Sorn rip off.

Ganga

Biggus_Dickus said:

We urgently need to introduce a ‘personal internet security’ test that everyone, regardless of age, should take before being issued with a licence to access the world wide web. Something along the lines of the driving licence ‘theory test’ perhaps.

However, old people (i.e. those over 50) should be compelled to take the test every 6-months to prove they still have the mental agility to navigate the web safely. As we all know, elderly people can lose their nuts & bolts very quickly so re-tests are essential.  

Too many OAP’s are being ripped off and something radical needs to be done to protect those poor demented souls from themselves. The sooner the better, imho. I feel really sorry for them.

I have seen plenty of posts on this website by younger people who have made plenty of mistakes on the WWW.,also why do insurance companies charge younger drivers more ,i know a lot drive too fast and also have little or no experience but a lot have very little common sense.

Mickey666

Belenus said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Biggus_Dickus said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Biggus_Dickus said:

We urgently need to introduce a ‘personal internet security’ test that everyone, regardless of age, should take before being issued with a licence to access the world wide web. Something along the lines of the driving licence ‘theory test’ perhaps.

However, old people (i.e. those over 50) should be compelled to take the test every 6-months to prove they still have the mental agility to navigate the web safely. As we all know, elderly people can lose their nuts & bolts very quickly so re-tests are essential.  

Too many OAP’s are being ripped off and something radical needs to be done to protect those poor demented souls from themselves. The sooner the better, imho. I feel really sorry for them.

How will we protect the over-50's from a scam involving fraudulent 'personal internet security' tests?
Maybe every elderly person should have a child guardian before they are allowed near anything technological.

So what you’re saying is that if the elderly and bewildered allow their ‘internet access licence’ to lapse they should be accompanied by an ‘appropriate youngster’ when they come to re-take the test?

I hadn’t thought of that, Gc;...it’s a really good point, btw.

I think they should just retire, let the young ones do the work, and enjoy the life of Riley in the sun at the expense of the taxation burden on the workers.

That's what I have been doing for ages, apart from the sun bit although we do live in one of the warmest and sunniest part of the UK.

Get back to work and pay your taxes you lazy youngsters, I need more champagne. 

I think you should delete that totally irresponsible post asap! 
What on earth were you thinking by letting the cat out of the bag?  Before you know it everyone will be wanting to retire early, just when we had them more or less resigned to keep working well into their 70s 

fatbeetle

Mickey666 said:

I know how to parse a sentence.

You obviously do not. A comma marks a slight break between different parts of a sentence. Used properly, commas make the meaning of sentences clear by grouping and separating words, phrases, and clauses. 

In my sentence, "But an elderly, or less savvy, person could be ripped off by these scammers,"  separating "or less savvy" by the us of commas, makes it a clause on its own. Try again.

fatbeetle

And yes, I missed the "e" off use, so sue me.

Jenni_D

fatbeetle said:

And yes, I missed the "e" off use, so sue me.

You could have just edited the post.

Mickey666

fatbeetle said:

Mickey666 said:

I know how to parse a sentence.

You obviously do not. A comma marks a slight break between different parts of a sentence. Used properly, commas make the meaning of sentences clear by grouping and separating words, phrases, and clauses. 

In my sentence, "But an elderly, or less savvy, person could be ripped off by these scammers,"  separating "or less savvy" by the us of commas, makes it a clause on its own. Try again.

Yes, that's basically what I wrote.
Just to be clear, I think you're saying 'an elderly person could be ripped off by these scammers'  You're also saying that a 'less savvy person could be ripped off by these scammers'.

I was merely questioning why you thought it appropriate to specifically mention an 'elderly' person as being susceptible to being ripped off.  Perhaps you could enlighten us?  (words of one syllable please as I'm obviously have trouble understanding what you write ).

Belenus

Belenus said:

Cue ten pages of debate about semantics without another singe mention of SORN.   

I was partly right.  

Belenus

Mickey666 said:

Belenus said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Biggus_Dickus said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Biggus_Dickus said:

We urgently need to introduce a ‘personal internet security’ test that everyone, regardless of age, should take before being issued with a licence to access the world wide web. Something along the lines of the driving licence ‘theory test’ perhaps.

However, old people (i.e. those over 50) should be compelled to take the test every 6-months to prove they still have the mental agility to navigate the web safely. As we all know, elderly people can lose their nuts & bolts very quickly so re-tests are essential.  

Too many OAP’s are being ripped off and something radical needs to be done to protect those poor demented souls from themselves. The sooner the better, imho. I feel really sorry for them.

How will we protect the over-50's from a scam involving fraudulent 'personal internet security' tests?
Maybe every elderly person should have a child guardian before they are allowed near anything technological.

So what you’re saying is that if the elderly and bewildered allow their ‘internet access licence’ to lapse they should be accompanied by an ‘appropriate youngster’ when they come to re-take the test?

I hadn’t thought of that, Gc;...it’s a really good point, btw.

I think they should just retire, let the young ones do the work, and enjoy the life of Riley in the sun at the expense of the taxation burden on the workers.

That's what I have been doing for ages, apart from the sun bit although we do live in one of the warmest and sunniest part of the UK.

Get back to work and pay your taxes you lazy youngsters, I need more champagne. 

I think you should delete that totally irresponsible post asap! 
What on earth were you thinking by letting the cat out of the bag?  Before you know it everyone will be wanting to retire early, just when we had them more or less resigned to keep working well into their 70s 

Its ok, they are too busy staring at their phones and posting on Instagram etc to notice what the future holds for them until it is too late.  

Grumpy_chap

Jenni_D said:

fatbeetle said:

And yes, I missed the "e" off use, so sue me.

You could have just edited the post.

Yes, but there are all these elderly people that have given up work and have a young person to do everything for them online - they are probably bored and will find the excitement of a legal case far more rewarding than editing a thread post - especially as the latter they would simply be asking their young person to do in any case

ontheroad1970

Mickey666 said:

fatbeetle said:

Mickey666 said:

I know how to parse a sentence.

You obviously do not. A comma marks a slight break between different parts of a sentence. Used properly, commas make the meaning of sentences clear by grouping and separating words, phrases, and clauses. 

In my sentence, "But an elderly, or less savvy, person could be ripped off by these scammers,"  separating "or less savvy" by the us of commas, makes it a clause on its own. Try again.

Yes, that's basically what I wrote.
Just to be clear, I think you're saying 'an elderly person could be ripped off by these scammers'  You're also saying that a 'less savvy person could be ripped off by these scammers'.

I was merely questioning why you thought it appropriate to specifically mention an 'elderly' person as being susceptible to being ripped off.  Perhaps you could enlighten us?  (words of one syllable please as I'm obviously have trouble understanding what you write ).

Are you saying that elderly people won't be misled?  More than one consumer programme have found victims of these scams having a large proportion of over 70's.  If you are saying that elderly people can be scammed, then there is nothing wrong with what has been said, because of the comma alongside the use of the word OR.