Loz

Afraid not, RPC. Maybe some journo could do a top 10 public transport announcers!

Nigello Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > To keep on post: dimbo, selfish parents who think it's a good thing to show their contact-bereft > young child a kid's cartoon/show with the volume on on a bus or train. Or let them play some phone-app game on full volume. Blip blip blip BING BING blip blip weeyup BING blip blip blip...

Rosetta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > When roasting , cook in a pan with some water in the bottom to keep moist, and use > the lemon and rub skin with butter first. Those roasting bags you can buy also keep in flavour. > That's how I cooked chicken all the time when I ate more meat than I do now. I bought an digital in-oven thermometer for about ?15. Stick the probe in the chunkiest part of the chicken, roast on a high heat until the inside is 65c. Take the chicken out, probe it a few more times to check the whole bird is at least 65c. Lovely and juicy. I use it for beef and lamb, too. Roast to 46/47c. Lovely.

The guy doing the announcements on the Piccadilly Line at Green Park station. His delivery is a cross between Robin Williams and Pat Sharp. An unexpected joy.

Here's another link to the steps you should take. Make sure you record everything in writing and photographs plus keep copies of all correspondence so you have evidence should the LL try to blame you. http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/repairs_and_bad_conditions/repairs_in_private_lets/reporting_repairs_to_a_landlord

As a tenant, you should usually have contents insurance, but tenants are not responsible for buildings, which a broken pipe or a third party damage would be. There would be three possibilities here: 1) The landlord considers you responsible. i.e. an act by you, your family or a guest flooded the room. You could be responsible for repairs in this case, but since it is a bedroom, I doubt they can claim that. Unless they think the kids had the biggest water fight ever. 2) The landlord considers upstairs responsible. He/she should be claiming against upstairs insurance or, if they don;t have any, upstairs. The LL's insurance company should deal with the legal side of this. 3) The landlord thinks it is a broken pipe. It is then either the LL's responsibility or, since you are in a flat, it could be the freehold owner (and their buildings insurance) that should be responsible. In addition, for 2 and 3 you can claim from the responsible party any damage to your property. More info here: https://www.gov.uk/private-renting/repairs

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm tempted to look for other employment but given ageism is a reality > I don't know if I should even try. Do you actually have anything to lose by sending a few CVs out? You won't find something if you don't look!

Robert Poste's Child Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The Olympics coverage reminded me of three gymnasts who were hugely inspirational to little > girls in the 70s: Olga Korbut, Nadia Comaneci and Nellie Kim. A lot of girls still go through a > phase around the age of 10 or 11 when they do endless cartwheels and handstands but not sure > they have the same kind of reference point. I noted the other day that female gymnasts seem to be the chronological opposite to policemen. They seem to look older these days.

We have a loft conversion with windows (done by previous owner). Some summer mornings I wish I had the full length Juliet and throw open the doors. But, I wouldn't have paid too much for the privilege because it wouldn't happen that often. What I would say is plan your room and where you intend to put things. I'd have done the layout of ours differently as there seems to be a fair bit of wasted space that could have been more useful had there been a bit more thought and better placement of the bathroom and the inbuilt wardrobes.

Robert Poste's Child Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I realise the chronology of the above is all wrong. Someone should put this thread in > chronological order or the under 40s will think the 70s was a time of variety, which, let's face > it, couldn't be further from the truth. Music went from Glam to Disco to Punk. That's a fair bit of variety!

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I suggest you two just ignore each other for a bit, because this is getting slightly personal, > and Loz you're not covering yourself in glory as JoeLeg points out (and more often than not I'm a > fan of yours). Fair point. LM is just dragging me down.

