Elite 11+ shopping and chat thread

rhosynbach

TrulyMadly wrote: »

I remember some of your desperate posts scamps......and even recently your fears over moving house and I'm so pleased your luck is changing......your kindness to others comes back to you by way of good fortune. What goes around comes around:)

shamelessly stealing tm post as she said what i wanted to but so much better, so pleased that things are good for you scamps xxxx

Savvybuyer

redfox wrote: »

it is what it is, savvy. It is an MSE rule which you all agreed to abide by when you joined. I don't make the rules so if you have any issue with it please don't take it out on me.

Sorry, I wasn't taking it out on you, just discussing a rule now it has been raised. A bit like notices in public places such as not to wear nightwear that I would have thought to be an obvious common sense thing that didn't need a notice until one was posted and then had me and had me now questioning what constituted "nightwear":rotfl:. In order to try to wear something that I thought wouldn't be wanted by the person that wrote the notice but which didn't constitute "nightwear" as they failed to express exactly what they meant (as usual!) and failed to cover what they wanted to cover as they failed to use the right word for it. I think there's an inherent thing, with most rules, of a wish to break the rule as soon as one is made. I've no issue with any rule, I wasn't just discussing it.

However, if there is an agreement, then, as I'm not acting in a course of a business of mine, it's subject to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations/ Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations and therefore, as the rule has any ambiguity at all - as I'd argue that all rules have - I use the most favourable interpretation to myself in accordance with regulation X(y), whatever it is, of the Regulations in order to render the entire rule legally null and void.

:rotfl:

EDIT: It now also occurs to me - it's also contrary to the legal concept requirement of "good faith" that includes equality, since it purports to give greater rights to staff of the trader (namely members of the forum team) and creates an unequal set of rights and obligations contrary to the consumer (myself).

None of this was ever raised as an issue for me and I was perfectly happy until it was mentioned just now:rotfl:. I'm not "unhappy" now - I'm just having a good argument about it.

I think the whole intention is that comments mustn't be posted more than once, in order to avoid disrupting threads and repetition etc. In which case, I could argue it's contrary to the Equality Act for me as a person with autism as I like repetition:rotfl::rotfl:. Oh dear. (I 'demand' my more favourable treatment to which I'm entitled by equality law:rotfl::rotfl:. Equality rights and all that - and my appeal to a higher form of rules than MSE's own rules.) I'm just having a debate though:cool:, and the aim of the rule, it seems to me, is just to prevent disruption of threads etc. In which case, quite why "members of the forum team" are allowed to post comments that otherwise would contravene the rule and arguably therefore to undermine the whole aim of avoiding the repetition, I do not know:rotfl:. One rule for one...:cool:. Do as we say not as we do:rotfl:!

Think I'll set up my own rules in my own home and purport to allow me to do everything and to stop anyone else doing the same as me:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::cool:.

rhosynbach

had dd 1 and 2 and their familys all over today and they ended up staying for lunch with a few of the girls from the hen party they had such a great time but dd1 best friend that is now ds2 girl friend got embarrassed when 2 girls about 8 or 9 came over to them in the restaurant, and said to dd1 your alice in wonderland thats cool, they then went around the table saying who everyone else was , white rabbit, cheshire cat, caterpillar, then goes to her friend and what are you suposed to be, she replied mad hatter and put the hat on, the older girl goes, well thats a rubish outfit you could have put more efort in then walked away.:rotfl::rotfl:

TrulyMadly

altojack wrote: »

Ouch, poor Mr TM, pleased he is ok TM. Make sure you are gentle with him tonight :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

It is such a worry having a cyclist in the family, every time ds3 is out racing or training I'm worried sick . He has had a few spills but luckily he's been ok. He could get knocked off or hit a stone on the road on his other bike when he uses it for work though. I always remember the saying "Think bike" when I'm out driving

Right back to Big Brother and my nightly catch up, 3 pages to go now X

Thanks aj.......he's currently mulling over the decision whether to stop raving or not

:rotfl:

Honestly I'm leaving that in....should be "racing":rotfl:

TrulyMadly

hampydoodums wrote: »

Evening luvlies, just catching up. I emailed ipint and asked them why we can no longer gift a voucher. They replied saying it seems the option was removed on the last update but they will check with the developers of the app and get back to me

Hello hampy:wave::wave:

izzy65

mhoc wrote: »

