Moos

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As it happens, under British law primates do have > rights that eschew those of more run of the mill > mammals. > > Principally regarding testing. > > I'm concerned that Moos' testing may have involved > a serious breach of these conditions in the name > of 'research'. The Japanese, of course, 'research' > whales. I am surprised at you, sir. I would have thought it hardly necessary to assure you that all of my research was carried out upon unpaid volunteers in none of whose vocabulary was contained the word 'ook'.

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So Zero is English, and Nought is American? > > Very good to know. Zero it is. My mother used to tell me off for saying Zero, because Zero is American, and Naught or as we now spell it Nought is English. So now I'm confused..

In standard consultancy, a graduate will be hired out at around ?400-?600/day. In the organisation where I work, ?1000/day will buy a client a specialist consultant with no more than 5 years' experience post university. No doubt in larger public-sector organisations, and certainly in the world of independent contractors, ?1000 will get you a lot more value for your money. But I would be surprised if you could get someone who could do sensible data analysis, market comparison and offer strategic solutions for much less than ?1000/day. This is all assuming this is a temporary consulting role, rather than a permanent job.

Yay for you snowboarder!

My research has shown that many men claim that they are bananas but in fact are much more likely to be found to be runner beans. I trust this will be useful to you. P.S. If I eat a lot of broccoli, does this make me less human?

david_carnell Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Michael, PM me for all your satorial needs. > > Moos - see me after school for spreading vicious > rumours! Scuse me? What rumours? I said I DIDN'T.. oh whatever.

daizie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Lmfao Moo .. hope you know him ? Dressing > appropriately for ones age is an 'art . So many > people get it so wrong . I'd suggest getting a > personal dresser, well worth the money .. It is my privilege to know both Mr. Palaeologus and Mr. Carnell reasonably well but not, you understand, Biblically. I leave that highest privilege of all to others.

Carnell's wardrobe?

EvilLaugh Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yeah and the people shaking all the plums into a > massive sheet. In a public park? Isn't that indecent exposure?

We can also stand up in small ways as well as big ways. Would I chase a mugger into a dark alley screaming Come back here, you naughty man, you! No. Would I ask a teenager (politely) to turn his music down on the bus? Yes. The trouble with all of the press about heroes who get stabbed is that people become frightened to intervene on even the slightest of occasions, but the more people are prepared to intervene on small issues, more people will feel that there is a collective set of acceptable behaviours. I'm sorry, I'm not sure that that was either coherent or particularly meaningful.

Time to go back into the Control Centre methinks. Just joshin' ya.

I added a signature when I was going through a particularly angry phase, and it felt like an appropriate warning. Took it off when I felt better. Have recently considered adding 'Education never pained' as I had to look 'sedition' up...

I did go away as asked but fresh accusations have been made about me, so I'm back. I don't agree that pointing out someone's rudeness and arrogance is talking down to them.

I don't think we're getting anywhere here. I hoped to make you think about your post and what it implied about your attitude to this forum. But obviously that isn't going to happen, so as invited I shall go away.

Well, it was a public post on a public forum, so I'm entitled to post I believe. And your 'just a prod' was extremely rude.

Starmix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Moos Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > Let's throw another hypothetical scenario. You're parking your car in a Pay and Display, and someone's forgotten to take the change out of the meter. There's nobody around, and you quickly realise that the sum of the change will get you free parking. Congratulations, You've just profited off someone's misfortune, sugar-coat it all you like. Er, well thank you for the congratulations and the proffer of the sugar-coat, but remember this is a hypothetical scenario, so I haven't actually done that. But let's say I'm standing there with this unearned ?3.50 in my hand. I look around, there's no-one walking off. Again, I hope I'd put the money in a change box in the next shop I go into. But let's say I shrug and say life's too short, and get my free parking. I've done wrong, no question, but it's a small and relatively unimportant wrong. It doesn't mean that it isn't worse to steal someone's pension, or their life savings. Just because you can rationalise away a small wrong, doesn't mean it isn't wrong, and it doesn't mean that therefore all morality is irrelevant. Subtlety, application to the context, scale and just pure 'feel' come into ethics; they have to, because life isn't black and white, and choices aren't easy.

I don't think you could find many people who truly behave to the utmost of their moral beliefs every moment of every day. But it's worth the effort to overall make what contribution you can. I'd like to think that if I found ?100 on the street and there was absolutely no way to find its owner that I'd give to to charity. But I can't say for sure. And personal circumstance comes into it too, truth is ?100 wouldn't make or break my week, and maybe I'd behave differently if it would. But I hope not. Starmix, reason and faith are definitively contradictory things. Faith or religion and ethics don't have to be combined (although they are in my case) and generally speaking good ethics can be backed by good reason - you could go with a simple 'greatest good to the greatest number' argument, for example.

Man = Winston Churchill.

And someone else would be equally unhappy for having lost ?100.

shurrrp Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > but you wstill wouldnt be a theif if you took it, > because you FOUND it.. No, perhaps not technically, but I thought we were talking about a situation when someone could have looked around and seen the person who withdrew the cash walk off without it. So if you pick up the money and quietly pocket it without making the effort, then you're deliberately choosing not to give it back and to my mind that's theft. Actually, I might even go one further and say it should be returned to the bank regardless.

Shurrp, I think Brendan was referring to thieving rather than grammar when he said some people are scum. And well done on your scholarship. I agree a lot of people would keep money at a cashpoint, my personal view is that it doesn't make it right. I can't remember whether it was you or Starmix that brought up the question of finding 1p vs finding ?100 but I think it's an interesting one. My take is that just because you can reduce a moral point to the absurd that it doesn't invalidate it. So, you find a penny on the street and keep it, because realistically you cannot find its owner. Most people would do that, and I think most would not call it theft. It's not really about the rigidity of the morals, but about their practical application in the world, and a realistic and proportionate effort to do the right thing. In this example, for me if you find ?100 on the street, you should make an effort to return it to its owner because it will make a real difference to that person.

Lewishamman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You are not very nice people. Lewishamman, sorry you've caught the sharp end of the forum on your first visits. I personally think it's generally a friendly place and you have seen a number of supportive posts on your threads. Since you're new, you won't have seen all the strange goings-on and false postings that people who post regularly have seen, and I'm afraid it has made people a little cynical. Try to take it with a pinch of salt - on the whole, I hope you will find this is an interesting and friendly place. I'm sorry you have found yourself in a situation that makes you so uncomfortable. I agree with the people who have suggested that you contact crimestoppers. Best of luck

TLS, Keef and Brendan, thank you very much for helping me to make my point. Hugo, that's interesting - thanks!

See previous, Quids. But seriously sorry for jumping on you so quickly.

Ha ha, is it 'I heard the news today, oh booooyyyyyyyy' that does it for you?