DaveR

And "should I have..."

I also can't do this at work, but try "what happens when.." for an interestingly random set

"I understand that in Chicago the law is that motorcyclists have to occupy the same space as a car. That means if a car can't fit into that gap then the motorcylist mustn't. It stops all the weaving in and out of cars. I think that should be applied to cyclists to stop them surrounding cars at junctions in front of them and to the right and left of them." does it also provide that a motorcyclist is entitled to the same space as a car? So when you're driving behind me and I'm on my bike (riding in the middle of the lane, naturally - you can't fit a car in the gutter) you will wait patiently until you can pass me safely as if you were passing another car? No, didn't think so. There is a clear difference between bad cyclists who, through their own behaviour, largely put themselves at risk, and bad car drivers, who largely put others at risk (cyclists, motorcyclists, pedestrians). That's why cars and drivers are more heavily regulated (and larger, heavier, more dangerous vehicles even more heavily regulated). Car drivers whinging about cyclists does not alter those basic facts. That having been said, I am all in favour of encouraging people to take some cycle training before they venture onto the streets, and of an appropriate degree of regulation e.g. taking action against the worst offenders and maybe some words of warning for those who could do better. And great big signs for pedestrians saying 'LOOK BOTH WAYS BEFORE YOU STEP OFF THE KERB, MORON!'

" You describe my field of investigation as "quite narrow" - maybe, but that doesn't mean that there isn't a lot to mined from that particular seam. By the way I'm not quite sure why you see the two quotes you isolate as contradictory. The differences between communities will be examined through the lens of their reaction to the troll. The piece will be about both the troll and the communities he interacts with." How much can you usefully learn about a community simply by witnessing a range of individual reactions to overtly contrived provocation? The two quotes are not contradictory, but this: "The contrasting responses I have encountered will be used in my analysis of what unites and separates these disparate groups" is more than a little disingenuous. Unless you really believe that how people react to obvious trolls tells you more about them than...how they react to obvious trolls. The significance of the online vs real persona point is that it seems obvious to me that your project is fundamentally ego-driven - it's not about any real examination of, or interest in, communities or individuals, it's about how they react to YOU. Again, not exactly rare in the world of journalism, but it kind of undercuts any pretence to your piece being serious investigative work.

"the main focus of my piece will be the reaction of the online communities to the presence of a "troll" and there will additionally be some discussion on the "real life" equivalent of the internet troll." That's funny, I thought you said at the start: "The contrasting responses I have encountered will be used in my analysis of what unites and separates these disparate groups, and what comparisons can be drawn with the nature of "real-life" communities" So in fact, your analysis will be limited to how these 'disparate groups' react to trolls. It's quite narrow, isn't it? Was it worth the effort? I have a theory (feel free to print it - who knows, an academic at a leading university may be interested). You undoubtedly think that your online persona is a wholly artificial construct, distinct from your own personality, views etc. I don't buy it - you are 'jrussell', subconsciously at least, even if the specific views/arguments expressed are not your own. Even the 'reveal' post still has a distinct 'jrussell' feel about it, and I'm not just talking about the prose style.

"I have been posting in various different forums, which have been selected to represent a wide cross-section of the different common-interest, geographical and socio-economic groups that exist in the form of online communities across the internet. The contrasting responses I have encountered will be used in my analysis of what unites and separates these disparate groups, and what comparisons can be drawn with the nature of "real-life" communities." How reliable is your analysis going to be when you have, by your own admission been trolling? The only thing you'll be in a position to do is compare reactions to postings by 'jrussell', which were understood by pretty much everybody to be wholly artificial. And as for the 'reveal' - at most it's a tiny bit disappointing to find out that 'jrussell' is not simply an eccentric troll, but rather a self-important idiot journo (not exactly a rare breed).

They say hard work never killed anyone, but I figure, why take the chance? Ronald Reagan

NCR market is where newlyweds take their visiting in-laws to fill the awkward hour between a walk round the park and lunch in the Palmerston. Never has so much fudge been bought as an aid to conversation. It's either that or queueing at William Rose - "Mum, Dad, I know you're not happy about me living in South London with an upstart graphic designer called Josh, but look at our fab butchers where we can buy a nice leg of lamb for lunch!"