Yes, a tiny one and yes we need to include it again during the weekend supermarket circuit - between farm foods and Aldi that would be most of the basics covered

4 pints of milk we struggled to use in a week but now we could easily use 2. I also think they did a bread offer - 2 loaves for £?
And good big blocks of cooking cheddar

Mhoc you could always freeze one carton and buy milk once a fortnight instead:)

Tinyshoes

TrulyMadly wrote: »

Thanks aj.......he's currently mulling over the decision whether to stop raving or not

:rotfl:

Honestly I'm leaving that in....should be "racing":rotfl:

Sport is such a hard thing to make decisions on, you get so much out if it but there was always the saying in trampolining no pain no gain. :eek:

Not for me to be competitive.

I was reading earlier about the two lads who came first and second in the British Trampoline championships yesterday. The one who came first is the one I mentioned before having broke both his arms but I feel so sorry for the lad who came second, he is about the same age as DD2, she used to go to Liverpool and train with the team up there occasionally. Anyway this lad had a really bad accident when he was 15 and nearly lost his leg, but he worked hard and got back his fitness and still carried on with his dream of getting to the Olympics. I know just before DD2 retired he was jumping really well again and then another spill in early 2015 another broken leg another set back. The scores were so close yesterday, both very deserving to go to Rio. Think there is one more trial but I think the first lad will get to go.

Mr TM must be in shock with what happened today, but tomorrow he may look at it in a different light. What's your gut feeling TM, are you allowed to influence him? x

Savvybuyer

I'm just having a look at the CBY soft drinks bottles (2L) for potential Avs M (careful on some of those as different descriptions to what they are mean that some of them may not compare against M - meaning that, if you have any one that fails to compare, the whole attempt against a 3 for £1.20 M will fail).

Is A's Limeade really still available in A? I notice it's not on msm now - suggests it's not on a.com (I have no time to look!) and therefore could that act as an invisible trigger in A's 4 for £2? Would then tie in nicely to 3 for £1.20 at M, as long as all of the others you buy appear, compare and pick up the M mbuy. Not worked out how much this would work out to even if it were to work, may or may not be any good as getting no comp. on any no-show Limeade (but then again that one didn't compare against M anyway, as A's website had it as Limeade even though it was (and I know hope it still is!) Limeade NAS and therefore didn't pick up M Limeade NAS). May end up not being able to work at all if stopped by a fundamental flaw, such as no Limeade bottle being available in A now.

I also find no Cherryade or Appleade (don't think A had that anyway) in A now? Any A Cherryade in A in the offer to act as a trigger?

EDIT: Only a deduction of 3p:( on each bottle for getting A's mbuy in the first place, so may not be very good. Having to add a 50p bottle in order to save 9p on the other three.

Sunshinemummy

Chrisv, pleased you are no the mend x

Naebbirac wrote: »

I was bored so had a general browse, which led me to Amazon.com.
Does anyone remember the funny reviews about the men's hair remover posted on here a lot of threads ago? Well I found one about sugar free gummi bears. If you want a quick giggle, look up Haribo Gummy Candy Gold Bears 5lb bag, on Amazon.com, and have a read of the reviews. Sorry, can't do a direct link as on the tablet and it won't seem to cooperate.
N x
edit.
Not suitable for children as odd snippets of dodgy language. Not suitable if easily offended.

They are very well thought of reviews..... I wonder if we could use these as diet aids!!

springdreams wrote: »

Happened to me around Christmas time. I posted the same Merry Christmas message on a few of the threads that I regularly haunt on here, and the MSE robots thought I was a spammer, so banned my IP address. I had to contact the forum team to get unblocked, which took around 10 days :eek:

It is all a little weird... but hey ho I have now found out what an IP address is... every cloud and all that!

:p:p:p:p

zippydooda

Savvybuyer wrote: »

It would be great if anyone had it working on one French Fries, which would then cause a single Walkers Vinegar Squares to glitch against T's 75p on both.

Maybe all three of the French Fries could kindly glitch:rotfl:. In which case there could be a purchase of four different items - fewer fillers then needed - and all of them get £1.45 vs 75p T:D. Could the system be so kind to us - and people need to look whether they have French Fries on wombles?

Kipling Viennese Whirls should be A £1.30:T vs T at 65p - so M's 2 for £1.50 wasn't any good then?:rotfl:

i posted ff on a shop i done