DJKillaQueen

I read a few days ago that OFCOM are going to deal with the promises ISPs make on bandwidth. They argue that advertising something as speeds of up to *** when actually delivering far inferior speeds to many customers is unfair and misleading. I totally agree with them. The problem BT has is that it shares it's network with other ISPs (it rents to) and to be honest it's not up to the job. Peak usage is so high they have to restrict bandwidth. Cable providers (like Virgin Media/ Sky etc have a better service at the moment because they don't share their network with other companies and are probably the better option for anyone wanting consistent speed.

Lost Yorkshire Man Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > . Very funny cartoon.....but breasts like that in a top like that wouldn't stay in for a second so I wonder if that's what some guys think they see as opposed to what is actually there? lol

stevebailey Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > DJKQ and W**F sitting in a > tree....................K I S S I N G > > Ahhhhhhhhhhhh > > :-) Too funny.....but not perhaps to his wife :X !

Brilliant post Giggi......(tu)....totally spot on with every point.

Dang how do I change the spelling mistake in the header.....lol? Ok done....:-S

It just has to be done.... A thread where admirers of the wit that is the woof can marvel at well...the wit! Who else would would think of turning till receipts into bricks and show a machine for sale to do just that....? C'mon...let's celebrate our favourite posts of the WOOF! :)-D

I love the meadows.... And at the weekend I saw literally a hundred or more bees pollinating from a patch of what I think was lavender. Wonderful to see.

You are very welcome. Looked good and delicious is what matters - pleased the recipe worked for you (tu).

Hi Scarlett, Welcome to East Dulwich! Have a look in the 'what's on' section where you'll find all sorts of things where you can make new friends, from forum picnics to sports and other stuff.

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > On no, the goose is out! Was it playing a guitar and singing a bit of folk as it flew by Loulou?

I love it all (even the blue fountain) and am lucky to live overlooking it - the best garden anyone can have!

Tills work with dual rolls anyway so the till memorises every transaction whether a receipt is printed or not and they all can be set to 'requested' printing as opposed to automatic printing. Don't really care for the tax man but I would care if I employed people only to find them stealing from the business.

W**F will be ok...he has assassin cats as back up!

I once saw a guy drop litter not more than three feet form a bin (close to where I live). I said to him, 'there's a bin there' and he replied 'you put it in there then'. What can any of us do? These people really do not care.

Peckham Rye ward SNT have been really good. They have always responded and by going to ward panel meetings, residents have helped to shape policing priorities between meetings. We'd be very sad to see that service go. Sounds like your SNT is the opposite. These days you can by a wireless surveillance camera, the size of a sugar cube, for about ?35 (just connect it to a video or DVD recorder or PC even). That's one way to catch anyone stealing petrol from you.

No one is disagreeing that some jobs require 'uniforms' or indeed 'safety wear' but the vein of the thread argues that a low cut top is in itself provocative (and that women should completely cover up). When asking the question why is it inappropriate? the stock answer is that the sight of any piece of cleavage is distracting. Why is it distracting and to whom? That for me is the issue. Surely the sight of the top of cleavage is not so rare that it is stopping production in thousands of offices. Yes there are aprroriate ways to dress, depending on the job and so on, but to argue that a small piece of female flesh, that lets face it, most of us pay no attention to is such a big deal. As for KK's example, to describe someones cleavage as 'sitting on the table' would be considered as sexual descrimination by a tribunal. The womans chest size will not diminish if she wears a different top.

LOL w**f

But this woman is not *flashing* her tits...she's only wearing a low cut top with a bra....we don't even know what size bra she wears... I can't see why a low cut top with a smart jacket and trousers or skirt is not appropriate for an office? Because thousands of women go to work dressed as such every day and most men and women have no problem with that. And breast size is an issue in this discussion so far (KK's clearly describes them as sitting on the table for example) and size is what determines what cleavage is visible, as larger women needed bras that support and uplift more. For me it is clearly descrimination against any women with a chest size above whatever point it is that men's eyes widen.

You forget Odyseey that women are also contending with underwired bras and so on so it's a different level of discomfort to wearing jeans/ trousers...... I am one woman who prefers a low cut top to a poorly fitting blouse (something women with cleavage often find) and I am certainly not wearing that top to attract anyone and nor do most of the men I know have any problem with women dressing as such in the workplace as long as they are smart. Half the population are female I think men have no right to tell any woman what they should and shouldn't wear anyway, simply because some men can't control the way they look at women! That's my view. We'll have to agree to disagree. I'm certainly not about to offer 'advice' on something I see as men dictating to women. This is not Saudi Arabia....

I would have asked him if his house had litter all over the floor too and if he was one of those people regularly featured in 'A Life of Grime'.

I agree it isn't in the spirit but he (or she) is going on and on at me and it's a bit tiring. I'm sure no-one wants to read it either.

Odyssey Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What if I was to walk into the office > in one of those baggy jeans which hang around your > arse revealing a substantial amount of bum > cleavage. Would this be allowable or would the > boss call me in for a chat? But what you are talking about is not comparable. And something else. If a woman has large cleavage she sweats in the joins - sorry to get intimate - so there are very good reasons why women prefer low cut necklines - especially in hot weather. It's not about being sexually provocative but comfort most the time. Wearing jeans below the bum on the other hand would never be comfortable and absolutely provocative.

I'm "totally hypocritical" (perhaps not totally, give me break !) I'm "frowning upon women's empowerment" (that's unfair) I "can't handle a bit of female flesh showing" (I already said there's plenty cleavage in the office to 'handle') KK go back and read that first post you refer to again...I think you find it in the third person and doesn't refer to you personally at all...however I have very right to criticise the views you have...take it on the chin....and stop making something out of nothing. I "think a low cut top unacceptable because you associate it with sex and the sex industry." (startling conclusion to jump to) YOU drew a comparison between your colleagues attire and that of the sex industry (not me) - read what you wrote - lol..... And yes I do think that if you think a woman wearing a low cut top is sexually provocative in itself then that is your problem, not hers. It's a perfectly valid view point to have. I honesty wonder why some people even bother posting in a debate if they can't tolerate a different perspective from their own views. Stop whining.

LOL...that's the spirit.....but if anything turns blue - you've cut off the blood supply because of over tightness!

HA HA..... - mind you bra's and chicken fillets - they do go together (especially with a bit of a jerk) but that's a whole different thread! ;-)