Senor Chevalier

Indeed - Bill was a great man and my weaving is entry level at best. Probably came to me after I clocked someone referring to life as a ride in the "Matter" thread earlier...

It's been a while since Caecilius so I'm having to interpret a bit but I feel you Luckily I've been practicing my reading between the lines on Richardbachs's posts all w/e...

Still DJ, my cockish remarks aside, people can be forgiven for not taking the moral stand that you do. Parents cannot be expected to reconcile wanting to do the best for their children with sending them into a system that is likely to fail them through no fault of their own.

Is irregardless a word?

Nah, sometimes in a competitive situation you have to run just to stay in the same place. But by the "huge" definition just about everything is included as marketing except perhaps the supply chain unless making eco claims about it. So anything that facilitates the customer experience (for example accepting credit cards, providing trolleys etc) is by definition marketing and thus an evil ruse to separate you from your cash.

Gutsy

Pretty broad definition of marketing. If they fixed the bus lane up DKH would that also be marketing?

But surely there are multiple tiers within state education access to which being based on such random factors as faith and propinquity..?

An old topic, but popped up on a recent thread. So what do we think people? To be applauded or scorned?

I am the weaver...

I paraphrase - I think the phrase used was "barking". Anyway whatever, this one has been done now.

Hi Otta Some of the earlier posts were sickeningly self-righteous or seemed to be suggesting that people who had concerns about this were nuts. This is clearly a ridicuous way to try to persuade people that have concerns and I was trying to unpick that. I think that in the later posts, those in favour arrived at a less sanctimonious position - that these things are regrettably necessary and should be supported. This seems to be your view too. Is a quiet night on here though all credit for trying to rev this up into something more interesting. I never thought I'd say it, but bring back the camper van man...

Well I've been looking into statistics today and, whilst I can't be certain, if I had to call it, I'd say the rabid dog-lovers are outnumbering the dog-hating pillocks though it is a close call. Of those in either camp there are the live and let live variety and then the extremists that give the others a bad name. I've just been to Peckham Rye park for a stroll as it happens and spotted 2 untethered dogs in the dogs on leash area against the rules. Now they were perfectly well behaved, and didn't bother me at all, though my wife did quicken her pace as she is a bit jumpy around dogs. People accept that there are dogs roaming around parks and there is no objection to that, but there are areas where dogs are meant to be on leashes for those with irrational fear of dogs to visit and feel safe in. Are you saying that those afflicted with such psychoses should not be entitled to enjoy their area of the park?

OK Frank, since you ask, here are your Stats: *Joined 107 days ago *Posted 1074 times *Average posts per day 10 *Average posts per month 300 *First three months - average 200 pcm *Most recent month - 400 Not looked into others but I reckon this must be close to top of the league table and the addiction is clearly escalating. Time for rehab? Having been nagged by the wife for the disproportionate amount of time time I spend looking at this thing and often watrned "not to engage with the crazy people" I am in no position to preach. I wouldn't worry, whilst quite an acute case, I'm sure the usual lifecycle (tentative first posts, growing confidence, exponential growth, plateau and then fall off to a more healthy steady state will apply. Still pretty bored.

Just bored and sticking my nose in really - you're right, I don't have a dog and don't live near Peckham Rye park or use it (though the cafe looks nice - meant to check it out) so I have no business posting on this thread. Just having a relatively quiet weekend and keeping myself amused on the forum and couldn't help but notice you all over it, haven't done any formal analysis. Will see how bored I am this afternoon and whether I can be sarsed to run the numbers...

Franko - Think she's just saying that your sample of 2 good ones doesn't mean there aren't also bad ones which you have also acknowledged. Can't see her slagging off your 2 in any way. Perhaps if you weren't posting so prolifically you'd have time to read posts properly...!

As replicants what "matters" is proliferation of our selfish genes. We are just vehicles. The fact that we have consciousness is incidental to our selfish genes. In fact they've stuffed up along the way in letting us get as complex as we are as we can now step back and question whether such gene replication matters. In other words the hosts are disobeying the instruction manual, defying animal urges, navel gazing and concluding that gene replication may not matter. Or something like that.

RB amazingly I think I follow what you are saying. Or at least I think I do. Who the f* knows. Seriously, your posts take longer to read then they must do to write. Sort it out. ETA: What's the collective noun for trolls?

Perhaps the Sydenham forum. Oh no, they didn't take the bait. In fact they called it after a couple of posts with this. http://troll.me/not-sure-if-trolling-or-just-stupid/ You guys are losing your edge.

In fairness probably easier to find a new career earlier in life than it is for those getting to the end of working life.

I'm not sure you should be questioning consistency so soon after a dump.

Are you suggesting there is no room for common sense on the roads and we should all be rule-following automatons? Sounds kind of dangerous to me.

The yoof need to be informed of this for it to be an effective deterrant...

Yes, I agree with the broader benefits. So the difficulty is that downside is tangible / direct whereas upside is broader and less immediately obvious. Interesting parallel with the discussions on standing one's ground in the face of threats. If we all refuse to be victims to petty crime (recent threads on phone muggings, jogger versus gang etc etc) then the immediate downside is quite tangible - the risk of personal harm in specific situations - whereas the upside is to society as a whole for not allowing a culture of crime (why are we all saying crimanility now?) and the expectation of getting away with it to flourish.

The success stories are presumably in terms of reduced reoffending rates benefitting the individual kids and the various areas that they would otherwise have committed crimes in. The downside risks are the local issues that might arise in and around the YOS. So really it is up to ED to step up and do its bit for the wider benefit of Southwark and London. Maybe we should stick it in Dulwich Village.