his clothes though . . .