SeanMacGabhann

Rule of thumb: If daizie says "too much information", no further questions your honour

seriously, I'm not even joking. It brings me to, genuine, proper rage

It was that particular fekker that started me off today!

I expect no better from him (decent enough chap tho he seems)

2/10 quids unless you mean it. In which case can I introduce you my (in effect) father-in-law Ps I hate the childish use of Con-Dems as much as you seem to. I don't think it's just a Labour thing tho. or Lib thing. I know many a tory voter at work who thinks it's hilarious to use that phrase.

Post-Limbo I'm now scared of 9 year old boys I'm so prone to thinking london lacks a "quick travel" mode Ace thread btw

Well done snork. You have invented a new crime. (touching a French stick) and invented a whole host of punishments to match Shopkeepers get anything but a free ride as this forum is witness to. But you go ahead and fantasise if you must Seriously, does balance never enter your thoughts?

Light my fire. The song. Any version by anyone ever I can genuinely affect my whole day.

Is now the time to remind people that that red smiley isnt quite what people think? Btw me = (?)

Ah, so it doesn't But if you have reached the stage where you are pm ing someone perhaps you can swap email addresses?

Just above where you type you reply... That strip of icons (including smileys). Just above THEM is a link saying "attach a file or photo" Click on that

yes I know about money and taxpayers money. It's the "waste" bit I don't get. It was specific.. not general waste but the "government has seen fit"

That waste being?

Hmmmmm

Well flat conversions wil have a huge effect obviously ? a street with 20 houses and 20 cars can easily become a street with 60 flats and 60 cars But your quoted stat doesn?t account for a) The number of households with 2 or more cars now b) The size of cars has increased significantly in the last 20 years All in all, a lot less space

Pk Funnily enough, I would normally be taking the same stance as you on matters like this. And having being embroiled in a recent argument with Huguenot myself I know what it?s like to have one?s words twisted to mean something one didn?t say And yet and yet ? this isn?t upturning some ?innocent until proven guilty? principle. These people aren?t in jail on a shopkeepers say so. They aren?t even going to be prosecuted. It?s simply one of the few available defences shopkeepers have. If I have stolen from a shop and they put my picture up I?ll probably avoid that place If I haven?t stolen froma shop and my picture is up I?ll have a quiet word with the owner abou the confusion (and let?s be honest this isn?t a likely scenario ? they aren?t going to put up pictures of people they THINK they have seen stealing) and we can clear it up

The solution to what problem tho? If the problem is "I can't park outside or near my house" then I might question if that is in fact a problem. As has been mentioned by others when you move to a place near a railway line, or a pub, or a station there are quid pro quos involved and this seems to be the case here and a number of people "affected" appear to be accepting of that The number of cars is growing - physical space in towns can't hope to match that growth. That's it really. Unless people opt not to drive, parking will continue to get ever more scarce

Not sure who you are classifying as vulnerable here IV You live up that way - spend a day with Nisha behind the counter or the guys in Red Apple and you will see who the vulnerable really are I'm for publishing lists of tax avoiders too btw - but that isn't what we are talking about.

Huguenot, carnell and I all on the same page here? Wow

Said moderator also finds ipads and iphone keyboards a pain to type on and has often misspooled wirds on here because of them

for clarity, I haven't said that. Many people disagree with my views. I don't say they have mental illness. If I intimated that you have a mental illness it'll be for some other reason. And I wish to retract any accusation of you having a mental illness But you do seem keen to equate Ireland fighting an often brutal colonial occupying force with Ireland voluntarily entering into a union with it's nearby trading partners. I am still calling that view (and not you personally) as nuts

latest update on this at snopes here

In theory, it?s the same argument but in practice it?s a bit different For a start who is the ?we? in the example putting up a sex-offender?s picture? In the shoplifting case it?s very clear who the ?we? and the ?why? is ? it?s also a good sanity check as a shopkeer wants business so will do all he/she can to get customers in ? I can?t see them putting up a picture on a whim. And even if the person in a picture is innocent? not much is likely to happen to them is it? ?didn?t I see your picture in the newsagents?? ? ?yeah but I think the newsagent doesn?t like me because I kept taking my dog in? or whatever? In the more extreme example, even if the ?we? was the victim of a sex-offender and the photo was genuine, the likely public reaction would likely lead to further illegal activity and disorder.

Good point EC, good point (although technically, not JUST for name calling) I had wondered if Tarot would revisit the post and edit it, but clearly not

now now, I haven't even questioned the whole "dyed in the wood" thing, much less the name-calling