Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • davemorton
    • By davemorton 30th Nov 18, 11:43 AM
    • 27,218Posts
    • 325,371Thanks
    davemorton
    Elite: Is this table taken please?
    • #1
    • 30th Nov 18, 11:43 AM
    Elite: Is this table taken please? 30th Nov 18 at 11:43 AM
    Just looking for a spare quiet table in the corner of the arms for a few exiled elite to chat, is this table free please?
    “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?”
    Juvenal, The Sixteen Satires
Page 413
    • bubbs
    • By bubbs 16th May 19, 6:06 PM
    • 56,518 Posts
    • 647,352 Thanks
    bubbs
    What did you eat tonight Bubbs?

    I had an omelette with home made fries, bit of tomato and cucumber and onion, plus onion and cheese in the omelette.
    Originally posted by Sleazy
    Sealed pot challenge number 242 £350 for 2015, 2016 £400 Actual£345, £400 for 2017 Actual £500 £770 for 2018
    Stopped Smoking 22/01/15
    :- 5 st 1 1/2lb
    • Sleazy
    • By Sleazy 16th May 19, 6:08 PM
    • 18,439 Posts
    • 39,544 Thanks
    Sleazy
    The F words in non-literal sense (in frustration at their computer screen freezing) or as an intensifier that fails to intensify but emphasises or modifies instead seem to be fine at my old place - no-one saying anything about them at all or seemingly having any problem with them. No, instead, it is words one of which Collins Dictionary removed the taboo label from in 2004, changed to mark just as slang and continues to claim is now "acceptable in speech although some older or more conservative people may object to it" that provoke the "uh, too much information" from one of my fairly young female colleagues and another, which I used to say freely in front of my mother when she was still with me, which a different female colleague once made a gesture to and said it was "low" when we were out at a pub and one of my male colleagues happened to say it, to which he responded with a brief "sorry" and then moved straight on to something else.

    So words the dictionary now claims are acceptable and which I can say in front of my mother (I was always using the one the dictionary still marks as taboo but not the one it now claims is acceptable) are the ones that provoke the objections from my colleagues. I think it is because they are fine with 'general swearing', including what is claimed to be "the most offensive language" by the communications regulator, apparently in reliance on the response to a question that asked "Do you agree?" and therefore is unreliable as it suffers from statistical bias (acquiescence bias), but instead the literal use of words in contexts that describe specific sexual acts is what gets objected to - even if the words are ordinarily not considered the strongest but in those contexts, by being objected to, are therefore more offensive than 'the most offensive' language which does not get objected to.

    I bet Ofcom staff use "the most offensive language" when they are in their offices and the computers are on a go-slow.
    Originally posted by Savvybuyer
    I wonder which ISP they are with.
    Maybe a request under FOI might tell us .....
    Weekly Distance Walked 30km / Total For Year 1162 km
    • tweets
    • By tweets 16th May 19, 6:13 PM
    • 33,801 Posts
    • 445,751 Thanks
    tweets
    Well got one so called answer at least.

    Come on ladies, I can wait ages you know
    Us men are used to waiting around for the difficult fairer sex aren't we Savvy? Apologies if there are any other gents here, but me, savvy and Marmie (who don't show his monkey chops lately) are the only ones I'm sure of .... even though I did refer to Enterprise as a chap once

    In a galaxy far, far away ...
    Originally posted by Sleazy
    You mean us ladies waiting for you men make up your minds

    I can be very crafty when need be but can also be an
    Lost 3st-9.5lb
    • Savvybuyer
    • By Savvybuyer 16th May 19, 6:18 PM
    • 21,477 Posts
    • 270,293 Thanks
    Savvybuyer
    Well got one so called answer at least.

