Huguenot

Yeah, agreed on the solictors, we used a really good value outfit called Forshaws in Warrington. No need to pay through the nose for a local one.

It seems to me that the cut-off point at 6.30pm is key. A claim for 'light pollution' or 'noise pollution' before 6.30pm is absolutely extraordinary in its intolerance. I'm not sure anything before 8pm wouldn't be similarly unreasonable.

"laughable [...]the answer to floodlights opposite your house is to put up blinds" erm yes. Exactly that. Why is this laughable? You don't say? We had a streetlamp directly outside our house in Crawthew that was on all night (rather than just until 6.30pm). I put up blinds. No tantrums, no barely contained fury. I just put up blinds. My blood pressure remained stable and I was a happy man. Metropolitan land acquisition is another issue. There's a good reason to protest. Floodlights until 6.30pm? No. Can't see it. I think that's laughable. Alleyns is a school, not some kind of rapacious evil empire.

The only complaint here that seems legitimate is about noise pollution. I can see how evening sports might make it hard for families with children to get them into bed. I can't see how light pollution has any legitimacy. We all live on well lit roads in a bustling city. If you want darkness put up blinds. 'Partying people' has nothing to do with sports floodlights, it's a question of ensuring that the use of the facilites remains for what was originally intended. If the school has an obligation to make facilites available to the community then it's simply a question of reviewing this and providing documentary evidence that this has taken place. It has nothing to do with floodlights. The issue about a company paying for use of the facilities over Easter is also a complete irrelevance. They are prefectly entitled to do this if they want. If a charity for 'disadvantaged kids' wants to use the facilites then they should make an approach to the school and see what accommodation could be negotiated. There's no reason why the school should be setting this up. They're a school, not a charity for 'disadvantaged kids'. Either way, it's got nothing to do with the floodlights. Some of the people on this thread just seem to be having a go at Alleyns for anything they can think of.

Not very compelling? You were prepared to force 'chocolate' on people when the majority didn't want it. The majority did not want it. That's what you just don't get. You're willing to force people to do what the majority simply don't want. That's why there's no democracy in FPTP. You think in some bizarre twisted way that giving people their second preferencce is giving them something they don't want. Unless you get this stupid view out of your head you're never going to understand AV. AV allows something called a 'compromise'. Something grown-up intelligent people do. Your statement about idiots like silverfox calling perpetual recounts applies equally whatever voting system you use, so I don't know why you bothered to bring that up. Fortunately most returning officers are wise enough to see people like that for what they really are.

silverfox is just deliberately trying to confuse people. It's such a pathetic sad waste. I simply don't understand why people would fight so hard to prevent representative democracy. Since the arguments in favour of AV are so compelling, then silverfox must think it's somehow in his interest to prevent it. Since the outcome of FPTP is not representative democracy, then silverfox must see retaining it as a way of getting 'his team' in power despite a minority backing. The thing is, 'his team' don't care about silverfox at all. They have no interest in his existence. They're not going to welcome him into their private club and toast his contribution. In fact 'his team' use AV to settle their own internal activities (so they know it's best). Instead of congratulating him, they are more likely to sneer at his gullibility and laugh behind his back.

There you go again. There isn't any complicated mathematical formula. That's purely and simply a lie. An outright lie. I don't tolerate liars PGC. You are entirely entitled to your view PGC, you are not entitled to lie with impunity. I cannot believe the arrongance, conceit and self-regard that would allow people to come on here and tell lies to try and get their own way. If you think that chastising liars is 'bigotry' then your moral compass is so buggered up it's tragic.

It really stands out for me, that most of those arguing against AV on this thread have been manipulative and disingenuous. Where those in favour of AV have been honest and open and worked hard to explain what are pretty simple ideas, those against have failed to come up with a sensible response between them. It culminates with PGC suggesting it's undemocratic. How fcuking sane is that?

What on earth are you talking about? Where did I suggest I didn't want democracy? AV is the only democratic option on the table. I take it you're intending to vote NO, hence you're feigning confusion where none exists, and trying to suggest that AV is undemocratic? This is it? The sum total of the NO crowd? Just load of innuendo and rubbish? You and silverfox, PGC? I never would have thought it. How very very sad.

Ah well. It's very compact. Looks to me like a 15 year old has picked up a bin bag and shaken it over the rye to impress his mates. You can't blame society for the actions of one kid. It might even be just a fox.

For Heaven's sake PGC what exactly is confusing about this? You vote for your first preference. If your first preference gets the least votes they'll be knocked out and your vote will be given to your second preference. It's not fcuking confusing. Trying to guess the outcome of an election is confusing regradless of whatever voting system you have, don't try and make this an issue of AV. Regarding Harriet Harman, she was elected with 59% of voters putting her in first preference. AV would have no impact on her election, because the majority actually want her there. AV is useful when a Tory bigot get's elected with 35% of the vote, because the sensible majority have mistakenly split their vote between Labout and Lib Dem. AV would probably prevent the bigot getting in.