Wasn't there another thread a while back where some posters from SE4 piled in to defend dear old 'Brockers'? This sort of community 'rivalry' is not a phenomenon at all - I think it only manifests itself in discussions like this on internet forums (when we should all really be working, but hey, WTF) I've lived in ED for a few years. I like some of the shops, pubs, restaurants etc, and not others. Over the last few years, for my tastes at least, most of the changes in the amenities on offer have been positive (although still an inexplicable no. of gift shop type places - I mean really, who buys this stuff?). And it's a nice place for a family with young kids, largely because there are so many of them (but don't go to Le Chandelier where, allegedly, the child catcher hangs out). But that's it. Am I in some sort of ED gang where I have to boast about the fact that we have Oliver Bonas (as if) and do down other surrounding neighbourhoods (Sydders, Brockers....Peckers)? No. Because that would be the saddest thing in the world. Ever.

njc97, my post was a little bit tongue in cheek, and I kind of agree with you, except that at least if you asked BMW where the extra money goes they could point you to differences in components and build that (for example) make a BMW a hell of a lot quieter and smoother to drive, which over a journey of say 500 miles could make a huge difference in terms of driver/passenger comfort. That may also be the case for a bugaboo but it's a pretty low-tech product (it doesn't have an engine, electronics or hydraulics, for example), and not many people are going to push one for 10 miles let alone a hundred, so I have my doubts. Better handling? - look out for the fast chicane outside Green & Blue! As for better engineered, I'd be seriously disappointed if any half decent brand couldn't manage the 12 months or so use that most pushchairs get. I'm glad you're happy with your bugaboo, and I entirely agree that it's a matter of personal choice, but I don't think there's any serious doubt that the price of a bugaboo includes a pretty substantial premium for looks/fashion.

My bank did not make a charge, I guess because it was a straightforward sterling transaction on a debit card. Having said that, Lloyds are known for being particularly bad in respect of charges for currency transactions - see here: money saving expert

Honest answer? The difference between Bugaboo and other (much cheaper) brands is about the same as the difference between a BMW and a Mondeo - it has very little to do with basic performance and everything to do with branding and image.

I use a pre-paid euro card from Fairfx - v. convenient, decent exchange rate.

Saw it yesterday. I didn't cry but all the other adults in the party did - kids pretty much oblivious to the sadness but found it scary/funny/exciting in equal measures. I'm not sure that 3D added that much to it, but a great movie.

Botany Bay is my favourite - haven't had trouble parking and there is a cafe/shop on the beach so not completely lacking in amenities

"Will I have lowered myself to the level of the petty vandal?" yes

The US started shipping guns, ammo etc. to Britain in mid 1940, and started shipping them effectively for free in early 41. German U boats started sinking US ships in early 41, so by no means certain that the US would have stayed out of it even without Pearl Harbor. junior partner? Dunno. But the war could not have been won without the US on the allied side.

It's just the same tired debate, over and over. I'm just as frustrated as Brendan - maybe more so, because I'm not disputing that he is sincere and intellectually engaged in the argument, whereas he thinks I'm some kind of comedy nazi. Now, I don't care what he thinks, but I'm also not that interested in reading it again and again. DJKQ is superficially different but substantially the same. So I'm out.

"Framework for Assessment of children in need and their families" This doc is not aimed at all children or all families, but specifically at those where there is a need for external intervention (estimated at 3-400,000 out of 11 million children in the UK). This reflects the statutory limitation of the responsiblities of local authorities under the Children Act 1989. 'subjective but with good intention' can equal wrong and the focus here should surely be more on ensuring the safety of children rather than not upsetting parents? This is a very dangerous road to go down without a well founded finding that there is a need for intervention in the first place. Is it 'wrong' to bring up kids in a house where one or both parents smoke? Or where kids are not fed an optimal diet? It is rightly recognised as a matter of principle that the State generally has no role in individual parents' decisions about how to raise their kids, and it is also right that actions that appear to offend against this principle are scrutinised to ensure that they are necessary and proportionate.

Scamps is v. good - my daughter has gone there the last two summers for a week or so, and loved it.

Swearing in a foreign language always sounds better I like 'porca puttana!', but Italian friends are v. keen on English swearwords, esp. w*nker. But we all know that the undisputed king of swearwords is c***.

Couldn't you put an honest title on this thread - how about "Freaks sought for freak show"

you should watch this first

"helping to raise the children's attainment levels by 2 sub levels or more through targeted Wave 3 interventions!! " any chance of having that in English?

Slacks