Loz

Ladygooner Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I can touch my nose with my tongue too - do I get a prize?! That depends. Have you got a big, droopy nose?

Burbage, The pie petition is truly awesome. Made me laugh out loud.

Hillsborough? What happened?

"we'll take that offline" - I'm putting that issue aside for a while. Like permanently.

dulwichhealthmatters Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Town centres should have more CCTV cameras in > place to help avoid criminal behaviour. > Fortunately nobody was hurt in this situation. Britain has over 20% of the world's CCTV cameras. How many do you want?

I consider 'relative poverty' up there with 'mentally addictive' - i.e. a misuse of a strong word for political reasons. The fact that people now use 'poverty' to mean 'relative poverty' only enforces that.

DJKillaQueen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But it is linked to poverty Loz. People don't turn on the heating because it becomes a choice between > eating and warmth. Or do we only define poverty a being neither able to afford food AND heat, rather > than one or the other. No, it's not. It is linked to being poor. Poverty is not that you are spending 10% of your income on heating (the definition used). That's being poor. Poverty is no heating at all... or food... or a house. There is little to no 'poverty' in the UK. There are a lot of poor people though.

I don't disagree that this is a problem, but I do wish people would stop trying to use the word 'poverty' out of context to make a political point. It really annoys me.

bon3yard Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > HOW IS THE RABBIT IN THE HOLE NOT WARREN STREET !!!!!!!! Yeah, that was my first guess and I was a bit miffed when I got the red 'WRONG!!' come up.

DJKillaQueen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But I do think that children are in a better > position to defend themselves because of things > like childline and open discussion of abuse and > even portrayal of such storylines in drama > accessible to them. For all the ills of the > internet and open media there is an upside too, > and I will take some convincing that open exposure > makes things worse rather than better. The only 'downside' (if indeed it can be seen as that) is that parents are so utterly paranoid nowadays. I doubt there is any more kiddy fiddling going on now than there was, say, 40 years ago - in fact there may even be less. But all the 'open exposure' has made parents gibbering wrecks.

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So why do women need to put on make-up at all > then? Wherever it is? Old joke: Q: Why do women wear make-up and perfume? A: Because they are ugly and they smell.

AbDabs Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Will it involve banning cars near schools? How about we move all schools in Southwark to the Outer Hebrides? Problem solved. Actually, a number of problems solved now I think about it.

Quids!! You can't tell us this and not post the link!

Dunno. You might come back with more money than you started with! (Doubtful, though...)

I've just read in the paper that one of the racist chants was the 'bonfire song'. I had to Google this. Whilst I can understand that singing a rather unpleasant song about the two Ferdinands can be seen to have racist undertones, the song itself seems difficult to define as racist. I'd guess that anyone banned for racism for singing this would have a legal case. (For those, like me, who don't know it, try http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/03/27/rio-ferdinand-chants_n_2961699.html)

Given the age of this news, I can see you spent a long time thinking about and composing this. I'd hazard a guess at about 2 minutes and 47 seconds.

woodrot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I know a poor qulity joke regarding a suitable place to get the weight of your pet cetacean > confirmed, but I cant be arsed. Dunno about that joke, but I did hear about the oyster dancing rather vigorously at the disco. He pulled a mussel.

the-e-dealer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Almost right. But. actually the arcimedes principle relates to weight. I got my physics o > level! Its not volume! Just noticed hugs explained better than me. Weight of the water displaced, not the weight of the vehicle. As Hugo said, if the vehicle sunk (most likely) you wouldn't know it's weight. The whole 'Eureka' story was that Archimedes knew the weight of the crown (?), but he didn't know its volume. So, he could not calculate the density and therefore decide if it was made of gold or not. But, once he stuck his fat backside in the bath...

the-e-dealer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If you put it in a bath full of water you can measure the displaced water. 0/10 for physics, TED. That's the volume, not the weight.

woodrot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Nam, do the reunification express between hanoi & HCM City, stop off at various places en route. > maybe a side jaunt to Cambodia if at all possible - one of the most fascinating places I have ever > been to. Does anyone know what Vietnam/Cambodia is like (weather wise) in June/Jul/Aug? I'm thinking of going there for a couple of months cheap travel.

Not sure why the state should be funding a lifestyle choice anyway. It's not as if this planet needs more people on it.

Burbage Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't think you'll find many providers at your budget (what you'll get for ?5 a month is space on > a shared server of some sort) that'll let you set up cron jobs. Actually, it seems quite common for those providers that use cPanel.

Naah, he's Joan Armatrading's boyfriend.

I wait until it annoys the bejeezers out of me and I look like a badly made mop. Then I give it a couple of weeks...

the-e-dealer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > How can you tell? - The intentionally 'amateur' look of the page - The heading saying, "This page scrutinises UK web hosting services and related companies." and yet comes to the conclusion that only one company is worth dealing with - The implied disassociation of the page writer with the company - Far, far too many 'facts' for a casual user of the companies services And finally, the fact that the poster on this page was a first time poster. Alarm bells rang immediately.