Well, I got some predictions right on the housing market, but I blew $160,000 of my own cash (not worth, real cash) on the exchange rate. That really hurt. I genuinely never realised how fcuked the UK economy was. Never again.

No, rubbish. You can only call Stinkbridge if there's been a dwarf redirect. Call Roadworks or accept a yellow card. Bah.

A weak pound makes exports disproportionately cheap, and imports unhealthily expensive. Whilst it offers a short term boost to national industry, it's only short term because they have to buy the resources in. At the moment they're still trading on pre-collapse medium-term reserve contracts. At some stage in the next 12 months the pound will need to strengthen, and that'll be achieved through raising interest rates. If you're planning to negotiate on current exchange rates I'd probably tend to delay, on the grounds that the pound is unlikely to get weaker, but quite likely to get stronger. A no-lose gamble. Having said that, it's entirely a personal conviction and I don't want to be held responsible if it doesn't work out.

People confuse the idea of 'nation' and 'state'. A nation is a social and cultural construct, a state is an administrative region. Quids thinks there can be no European agreement because it'll never be a 'nation'. I don't disagree with him that the totalitarian tendencies necessary to creating homogenous 'nations' are in the past for Western Europe. However I fundamentally disagree that this stands in the way of creating a state. I'm also convinced that statehood is necessary in a world of dwindling resources to gain Europe a fair share in the face of Chinese, Indian and US imperial inclinations. Most 'nations' were built by the arbitrary identification of 'state' borders, and the indoctrination of children through education into a unified concept of genetic nationality. 'Nations' are for mugs and the Balkans. Despite popular myth, the UK has never really been a 'nation' in the 'one people' sense of the word. Every region has strong separatist ideals. The same applies to all of the european super-nations of Germany, France, Italy and Spain. When Cameron, Merkel and others claim that multiculturalism has failed, they are merely protesting that the natural consequence of an educated society is a reduction in the need for blind tribalism that hangs 'nations' together. They would do better to focus on the elements of statehood that would best serve their electorate, and stop trying to sustain antiquated medieval concepts beyond their natural life.

You may be underestimating the degree to which the US and Chinese don't like themselves ;-)

I'm not sure what you're getting at Quids? This comment is clearly erroneous: ?It won?t work, you can?t marry up sovereign states with different political, economic and, er, cough ?accounting practices' together under one set of monetary rules.? You only need a daytrip from Kensington to Liverpool to see two two nations with different political, economic and accounting practices working together under one set of monetary rules. I don't doubt that consistent interest rate policies are inherently risky. I just see no point in attemtping to make this a European 'national' issue. Perhaps a visit to Ripon from Henley would clear that one up? Since the challenges are as big within our borders as without, then it's a non-issue so far as European integration goes. I don't know whether convergence means a loss of 'sovereignty', because I don't know what 'sovereignty' is. Since we are economically and structurally entirely dependent upon world trade, I argue that we have no 'sovereignty' that's worth anything more than the bleating of the Sun. I can't see a reason to distinguish someone I don't know in Leeds from someone I don't know in Lisbon. The only distinction you could possibly draw would be completely arbitrary and constructed upon 500 year old social engineering, language and lines on maps. Since this form of distinction is based on irrational and arbitrary prejudice, then the 'little englander' sobriquet is applied with complete accuracy. Not a smear or lie in sight.

Spinoza's Uncle was Manuel apparently, Reggie was chancing his arm.

You're not interested in the answer to the above question silverfox. You're asking it in a delberate attempt to sow confusion and doubt where none is necessary. I'll answer it for others. In FPTP elections in the event of a tie, the returning officer must resolve the issue by a random selection. This usually amounts to tossing a coin or drawing lots. In AV the returning officer will initially check the number of 'first place' preferences. If it's still a draw then a random method will be used. Hence AV is more representative than FPTP in the event of a tie.

Totally agree mockney, what I was saying is that it isn't about tax evasion. Having said that, Barclay's claim that the vast majority of their customers in the UK aren't where they make their money. I can believe that, because High Street banking isn't particularly profitable. Most of the cash is in overseas investment banking. Whilst Barclay's looked particularly stupid over the way they handled the tax issue, I sympathise with the point they were trying to make. People are trying to paint them as theives and parasites, but in fact the majority of the cash they generate goes in wages. In this sense they generate a huge amount of wealth that is circulated in the economy contributing to the greater good, and also goes to the government in the form of income tax. Either way, it seems churlish to try and destroy them for having bad PR. I don't think bankers are angels, but neither do I think there is anything rational or fair about the nature of the attacks on them. Like Blair and the Iraq war, people are trying to find scapegoats and the truth has gone out of the window.

Oh right. But can I follow this with Nevsky Prospekt?

O-level Geography - Lulworth Cove?

Finchley Central

Salisbury?

Muses... http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_OrBfWtVz_1k/TMeDAd0qq4I/AAAAAAAAAII/T9YC2hELXQI/s200/male_nanny_manny_tshirt-p235154102267706778s564_400.jpg Note the clarification.