Wednesday 10th.August 2016

[citizenJA]

Oh blimey shall I go back on holiday?

Welcome back! Stay awhile. Where you been?

[SpinningHugo]

I had thought the specific leadership threads were for links, not discussion?

If it will help cool things down, I'll take a little while off.

[StephenDolan]

Anyone here think that some members recent behaviour maybe resembling the behaviour we have deplored from the NEC. Because I do.

Examples:
a) this morning, we are asked not to discuss a quite pertinent topic - the Labour Leadership contest.
b) last week, we were instructed to only write about it on a separate page and even then, discussion around the topic is not encouraged. As a consequence, only about 2 people are regularly contributing to those pages.
c) now there is talk of banning members who discuss the Labour Leadership contest on The Daily Politics page (yes, the section that everybody reads). Is this a dictatorship, you hear me cry.
d) now there is talk of banning a particular member who irritates some members but not all. Again, you hear me cry.

IMO:
a) it was a very bad idea setting up a separate section to discuss a very important issue to a lot of members.
b) I dislike being told that I can't discuss a certain issue.
b) how dare someone suggest that members get banned for daring to mention this very important issue.
c) how dare someone suggest that a member get banned because he happens to irritate said person.

Perhaps, I am oversharing.

I thought the other leadership threads were/are for 'news only' but there could be actual discussion here? Have I misunderstood?

[pk1]

Bit silly complaining about politics discussion on the Daily Politics thread.

Surprised nobody has mentioned that the GMB (who balloted their members, unlike Unite) have backed Owen Smith by 60% to 40% for Corbyn.

Oh, how dare you?

And, I guess you are banned now as you have just mentioned the Labour Leadership contest on The Daily Politics page.

Shocking, eh. Just waiting to be blamed for it after having had a break from this place for such a long time

FWIW I agree with every word of your 4.39pm post & unless things have changed whilst I've been away, we are all equals here & there isn't anybody in a role that can instruct topics to be debated or not.

And Hugo - don't be pushed out ! Your opinion is as worthy as that of others - unless this place is to become like the Graun, from which we all flew.

[AngryAsWell]

Anyone here think that some members recent behaviour maybe resembling the behaviour we have deplored from the NEC. Because I do.

Examples:
a) this morning, we are asked not to discuss a quite pertinent topic - the Labour Leadership contest.
b) last week, we were instructed to only write about it on a separate page and even then, discussion around the topic is not encouraged. As a consequence, only about 2 people are regularly contributing to those pages.
c) now there is talk of banning members who discuss the Labour Leadership contest on The Daily Politics page (yes, the section that everybody reads). Is this a dictatorship, you hear me cry.
d) now there is talk of banning a particular member who irritates some members but not all. Again, you hear me cry.

IMO:
a) it was a very bad idea setting up a separate section to discuss a very important issue to a lot of members.
b) I dislike being told that I can't discuss a certain issue.
b) how dare someone suggest that members get banned for daring to mention this very important issue.
c) how dare someone suggest that a member get banned because he happens to irritate said person.

Perhaps, I am oversharing.

Well said, I had been thinking of popping in to say "people take a look at yourselves! What has this list become?"
But you said it better. Thanks

[citizenJA]

Bit silly complaining about politics discussion on the Daily Politics thread.

Surprised nobody has mentioned that the GMB (who balloted their members, unlike Unite) have backed Owen Smith by 60% to 40% for Corbyn.

Oh, how dare you?

And, I guess you are banned now as you have just mentioned the Labour Leadership contest on The Daily Politics page.

Shocking, eh. Just waiting to be blamed for it after having had a break from this place for such a long time

FWIW I agree with every word of your 4.39pm post & unless things have changed whilst I've been away, we are all equals here & there isn't anybody in a role that can instruct topics to be debated or not.

And Hugo - don't be pushed out ! Your opinion is as worthy as that of others - unless this place is to become like the Graun, from which we all flew.

I'm happy you've come back - I've missed your contributions.

[AngryAsWell]

Anyone here think that some members recent behaviour maybe resembling the behaviour we have deplored from the NEC. Because I do.

