Elite 11+ shopping and chat thread

Arthien

davemorton wrote: »

I recon 4, possibly five at a push

I was going for another but I got called away :mad::D

Arthien

TrulyMadly wrote: »

Does anyone have a Sonos sound system?

Can you recommend it?

http://www.johnlewis.com/brand/sonos/_/N-1z13xxf?&s_kwcid=1dx43700013382668432&tmad=c&tmcampid=1&gclid=CN_1ntDx2NACFUNmGwod0kcA3w&gclsrc=aw.ds

DH has one at work. Said its good for what it is, but there may well be cheaper brands that have similar features.

Savvybuyer

MKS wrote: »

Thanks, Savvy but I am still no clearer on jeffing.:o
Glad that my post amused you. :beer:

It's just a turn of phrase - "effing and jeffing" means swearing. Whatever that means as I have no complete precise clue these days:rotfl:. It's like "effing and blinding" - you know what that means don't you? - some people say "effing and jeffing" instead or, sometimes, "effing and ceeing":eek::rotfl::rotfl::D:D:rotfl:.

You, or some other people, might not know, or might not have known, what "effing and blinding" meant - this could be if you are from America or places like that as it's a British phrase. It generally means swearing, sometimes with the added implication that the swearing is either constant (which can sometimes be far better:D) or is swearing angrily (which is usually not - in other words it's not good when it's in a context in which you fear that someone might physically assault you). I've worked it all out! I like swearing, in that I like the words, when it's in a place in which it doesn't cause me personal offence - and constant is even better there if it's repeating something I like, especially if it's repetitive to suit my autism, but, when in its in a place in which it cause me offence, then I don't like a single use at all and even more is even more uncomfortable - repeated discomfort.

I would like swearing as well, that is saying the words, except that, unusually from most people, I find it physically impossible to say any of them even when entirely around friends. I use these words, deliberately, all the time now, which other people irrelevantly in the outside world may consider to be "swearing", when around at home - and we are a happy family and get on as no-one is ever angry or shouting anything at all and especially not in anger. In fact I think people here get less angry than ever they did now and possibly because in my house you can "swear" freely!

Actually it's words that are not considered to be swear words that usually cause me to be upset nowadays. The swear word 'insults' have ceased to offend me or even to amount to "insulting" me at all now, precisely because they have been used so much. To upset me, people need to come up with something that is very unusual rather than the same expected words again. I'm just jaded to it all now, except in some stranger environment contexts - but even there - on the street, overhearing, doesn't bother me anymore (it did used to do so twenty years ago, it used to make me uncomfortable) - but now I even find it funny even if it may be considered "socially unacceptable" - unless said out loudly especially when elderly people or children are around. I got called something by another motorist recently, whom I think thought I'd cut him up (I didn't intend to) - he shouted something that the forum won't allow me to repeat and it was the highlight of my day:rotfl:!

People will perceive this as a moral decline, they always do, but it never is.

For example, as to what did upset me, some recent comment by a darts player, who said "Bet the rugby boys..." etc. The words "bet", "the", "rugby" and "boys" are none of them considered to be swear words, but, in that context, in the sentence and circumstances and what they related to, did upset me. I think that the word "bet", the word "the", the word "rugby" and the word "boys" should therefore be prohibited from being heard by children, as they might imitate and repeat them and string them together in inappropriate context, not knowing that it was wrong. (Of course, I don't think this: but it's no more rational or logical to prohibiting anything else from children. They ought ban the word "fire" from pre-watershed TV where children may hear it as children might be in a dark theatre in the evening and inappropriately shout that out, causing panic and mayhem. And they should definitely ban both the words "yes" and "no" from children's hearing:rotfl:. As a child might be asked "Do I look fat in this dress?" and inappropriately and offensively answer "Yes", causing upset to the other person, and of course should be prevented from saying "no" as a child that says that to their parents/carers and teachers is always disliked:rotfl:. It's always about context, whether in relation to so-called "swear" words or not. And of course the concept of "pre-watershed" is itself a society creation. One that, for me personally, has given rise to so much harm as I've only ever been uncomfortable with or found some words offensive when they have been before that time and not afterwards. That pre-watershed danger-zone!:rotfl::rotfl:. It is... create a concept, of taboo words, and then the taboo is broken... and people are caused discomfort.)

