Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Its useful that the "No, Sir" appropriate way to address someone thread has seemingly merged with the "Freedom day poll", as the attached photo was sent to me by a mate (an actual mate, as opposed to me calling most of you 'mate':)) ) in Australia...and seems to be appropriate for both threads....

malumbu Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> notimpressed Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Who in this day and age says 'sir'? I prefer to

> > address people as 'mush' or 'fella'.

>

> You're my rocka-fella, You're my Cinder-ella,, ooo

> ooo oooo oooohh




You sir, need to get out more....

maxxi Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Nigello Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Guys is bloody awful. Chaps, lads, kids, you

> lot,

> > pals - all are much preferable.

>

>

> As long as it's not followed by 'and gals' I'm

> okay with it.


Oh no - supposed to be gender neutral

tomskip Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If you are female, and in Plymouth, they call you

> Maid.



An Aussie guy I met was going off to Plymouth to meet his ?reli?s?


On his return he said ?Strewth, they all speak like pirates down there?


So hearing ?Maid? as an address to a person kinda fits


Very nice

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> maxxi Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Nigello Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Guys is bloody awful. Chaps, lads, kids, you

> > lot,

> > > pals - all are much preferable.

> >

> >

> > As long as it's not followed by 'and gals' I'm

> > okay with it.

>

> Oh no - supposed to be gender neutral


ahem, not quite what I meant...

maxxi Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> JohnL Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > maxxi Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Nigello Wrote:

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > Guys is bloody awful. Chaps, lads, kids,

> you

> > > lot,

> > > > pals - all are much preferable.

> > >

> > >

> > > As long as it's not followed by 'and gals'

> I'm

> > > okay with it.

> >

> > Oh no - supposed to be gender neutral

>

> ahem, not quite what I meant...


I just got what you meant .. this heat means my brain forgets some things - like him

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • We did fine for 300 years with the Royal Mail before the current "competitive" shambles was introduced. Now we have multiple companies with multiple vehicles making deliveries to the same streets every day, none of the workers are employees with decent working conditions or any job security, and consumers have to deal with x different distribution networks and apps and platforms and drop-off points... https://postandparcel.info/12422/news/uk-royal-mails-monopoly-to-end-on-1-january-2006/
    • That's certainly the narrative that runs ad infinitum on the Forum but I wonder how true it is. Speaking for myself I'm very happy M&S, Superdrug, Pret and, in the last century, Sainsbury's arrived and judging from the business they do I'm not alone.
    • There are Christmas lights?! Or a, I missing something?
    • Though it's often the big corporates who dig deepest. For small independents that's a bigger ask, decorating, when they do their own premises is cost enough. And we're normally happy not to have the big corporates in LL. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...