    Come on ladies, I can wait ages you know
    Us men are used to waiting around for the difficult fairer sex aren't we Savvy? Apologies if there are any other gents here, but me, savvy and Marmie (who don't show his monkey chops lately) are the only ones I'm sure of .... even though I did refer to Enterprise as a chap once

    In a galaxy far, far away ...
    Originally posted by Sleazy
    To be fair, I have waited around for people regardless of their gender that have said meet up at 7pm which then turned out to mean 7.18pm and - shock horror - have even had no-shows in the past. I'm the one that turns up later than they say now so that I have less waiting around.

    In fact, I am now off to a pub - but you've reminded me that I am no longer going to another pub at all. They've kept me waiting for my dessert on three separate occasions now. I complained after the first time and, when I visited again, it seemed to make the situation worse - I was kept waiting on a second occasion for even longer and I suspected that they were doing it deliberately* although I could not prove that it was - nonetheless I said nothing about it - I reminded them we were waiting and they apologised and the meal soon came (after we had been waiting over half an hour before plucking up the courage to say we haven't had our dessert yet) and I gave them the benefit of the doubt and returned to their place again later.

    Last time - now a couple of months ago since I am never going back again (and haven't told them anything) - they kept us waiting again. When I finally decided to say we haven't had our dessert yet, it came and the waitress apologised, this time claiming that the message hadn't been passed back. I'm sorry - I don't believe them, I think they are doing it deliberately and, having kept us waiting for over half an hour on three separate occasions, I am not going back again. The reason is they come out and serve all other people first even though they have just taken their meals away - I think they are missing us out and making us wait longer. See you later - I am off elsewhere (shame as it's a rare visit as the other place is a slightly longer journey out but I'm not the person that needs to visit pubs and social venues very often anyway).

    *In my previous naivety, I could not have ever believed people would do things deliberately but trusted any explanation they gave. However, after having had an adviser claim that a particular organisation was doing things deliberately - who deals with them regularly and they must know - "they do these things deliberately" she told me - it is now clear to me that I was being very naïve indeed. As such, I can no longer trust that the pub staff are actually accidentally forgetting about us or that it is because someone hasn't passed the message on - it is too much to be a coincidence at this stage and I think it is deliberate. Again, we can never prove these things but I don't accept the waitress' last assertion because people generally lie so much. Even if what seems to be their lame excuse to me is true - they claimed much the same the previous time and, whilst half in a thought of "yeah, pull the other one", I gave them the doubt - I've had enough with them keeping me waiting and I'm not standing for it, they've lost my custom completely.
    Last edited by Savvybuyer; 16-05-2019 at 9:11 PM.
    • Sleazy
    • By Sleazy 16th May 19, 6:20 PM
    • 18,439 Posts
    • 39,544 Thanks
    Sleazy
    I hope you have a nice evening Savvy.
    Weekly Distance Walked 30km / Total For Year 1162 km
    • Enterprise 1701C
    • By Enterprise 1701C 16th May 19, 7:29 PM
    • 21,854 Posts
    • 221,270 Thanks
    Enterprise 1701C
    I've arrived! Been busy catching up on my accounts.

    OH had his nose put out today, said to him I reckoned I could do the Cat5 terminating and showed him on a patch panel we had spare. Today we went to a client's and I was terminating on the patch panel and he was doing the modules, I finished before he did, and it all tested perfect first time

    As for cars, I know nothing. I know OHs car is blue, think it is a Ford. If I am asked to describe a car I normally manage the colour and how many doors. Cars mean nothing to me, especially as I don't drive.
    What is this life if, full of care, we have no time to stand and stare
    • Bansky
    • By Bansky 16th May 19, 7:36 PM
    • 234 Posts
    • 720 Thanks
    Bansky
    For my friends Mr and Mrs Bubbs

    • tweets
    • By tweets 16th May 19, 8:05 PM
    • 33,801 Posts
    • 445,751 Thanks
    tweets
    I've arrived! Been busy catching up on my accounts.