Examples:
a) this morning, we are asked not to discuss a quite pertinent topic - the Labour Leadership contest.
b) last week, we were instructed to only write about it on a separate page and even then, discussion around the topic is not encouraged. As a consequence, only about 2 people are regularly contributing to those pages.
c) now there is talk of banning members who discuss the Labour Leadership contest on The Daily Politics page (yes, the section that everybody reads). Is this a dictatorship, you hear me cry.
d) now there is talk of banning a particular member who irritates some members but not all. Again, you hear me cry.

IMO:
a) it was a very bad idea setting up a separate section to discuss a very important issue to a lot of members.
b) I dislike being told that I can't discuss a certain issue.
b) how dare someone suggest that members get banned for daring to mention this very important issue.
c) how dare someone suggest that a member get banned because he happens to irritate said person.

Perhaps, I am oversharing.

I thought the other leadership threads were/are for 'news only' but there could be actual discussion here? Have I misunderstood?

The idea was links, new items, but no discussion.

[RogerOThornhill]

Gotta love people who have either been here a few weeks or turn up only every now and again throwing their toys out of the pram over a specific request that we not discuss Corbyn or the Labour leadership every sodding day and maybe talk about something else.

And no, the Labour leadership isn't the same as "politics" - it shouldn't dominate the discussion as it has a tendency to do.

All it seems to be is going over the same old ground. It's boring. Sorry.

[AngryAsWell]

Bit silly complaining about politics discussion on the Daily Politics thread.

Surprised nobody has mentioned that the GMB (who balloted their members, unlike Unite) have backed Owen Smith by 60% to 40% for Corbyn.

Oh, how dare you?

And, I guess you are banned now as you have just mentioned the Labour Leadership contest on The Daily Politics page.

Shocking, eh. Just waiting to be blamed for it after having had a break from this place for such a long time

FWIW I agree with every word of your 4.39pm post & unless things have changed whilst I've been away, we are all equals here & there isn't anybody in a role that can instruct topics to be debated or not.

And Hugo - don't be pushed out ! Your opinion is as worthy as that of others - unless this place is to become like the Graun, from which we all flew.

I posted that in the Owen Smith thread - where its so easy to get overlooked....
Nice to see you back

[pk1]

I'm happy you've come back - I've missed your contributions.

Thank you CJA & AAW

[minch]

Gotta love people who have either been here a few weeks or turn up only every now and again throwing their toys out of the pram over a specific request that we not discuss Corbyn or the Labour leadership every sodding day and maybe talk about something else.

And no, the Labour leadership isn't the same as "politics" - it shouldn't dominate the discussion as it has a tendency to do.

All it seems to be is going over the same old ground. It's boring. Sorry.

I agree.
We must not end up being blind to all the other things that are happening by concentrating too much on one topic.
The leadership is very important but sometimes I feel that we fall into the same trap as in the referendum debate where emotions dominate rather than a real debate on issues.
I think things might have been better if there were more than two candidates (given the voting method) as that might have moved things onto policies rather than personalities (e.g. who do you vote for if you are against Corbyn and Trident)?

[pk1]

Gotta love people who have either been here a few weeks or turn up only every now and again throwing their toys out of the pram over a specific request that we not discuss Corbyn or the Labour leadership every sodding day and maybe talk about something else.

And no, the Labour leadership isn't the same as "politics" - it shouldn't dominate the discussion as it has a tendency to do.

All it seems to be is going over the same old ground. It's boring. Sorry.

If that's a dig at me, you should have had the courage to say so.

Sorry but the comprehensive backing given by the 3rd biggest union to the underdog in the fight, IS news. You may not like the news but it still exists.

If people don't like what Hugo posts, ignore it ! Why is it so hard ? I've skipped past a great number of posts over the years this site & it's predecessor has existed because they're a topic that doesn't interest me but I'd never have the audacity to complain about them being posted.

[PorFavor]

Oh blimey shall I go back on holiday?

Hello! Good holiday? Great to see you.

[citizenJA]

My friends here are all dear to me.

[RogerOThornhill]

By the way, did we see this?