I think so - I think people on this thread - don't worry about it though! - are more likely to upset me, inadvertently, by something that they are allowed to post than by anything than the forum does not allow them to post at all.

(One thing is that tone is not always clear with written words, so that something written can sometimes come across as far more severe than what may have been intended because tone is absent*.) So, the whole approach to banning words, on any forum at all, doesn't work. (I'm not saying there should not be such a ban, in some circumstances, although none of the filter programs are capable of considering context and they allow through, unchecked, more severe words (subjectively) whilst banning ones that aren't (and everyone has a different view as to what is more "severe", "mild", and what-not, so no agreement about anything anyway) and even then the filters are capable of being circumvented. They also 'censor' innocuous contexts and put an offensive context onto something that, unchecked, would not have been offensive at all. So, again, it makes it worse.
It's no real use at all - filtering - and, if something really was offensive in the circumstances in which it appeared, I would not merely want it to be "filtered" - a mere "filtering" is inadequate, I would want it to be completely banned and not even posted in the first place in any form at all as any method of conveyance of it is still offensive. Indeed, then, the failure of the filter to stop the entirety of anything coming through at all is even more annoying. Sometimes it gives rise to misunderstanding, as I think someone means something different from what they actually did - and then caused offence by what I thought they meant whereas what they originally wanted to say wasn't offensive to me at all. I've had that - I've had personal offence to me and been upset by censored versions that, later, the uncensored one has turned out to not to be the thing that upset me at all and would not have caused me offence - for instance the word "bullet" in a My Chemical Romance song. The censored version, in a public place, removed the word and put a different word in my head and I got that and felt very uncomfortable at what it appeared to mean:rotfl:. I can laugh about it now.)

*However, I wouldn't worry about it folks - it's only me that considers such things in depth - keep going as you have been doing and you don't need to worry about it as no-one has been offending me on here.

davemorton

bubbs wrote: »

*yawn* he is off:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Can someone tell bubbs I have her on block, so cant see what rubbish she is spouting in her musically tone deaf manner.

scamps1966

Sarra to win.:T:T:T

Sunshinemummy

MKS wrote: »

And it means? Will go and consult google.

MKS wrote: »

Thanks, Savvy but I am still no clearer on jeffing.:o
Glad that my post amused you. :beer:

Fing and jeffing, is a term used when someone is swearing (usually repeatedly)

tbw wrote: »

We had an old 'up and over' door and it was inclined to shut itself if there was a lot of wind. I hated it as it was so heavy but DH didn't want to fork out for a new one. He changed his mind the day the bloomin thing fell on his head and knocked him flat out. I had to take him to Casualty to get it stitched and the next day we ordered an electric one - should have done it years ago but men can be stubborn so and so's.

Men.... they need their heads banking together!

We have been waiting to decide what garage door to get for about 2 years. I want electric, he wants up and over manual. The issue is that the openings are huge, and I could not open manual ones!

I think I will do an E, and just order them!!

:D:D:D

bubbs

davemorton wrote: »

Can someone tell bubbs I have her on block, so cant see what rubbish she is spouting in her musically tone deaf manner.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl: did you see that kenwood i posted?:p

Sunshinemummy

MKS wrote: »

Jeffing is all the rage with Run Mummy Run members. The Jeff Galloway Run/Walk/Run method is being adopted by many RMRs to help them increase their distance and endurance.

Don't think this is what she meant somehow. :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

It is flipping swearing........

davemorton

bubbs wrote: »

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl: did you see that kenwood i posted?:p

Yeah, but its £90 without all the nice utensils the other one had, I want the other one

MKS

Sunshinemummy wrote: »

It is flipping swearing........

Thanks SSM. x