    OH had his nose put out today, said to him I reckoned I could do the Cat5 terminating and showed him on a patch panel we had spare. Today we went to a client's and I was terminating on the patch panel and he was doing the modules, I finished before he did, and it all tested perfect first time

    As for cars, I know nothing. I know OHs car is blue, think it is a Ford. If I am asked to describe a car I normally manage the colour and how many doors. Cars mean nothing to me, especially as I don't drive.
    Originally posted by Enterprise 1701C
    Well done on the job

    I am with candy cant do level 4747 had over 300 goes and get no nearer doesn't help having no spare candies will pack in after I struggled to get terminus beg week now cant move grrrrrrrrrrr

    Pays to moan done it first go after
    Last edited by tweets; 16-05-2019 at 8:15 PM.
    Lost 3st-9.5lb
    • bubbs
    • By bubbs 16th May 19, 8:12 PM
    • 56,518 Posts
    • 647,352 Thanks
    bubbs
    For my friends Mr and Mrs Bubbs

    Originally posted by Bansky
    Well here is Mr Banksy an why thankyou, how are you?
    Sealed pot challenge number 242 £350 for 2015, 2016 £400 Actual£345, £400 for 2017 Actual £500 £770 for 2018
    Stopped Smoking 22/01/15
    :- 5 st 1 1/2lb
    • bubbs
    • By bubbs 16th May 19, 8:13 PM
    • 56,518 Posts
    • 647,352 Thanks
    bubbs
    I've arrived! Been busy catching up on my accounts.

    OH had his nose put out today, said to him I reckoned I could do the Cat5 terminating and showed him on a patch panel we had spare. Today we went to a client's and I was terminating on the patch panel and he was doing the modules, I finished before he did, and it all tested perfect first time

    As for cars, I know nothing. I know OHs car is blue, think it is a Ford. If I am asked to describe a car I normally manage the colour and how many doors. Cars mean nothing to me, especially as I don't drive.
    Originally posted by Enterprise 1701C
    Well done E
    Sealed pot challenge number 242 £350 for 2015, 2016 £400 Actual£345, £400 for 2017 Actual £500 £770 for 2018
    Stopped Smoking 22/01/15
    :- 5 st 1 1/2lb
    • Enterprise 1701C
    • By Enterprise 1701C 16th May 19, 8:29 PM
    • 21,854 Posts
    • 221,270 Thanks
    Enterprise 1701C
    Well done on the job

    I am with candy cant do level 4747 had over 300 goes and get no nearer doesn't help having no spare candies will pack in after I struggled to get terminus beg week now cant move grrrrrrrrrrr

    Pays to moan done it first go after
    Originally posted by tweets
    I took ages on 4747 too I'd better look out behind me now then, you are not far off!
    What is this life if, full of care, we have no time to stand and stare
    • tweets
    • By tweets 16th May 19, 8:47 PM
    • 33,801 Posts
    • 445,751 Thanks
    tweets
    I took ages on 4747 too I'd better look out behind me now then, you are not far off!
    Originally posted by Enterprise 1701C

    You are ok I am off to bed did next level then stuck so

    goodnight everyone
    Lost 3st-9.5lb
    • Sarahdol75
    • By Sarahdol75 16th May 19, 8:54 PM
    • 7,210 Posts
    • 93,462 Thanks
    Sarahdol75
    Evening all

    For the gardeners, I have 2 plants growing in my garden but dont know if they are plants or weeds or what they are. will post a picture
    • Sarahdol75
    • By Sarahdol75 16th May 19, 9:02 PM
    • 7,210 Posts
    • 93,462 Thanks
    Sarahdol75


    • Savvybuyer
    • By Savvybuyer 16th May 19, 9:03 PM
    • 21,477 Posts
    • 270,293 Thanks
    Savvybuyer
    I wonder which ISP they are with.
    Maybe a request under FOI might tell us .....
    Originally posted by Sleazy
    I'm sure it will. I could put one in. There is no reason why the ISP would not be disclosed. Especially as, given that they are the communications regulator also responsible for telecommunications regulation, there would I think be even more public interest for disclosure here so that we can be assured of no conflicts of interest etc. I can see no exemption anyway, so no need even to get to looking at public interest for disclosure. This is even more disclosable I would think than the already disclosable information of contractual arrangements and expenditure of public money - the mere identity is surely not commercially sensitive - that would apply to any other public authority.

