binary_star

I've got MobileMe for my iPhone, and in my head, any theftplays out like so: http://iphonetheif.blogspot.com/2010/01/iphone-theif-bust.html In reality, I understand this probably wont happen, sadly.

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I cannot for the life of me understand why > silverfox is attempting to excuse this as a > 'set-up'?? I honestly believe that some people think it's acceptable to have racist or other bigoted views so long as they don't air them publicly: "Well, if I'd known I was being videotaped, I wouldn't have said it obviously!" To me it's along the same line of thought that leads people to think it's ok for BNP members to be teachers so long as they don't teach the drivel to the kids. The man should have been fired, no question.

The Google game:

Yeh, I was trying to reaffirm that, but admittedly not very clearly! In any case, I haven't even managed to sit through 10mins of Nathan Barley let alone a whole episode.

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > They're not all wallies in Hoxton. thebestnameshavegone Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > (See also: people who watched Nathan Barley once, > and base their stereotype of 'trendy people' on a > 5 year out-of-date sitcom based on 10 > year-out-of-date character)

Is advertising a subset of publicity? I would say the object is to generate publicity through advertising but that not all advertising actually generates publicity. And that in industry terms, there is almost always an associated cost with advertising, but not so with publicity.

Very useful info Sue, thanks!

Search engine optimisation really means Google optimisation for most websites these days. It will take more than a 'sit down' but if you have a limited budget you can learn a lot of the basics yourself. There's a lot of jargon in the industry that might seem baffling at first and although SEO can be greatly effected by things such as canonical urls, 301 redirects, .htaccess configuration, the robots.txt file, XML sitemaps, the main thing is to ensure you have relevant, accessible and well structured content. Remember that search engine robots will read your site as plain text - even images will be indexed using their file names, titles, alt tags, and descriptions so think carefully about what keywords people will be using to search for your site and write relevant content around those. Google also places a lot of importance on page titles and the structure of html too, so make sure your web designer knows how to write standards-compliant (x)html. It's a bit cliche but user friendly is Google friendly so having readable urls, good html titles, consistent navigation and accessible content will help lots. Get a Google account, install Google Analytics, submit your site to the major search engines and verify it in Google's Webmaster tools (or get your web designer/developer to do this for you). Sit back and review your analytics statistics to make sure you're meeting your goals or to see whether you need to make any changes. Ultimately, be wary of anyone who promises to get your site to the top of Google (no-one can guarantee that) or anyone who advocates bad practices such as keyword stuffing, deceptive redirects, link schemes etc - this could lead to your site being blacklisted and you will be removed from Google's results altogether. Not irreversible, but a pain in the ass no less. A good place to start is this from the horses mouth: http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=35291 http://www.google.com/webmasters/docs/search-engine-optimization-starter-guide.pdf Good luck! EDIT: I forgot to say that if you can get your keywords in your domain name, then that is a mega bonus (www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk is actually a really good example of this).

Jah Lush Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Reads the forum but only that one post. Bogus. Or to preserve what anonymity he has left, he chose not to reply under his regular username?

Fox, hunting with firearms: http://www.fwi.co.uk/blogs/rural-life/Fox_hunting.jpg

Annette Curtain Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "This thread is a hoot.." http://i656.photobucket.com/albums/uu284/squirli/oryl-owl-ya-rly.jpg

"We used to dream of living in a corridor"

Ah so you did lol, oops. What can I say, I'm very conscientious and read all threads thoroughly from top to bottom - especially your posts :-$

A bit late now, DipDap, but you may need in the future a very good post from a London cycling forum "What to do in case of an accident": http://www.lfgss.com/thread4213.html

Could the enhanced private messages module do it? http://www.phorum.org/phorum5/read.php?62,147761,147761 Looks like it requires the latest release though :(

Is it possible to search through ones own private messages? If not, any chance of this functionality in the near future? It would be super handy.

Thanks applespider, I am aware of rose veal, and too of ethical foie gras and the practice of stunning or freezing lobsters before boiling them but I was referring more to the traditional methods associated with these foods which in my opinion are cruel. And I don't think I've found myself in the position to eat the more humanely produced varieties. Edit: not sure what happened to this post - managed to butcher it somehow - but it went something like the above.

SeanMacGabhann Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > meat-eaters might survive without meat > > The animals they eat won't be so lucky tho Now that would be the natural (selection) order of things. Ok, not quite but should "wild" cows exist? In terms of the breeds we've selectively bred for the dairy industry, probably not.

RosieH Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I read the increase in brain size has to do with > cooking food. I read it was because early humans had adapted to use tools to get at nutritious sources other scavengers and hunters couldn't reach on a carrion (e.g. bone marrow, brain). It makes sense that this in turn would lead to greater brain development, which in turn would lead to more complex tools for preparing and cooking food. Chimps have also been shown to use tools to scavenge for food. Either way, I don't think many people often find themselves in the position of having to smash open a femur or skull to get a bite to eat these days.

I am comfortable buying animal hides that I can think are by-products of the meat industry (leather, reindeer pelts for example). Furs in general, are primary products which is quite possibly why I have never worn or purchased real fur. I do eat meat but there are certain foods I absolutely will not eat and could not enjoy eating for various ethical/moral reasons, including: foie gras, veal, lobster and other crustaceans that are boiled alive, anything still alive. The more I learn about food production, the more foods are added to the banned list - shark fin is a recent addition for example. Like anyone, I can quickly rationalise just about anything in order to appease my ego, but I can't justify the hypocrisy of my stance on animal products, except to say that it's an emotional rather than logical choice and that my omnivorisym is coupled with a fair amount of guilt. A lot of this guilt is associated with the fact that as humans, meat is farmed for us rather than hunted (or even scavenged) by us. It just seems a bit distasteful to me that as higher functioning organisms we are breeding lower functioning ones solely for the purpose of consumption. Again, I think more of an emotional thought process than logical one. In the West, we have alternatives to meat so I don't buy the survival argument...I for one, could survive quite easily without meat. On my part it's just laziness and ignorance that's maintaining my meat-eating habits. I am considering vegetarianism. But I had beef for dinner, so obviously not today :D

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Blimey, I've morphed into KalamityKel :)) > > I should lay off the Stella :)) Your post linked to this form which seems to be running now that the other one is down (for me anyway). Royal Mail's website is about at usable as their telephone system.

ortmann80 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > well the next person i see letting there dog poo > on the path without cleaning it up, i will > personally pick it up with anything i can find and > throw it at them. No you wont. But if you do, can you let us know how that goes?

Royal Mail complaint form posted here seems to be up and running still. I've complained, and got an automated response to let me know that they'd received the complaint.

It will be http://twitter.com/ followed by your Twitter username, so http://twitter.com/leaglebeagle for example.

Good outlook Pearson. It does annoy me a bit that the onus is on the cyclist to modify their behaviour in order to compensate for bad driving, but he will be safer for it. The driver should also learn not to pull out at a junction without looking though. He obviously didn't care enough to stop when he hit the OP's son, so the actual act of causing an accident and possibly injuring someone clearly wasn't lesson enough, which for any normal person would have been. I think he should financially compensate you for any damage, just for the principle. But we don't live in an ideal world, and I've been in similar situations where I was just glad to have come away unscathed. The good thing is that your son is ok and he has learned a lesson that will ultimately make him safer.