Nice People Thread No. 15, a Cyber Summer

zagubov

No, Dennis was on the interview panel that got him his job.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

michaels wrote: »

I'm sure your mate Nicola has a solution.....

- not a very good one.

I'm just tired of the weather (it's been a very lacklustre summer up here) and the daily annoyances - need to go on holiday to start missing it again.:)

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

CKhalvashi wrote: »

Me too. It doesn't feel like home at the moment

I have a meeting with my MP tonight, so hopefully I'll be feeling a little less tired when I've aired various frustrations.

Yes there's something in the air for sure that feels a lot less pleasant at the moment - hopefully it'll calm down in time.

This is the NICE PEOPLE THREAD.

We are nice here, and if (as I suspect) you're trying to cause another EU argument, then please don't. .

A rule even I manage to (mostly) follow. :beer:

(but I still hate mushrooms - no way I'm being nice about them)

Pyxis

zagubov wrote: »

No, Dennis was on the interview panel that got him his job.

Let me get this right........Nilsson was on his interview panel, but when the news broke about what he'd (Nilsson) had done, your mate didn't recognise him then, but did recognise him when he saw his figure in Madame Tussaud's? :huh:

PasturesNew

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

... it's been a very lacklustre summer ...

I've felt that I've been waiting for summer to start - and it never really did. We had some nice days, but so much rain etc and promises of heatwaves that never happened.

Now it's over

Conrad

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

- not a very good one.

I'm just tired of the weather (it's been a very lacklustre summer up here) and the daily annoyances - need to go on holiday to start missing it again.:)

Was out in Malaysia (I'm tempted to say Malaya, what) and Singapore in August, the heat was sapping.

I was glad to get back to damp and cool Britain, and still relishing it today. I hope I don't get a posting to the spice islands as Empire 2 unfolds, too damn hot.

PasturesNew

Pyxis wrote: »

Let me get this right........

Pre-Internet there wasn't much news. It wasn't everywhere/in your face. It's perfectly feasible that somebody wouldn't have taken notice of the case at the time. News on the telly was two 30-minute slots, if you weren't in the habit of watching the news you could miss it.

A panel will consist of lots of people with names you might remember/might not ....

Then, having not noticed/spotted it etc ... it is possible to randomly come face to face with somebody you "recognise" in a line up and then read the info more carefully - then, later, check and look it up, before realising you'd crossed paths with them.

Pyxis

PasturesNew wrote: »

Pre-Internet there wasn't much news. It wasn't everywhere/in your face. It's perfectly feasible that somebody wouldn't have taken notice of the case at the time. News on the telly was two 30-minute slots, if you weren't in the habit of watching the news you could miss it.

A panel will consist of lots of people with names you might remember/might not ....

Then, having not noticed/spotted it etc ... it is possible to randomly come face to face with somebody you "recognise" in a line up and then read the info more carefully - then, later, check and look it up, before realising you'd crossed paths with them.

Are you sure it wasn't in your face? I seem to remember it being on loads and loads, as the enormity of it all filtered down. Believe me, if I can remember who he was, with my sieve-memory, and no connection whatsoever, it just seems strange that someone with a connection wouldn't have.

But perhaps I'm missing something? (Quite likely! I seem to be having a cotton-wool-brain phase at the mo!)

PasturesNew

Pyxis wrote: »

But perhaps I'm missing something?

A panel of interviewers are blurry characters with forgotten names.
He probably didn't put 2 and 2 together that quickly at the time and/or was busy getting on with his life and not at home when the news came out and/or flicked past the "sensationalist" news pages, heading straight for the footy.

chris_m

PasturesNew wrote: »

Pre-Internet there wasn't much news. It wasn't everywhere/in your face.

Whereas nowadays it's news 24/7/365 - even if there isn't actually any news.

I stopped bothering to watch "news" when the Ufton Nervet rail crash happened back in 2004. IIRC the BBC cancelled other programmes for about 6 hours to cover it, mostly with pointless and inaccurate speculation - the scene was pitch dark and the emergency services (understandably) weren't letting anybody into the area so the BBC kept switching between a know-nowt "on the spot" journalist about 400 yards away and anybody and everybody they could drag into the studio who might once happen to have ridden on a train. Pathetic and totally pointless - apart from, maybe, getting people to watch their useless coverage instead of Sky's.

The only reason I knew it was still going on was because I switched back (or on) every now and then to see if "normal TV service" had been resumed, it hadn't.