    I have thought before about whether they have email filters etc., given that they are dealing with regulating offensive language regularly and would surely need to communicate internally for legitimate business purposes including material that might not normally be allowed in other workplaces - also regulating porn channels where staff would need to watch the material, in order to assess its regulatory compliance or otherwise, and would need to watch it in their workplace that isn't normally seen in many other workplaces. I also wonder about what is 'safe for work' in respect of the workplaces of those involved in porn, namely the film studios that produce commercial pornography. It wouldn't seem to me that material containing swearing would be too problematic in a film studio at a time when such filming is going on. So the very concept of 'unsafe for work' is somewhat meaningless - something 'unsafe' may actually be safe enough as this may vary for different workplaces.

    Your curiosity you know, about the ISP - just write to them and ask. Just needs your real name and a return address (which can be an email address).
    Last edited by Savvybuyer; 16-05-2019 at 9:09 PM.
    • Savvybuyer
    • By Savvybuyer 16th May 19, 9:21 PM
    • 21,477 Posts
    • 270,293 Thanks
    Savvybuyer
    In fact, I know that "offensive language" is heard in regulator's offices whether we can count quoted discussions among this. I once, many years ago, met the Head of Programming and Advertising (not as grand as it sounds maybe as they only had a handful or so of staff) of the then Radio Authority in their office and the two of us did have a discussion involving offensive language, in which they (they went first) mentioned ('used' in quoted form) three specific offensive words, including one of "the most offensive" (that proved on that occasion to be not offensive at all) and even I said a couple too, words that both will not print on here, one of those twice as I am on repeat, and amazingly (- in other words, we know really why not) I wasn't asked to leave as a result and did not get chucked out. But I would think for a fact that they are heard in regulators' buildings. I think I should probably add, so as not to give a potentially misleading advertising, that my main concern was actually misleading advertising - or actually it was everything, but not as part of any 'concern' but just the Asperger syndrome Code enforcer - mentioning this because I might otherwise have given the impression that I was someone objecting to swearing all the time. I am sure the department head knew from my correspondence that I had no objections and that they were quite free to mention those words with me, so none of it came as any shock.

    EDIT: Apparently, one of those words I used, the one I used twice, does print on here. Surprisingly perhaps as it is considered more severe than merely its root word. I just went and tested both of them on an old page that I hoped no-one was seeing and then removed them. But, yeah, surprisely, one of them is allowed through.
    The actual mild root word, that significant number of people don't even appear to believe is swearing, and which is largely more affectionate gets censored to four exclamations but the eight-letter word that is more severe and can be used more as a term of abuse gets through. Of the two eight-letter words I tried, one of which was censored and this other got through, the more serious one got through. Actually, some current versions of Collins give the censored one a "vulgar" marking but the one getting through marked as mere "slang" but I still think too severe for this forum, and I think the broadcast audience research puts the Collins "vulgar" in some parts of the website but not in others one as less severe than the Collins "slang" one that gets through on this website.

    EDIT 2: I am wrong. My "mild" word (this site censors) is in fact a strong word in the research, whilst my "more severe" word (uncensored on here but I am still not going to print it) is a medium one. It is not medium - it is more severe to me (if indeed I am notionally giving anything any severity at all*). The "medium" one would have had more impact on me - I'd always seen it as worse - I've have been more inclined to use the one the research now says is "strong" in front of my mum and in fact did so and without objection and in fact she called me that at times too (not in real anger or anything) and no problem to me or her but I would never have used the one they say is medium in front of her - and didn't do so. It does clearly vary for different people. But it is still the case that the four-letter root word (censored on here) is mild in the public opinion research (first word in mild column in the research for those wanting to find out what it is) whereas the eight-letter word (gets through) is medium in the research (again first word in the column), so it is still the case the mild is stopped and the medium gets through. Since it is in alphabetical order, me saying it in the first word in the lists will probably give you a clue.