JoeLeg Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Your many good points notwithstanding Loz, you can > be an arrogant so-and-so at times. > > " your last few posts have been an improvement." > > Way to come off like a sanctimonious schoolteacher... Sorry - LM got right up my nose (as you might have noticed)... so that was just a little dig, trying to return the compliment. :))

miga Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Loz Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > > miga Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > > > I also agree with Loz, if I may paraphrase, that any broadly based social justice movement will > > > have inconsistencies and imperfections and logical flaws. > > > > Sort of, but not quite what I said. I was suggesting that BLM chooses its battles more > > carefully. Defending someone using a 5 year old as a human shield I think reduces the potency of > > their argument. > > > > But what you said I agree with as well. > > That's why I said "paraphrase". > > To be consistent and logical - the group would have to pick only the pure as driven snow cases, > behave totally ethically and consistently and wait until all evidence was revealed about every case > they protest before saying anything. Admirable as that would be - that's more how a law firm or a > government inquiry works than a broad, decentralised social justice movement. It also > means that nothing would get done. Some people in the BLM camp ran with the case you mentioned - I > agree it weakens their case, but it's the nature of this kind of thing. Certainly not just the 'perfect' cases, but certainly try to avoid the completely indefensible. BLM's has many critics - why give them ammunition? (Sorry, not the best phrase to use in the circumstances, but can't think of a suitable replacement.) It's a problem shared by many broad based movements - a lack of focus and the inability to spot the winnable battles.

LondonMix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I did not scream loudly at you and I don't need > your condescending invitation to participate on > the forum. You came in with a very attacking post, came to a ridiculous conclusion and accused me of saying things I didn't say, with the added pompous 'educate yourself' twaddle. Not to mention your attempt to stifle debate with your 'stop criticizing something you don't actually know much about' demand. And still you wonder why you got a major pushback to your bolshiness? Many times I suggested you just ask nicely for a clarification and when you finally did I gave it to you. Anyway, enough. You have your clarification and your last few posts have been an improvement.

miga Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I also agree with Loz, if I may paraphrase, that any broadly based social justice movement will > have inconsistencies and imperfections and logical flaws. Sort of, but not quite what I said. I was suggesting that BLM chooses its battles more carefully. Defending someone using a 5 year old as a human shield I think reduces the potency of their argument. But what you said I agree with as well.

You have all the necessary information, LM, but just can't piece it together. BB posted a query about the original stat that I posted and suggest there was a correlation, so I asked BB to apply it to another stat - one that I believed that BB would accept more unquestioningly. The point being to show that the correlation BB was suggesting was not valid and show this by applying it to a different stat. BB then put forward a related stat so I posted the stats to show that wasn't actually correct. My entire point from the start was even if the correlation did exist, it would not necessarily show causation anyway. Yet - and rather ironically - you read it as if I was providing it as 'evidence' of whatever it was you had decided to get you knickers in a twist about. Whilst I agree that understanding the finer points of that wasn't terribly easy, coming to the conclusions you managed to make was really rather ridiculous. You somehow made "2 + 2 = fish". Loudly. As further information (though with the associated danger that you will misconstrue this just as badly), the 'male prison rates' stat is interesting. As civilservant agreed, there is a significant bias in the justice system against men... but there is also studies to show men commit more crimes than women. So what does the 93% male prison population conclude?? On its own, absolutely nothing. You can't make the stat show causation - and this is important - for EITHER argument. It can signal that there may be a problem with bias or discrimination, but you have to dig further to find additional evidence to make any claim. We had good debate in here until you came in. You are more than welcome to join in, but stop putting words in people's mouths - it is offensive. Constantly screaming highly random versions of "SO YOU THINK THIS" is tiresome and, yes, gets my back up. If you ask - nicely - for clarification, you will get it. If you jump up and down like a little child you will be treated accordingly. LondonMix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > And here is the quote since you keep saying, I'm > not quoting you.... > > Loz Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Blah Blah Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > And I wonder what percentage of crime > > (especially violent crime) is carried out by > men? > > There's > > > probably a correlation there Loz. > > > > And if you do the same exercise with ethnicity > in > > the US?

