Jump to content

Recommended Posts

keekybreeks Wrote:

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

> i lose track of what i am supposed to find

> acceptable these days in the vibrant ED


> I can always lie & say I am bang into 80s hip hop & Northern Soul as a default if I have to keep face i spose



You can like whatever you want. But Mumford & Sons will always be godawful mobile-phone-advert shite.

miga Wrote:

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

> Are you all sure none of you liked Mumford & Sons

> even a little bit when they started out? I find

> that surprising.




I like one of their songs. Don't know what it's called, but it's good. But I drove up to boro with a mate a while back and he played the first two albums the whole way. It made a very long trip absolutely awful.

Otta Wrote:

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

> miga Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Are you all sure none of you liked Mumford &

> Sons

> > even a little bit when they started out? I find

> > that surprising.

>

>


you should have stuck on Chris Rea- his road to hell thang is about the A19


or maybe that isnt EDF dadster enough ?

>

> I like one of their songs. Don't know what it's

> called, but it's good. But I drove up to boro with

> a mate a while back and he played the first two

> albums the whole way. It made a very long trip

> absolutely awful.

I liked one Arcade Fire song (Ready To Start) and didn't mind one Mumford song (the one that goes "and I will change my ways"). I mean a good song is a good song - whether it's played by a Canadian in fancy dress, or a posh Englishman with a banjo. But neither band are really my bag.

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

    • Language is a fluid and evolving thing and as it changes the original meaning of words can alter to take on a new true meaning or meanings. Original meaning is not the same as true meaning. Take the word literal which is now used to mean the very opposite of how the word used to be used, irritating for some of us but demonstrates the English language is vibrant and alive and also very subjective. But I must go and make myself a cup of tea now or I will literally die of thirst 
    • With the right type of feeder arrangement the access by parakeets, squirrels and rats can be eliminated completely. Likewise, the spread of disease can be minimised. The best method is to hang individual feeders inside a wire  cage that has a 2"x2" mesh on all sides that is mounted above ground. Being above ground it stops slugs and rats getting in. And with mesh on the bottom,the risk of transmitting disease from any droppings is eliminated. Small birds feel safe from predators in three These cages are available online for about £33
    • It is worthwhile noting that the original technical meaning was 'a reduction of 10%', which does not, to my mind, chime at all with 'drastically reduce'. I know that's how it is, I think lazily, often used nowadays but it does allow 'decimate' to be used so loosely that it loses meaning. And it can be confusing to those who know it's original meaning. I think that the fact that decimate and devastate are close homonyms does not help things here. 
    • Hi, I'm after a length of plastic or aluminium pipe, 40-50mm diameter and at least 600mm long. An unwanted offcut of plumbing soil pipe would be ideal. Many thanks!
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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