    *My view is that all have been used so much over many years and that they are all now mild if they are anything at all (or at least they are to me all mild or not even that, even so I wouldn't go up to a stranger in the street and shout any of them at them as I assume everyone else is not at the same stage as me) - none of them are discriminatory words that are now the strongest of all.
    Last edited by Savvybuyer; 16-05-2019 at 10:19 PM.
    • Savvybuyer
    • By Savvybuyer 16th May 19, 9:39 PM
    • 21,477 Posts
    • 270,293 Thanks
    Savvybuyer
    Me waffling?
    Does that make me a waffler, or a waffle?
    Originally posted by Sleazy
    A waffler, on that occasion.
    • Savvybuyer
    • By Savvybuyer 16th May 19, 10:32 PM
    • 21,477 Posts
    • 270,293 Thanks
    Savvybuyer
    Let's just end it by saying the radio presenter, she f'ed up didn't she? And you know that I am not saying the euphemism when I am having this thought here at home.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HKIdiYRMGo
    It proved to be dead funny rather than offensive at all. I just don't know how she managed it!

    Now I've come back here and then gone back there - and funny every time! It is as the caption says. "Rachel Burden says it like it is". She does: no wonder she had to apologise for the truth. At the moment on there, I can see there is one comment that has been made. The comment is "Appalling", which amuses me as well, possibly even more. I don't know if they really mean appalling, maybe they are just being ironic or sarcastic, but, if they do mean it, either way, it's ridiculous to me that someone says "Appalling". Perhaps they are appalled with me now for apparently supporting it so much, but I just find their comment "appalling" hilarious.

    Appalling.

    It was perfectly in context too - on a programme that says it is about life for 20 somethings. "20 somethings" won't be offended by that - it depends on what generation you are.

    EDIT: I've actually managed to get further in the recording now - though my interest in the rest was waning as, on the first four or five occasions, the programme was boring after she says the phrase - they (and including the interviewee) just continue like it was unnoticed.

    Again. It just never fails. I can't listen to it without it making me laugh.

    EDIT 2: There's a version on the Independent's website where, not only do we have to sit for ages through an advert, they've got rid of (bleeped) the only good bit in the entire programme. Appalling.
    Here though - https://www.enfieldindependent.co.uk/leisure/showbiz/17643866.bbc-presenter-rachel-burden-apologises-for-f-bomb/ - she accidentally appeared to drop the F-bomb. So, it only appears that she did but she didn't actually do so? I think rewind the recording on YouTube and you will find it's not an appearance! I have still not succeeded in failing to laugh.
    Last edited by Savvybuyer; 16-05-2019 at 11:44 PM.
    • Savvybuyer
    • By Savvybuyer 17th May 19, 12:24 AM
    • 21,477 Posts
    • 270,293 Thanks
    Savvybuyer
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7011962.stm

    "It should not surprise anyone that these people, some of whom have limited intellects, become aggressive with each other."

    Perhaps, in future, I should just admit that everyone else really does have lower intelligence than me rather than keep sugar-coating it. If the district judge can say people (namely some of them) have "limited intellects" then I should do so regardless of whether people then think I am arrogant when, arrogantly, I will then say that I am not. I am just telling the truth. The district judge wasn't arrogant, he was correct in what he said - and so am I.

    Everyone else does have less intelligence* than me. Except that you of course do not.
    Last edited by Savvybuyer; 17-05-2019 at 12:32 AM. Reason: *Not social intelligence here, as I am lacking in that.
    • Sleazy
    • By Sleazy 17th May 19, 4:13 AM
    • 18,439 Posts
    • 39,544 Thanks
    Sleazy
    A waffler, on that occasion.
    Originally posted by Savvybuyer
    Weekly Distance Walked 30km / Total For Year 1162 km
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

2,057Posts Today

7,798Users online

Martin's Twitter