LondonMix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I read the entire thread and what you wrote. Please, correct me if I'm wrong but it read to me > as if you were essentially saying that as the rate of shootings is less than the proportion of the > prison population, that's evidence of no specific racial bias in the way the criminal justice system > treats black people. If that was not the point of those stats please tell me what was. Did you read Blah Blah's post before mine? Is it not obvious then why those stats were posted? And even ore obvious when you read the first line of my post that your strange conclusion is a bit, well... strange? I admit that my reasons for posting the male stats was rather more opaque and esoteric, but those prison stats were pretty obvious. It's curious that you've made wild, random mental leaps to try and understand what I am thinking, when possibly the only post of mine you haven't quoted and queried explains that pretty concisely. As a clue, that post exists because someone asked nicely what my thoughts were, rather than taking your current approach of blundering in and making all sorts of wild accusations. You are coming across as more than a little unwilling to stop, see, understand and accept/debate other people viewpoints and, by extension, you are really not doing BLM any favours.

LondonMix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Are you saying that until all social issues are resolved that impact all groups, black > people have no right to advocate for changes specifically impacting their community? > Why does that make sense to you? No, I didn't say that at all. But I assume you must have known that, as you didn't quote anything I've written that comes anywhere close to saying that. Why are you putting words in people's mouths and setting up nonsensical strawmen?

civilservant Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > According to the Prison Reform Trust, "Out of the British national prison population, 10% are black > and 6% are Asian. For black Britons this is significantly higher than the 2.8% of the general > population they represent. The current prison population is 93% male, compared with 49% of the population.

LondonMix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If you really care, educate yourself about the issues you are raising. If you don't really have > the time or inclination to do a deep dive into the political issues at hand (which is totally > understandable), stop criticizing something you don't actually know much about. 1) Please read the whole thread before picking out one comment, as you don't seem to have followed the context in which it was written. There was a whole conversation around that post and stats. Read the previous posts and you will see the context of why those stats are in that post. And especially read the first line of my post. 2) Don't use the term 'educate yourself'. It is only used by pompous idiots who think their view on a subject is the only acceptable view, and I doubt you want people to think that of you.

titch juicy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Following them were two police bikes but not chasing them or getting > them to stop, more keeping an eye on them. Were they wearing helmets? I'd guess not. Police are not allowed to chase people on motorbikes if they aren't wearing helmets. So they don't. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-32904622 Nuts. Just nuts.

miga Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So what do you think Loz, do you think BLM are misguided (in the States, let's leave the very > different local issues aside)? In some cases yes, in some cases no. The woman the other day that used her 5-year-old as a human shield whilst shooting at police is very different incident to the carer that was shot - the one where the white guy with learning difficulties wouldn't respond to police instructions, so they shot at his black carer who lying on the ground with his hands in the air. One is an understandable response (in as far as you can ever understand police shooting someone) and the other is a jaw-dropping 'WTF' type moment. Yet, BLM are raising both these as being part of the same problem, which I think is a mistake. I think police body cameras are they way forward. Of the incidents where bystanders have filmed incidents, they have been usually provided enough information to either back the police or have the officer in question charged. Having all police wear tamper proof cameras can only be a good thing. And that applies in the UK as well.

I'm not sure arrest rates or even prison stats are a good justification for police killing stats, but for the moment I'll go with that. I can't find arrest rates, but looking at prison rates from 2010 (from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States#Ethnicity ). People with an ethnicity of 'black' comprised 40% of the US prison population. And, in 2015, according to data from the Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/jun/01/the-counted-police-killings-us-database ) people with an ethnicity of 'black' comprised 306 of 1147 people killed by police, or 26.7%. I know those dates are not the same, but I doubt the US prison population ethnic make-up has changed markedly over those years.

Also, RD, you did that yourself when you said, "The BBC licence fee is still amazingly good value at just over ?12/month, far cheaper than alternative forms of entertainment." My first thought, on reading that, was that Netflix and Amazon Prime are both cheaper.

Blah Blah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > And I wonder what percentage of crime (especially violent crime) is carried out by men? There's > probably a correlation there Loz. And if you do the same exercise with ethnicity in the US?