Overwhelming rejection of an early general election in our Tory members poll

http://www.conservativehome.com/thetory ... -poll.html

Recent opinion polls have shown very comfortable Conservative leads over Labour. For example the latest YouGov poll has a 14 point lead – with the Conservatives on 42 per cent and Labour on 28 per cent. This might have been thought to make the prospect of an early General Election tempting for Conservatives. However our latest ConHome members survey shows overwhelming opposition to the idea. 75 per cent reject the idea. Only 20.5 per cent support it and 4.6 per cent are don’t knows.

The result is even more emphatic than a month ago. In our July survey 32 per cent said that “the next Prime Minister” should call an early election. 61.5 per cent did not believe that.

We don’t ask respondents for their reasons. However one consideration is likely to be that after the EU referendum result a period of calm would be in the national interest. This point would apply particularly strongly as the process of calling an early election is rather more problematic in view of the Fixed-term Parliaments Act. It would require a two thirds majority of MPs to back an early election. Or there would need to be a vote of no confidence passed and then a delay of 14 days. The Government declaring no confidence in itself would not be likely to reassure the markets.

Quite.

FTPA makes it far more difficult and I pointed out to Rentoul the other day that I though the idea of the govt declaring no confidence in itself a fairly ludicrous idea.

[minch]

Gotta love people who have either been here a few weeks or turn up only every now and again throwing their toys out of the pram over a specific request that we not discuss Corbyn or the Labour leadership every sodding day and maybe talk about something else.

And no, the Labour leadership isn't the same as "politics" - it shouldn't dominate the discussion as it has a tendency to do.

All it seems to be is going over the same old ground. It's boring. Sorry.

If that's a dig at me, you should have had the courage to say so.

Sorry but the comprehensive backing given by the 3rd biggest union to the underdog in the fight, IS news. You may not like the news but it still exists.

If people don't like what Hugo posts, ignore it ! Why is it so hard ? I've skipped past a great number of posts over the years this site & it's predecessor has existed because they're a topic that doesn't interest me but I'd never have the audacity to complain about them being posted.

In case you think I was getting at you .... I wasn't. As you say we all skip over posts that don't interest us.... What I like is to have lots of different topics discussed every day (including the leadership)

[minch]

A quick thought.... given the mess that will be brexit if I ran a party I would be rather keen on not being PM when the sh*t hit the fan.

[ohsocynical]

Cpb80t1XYAAv-xJ.jpg (195.56 KiB) Viewed 8252 times

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/d ... b70dc0f646" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

OMG !!!

[yahyah]

To be frank Rob S, am getting pretty fed up with you thinking it is all about you all the time.

It isn't. Instead of resorting to your default victim position...how about using some of that intellect that you use against others ?

By mentioning Andreou and myself, in reference to the post from the former that Hugo had linked, I was clearly referring to ....''twits like me & Andreou who voted the way we did last time'' in relation to those who...wait for it...Not Rob Snozers...but people who voted in good faith for Corbyn last year but have since been disappointed, and changed their minds. 'Mea culpa' is my own apology for not listening to folk on here, like PF, Anatoly, Hugo and others who warned what would likely happen last year.

If I'd meant you, don't worry, I'd have said you.

People here in the last weeks have sworn at non-Corbyn supporters, deliberately sabotaged an Owen Smith thread in a malicious way, called Smith a lying snivelling sack of shit, told another non-Corbyn supporter to 'piss off' and yet you, for some reason take umbrage at something that, guess what, has nothing to do with you. Unless you of course, have a sinking feeling you may actually be wrong, and that's why you get so angry with anything that does not match your arguments.

Same for HowSilly. For some one so obviously very intelligent he makes the obvious error of claiming that I think all Corbyn supporters are members of a cult. I don't. I have never said they are. Some are clearly very obsessed though, and will brook no opposition in their obsession.

Rob...just read your own signature thingy...it says it all.

An apology for taking umbrage at something that had nothing to do with you accepted in advance. Realise it may be hard for you to do but it would be appreciated.
We both suffer from depression etc. and that sometimes skews one's temper and ability to see things clearly.

Unfortunately, all the snitting, swearing, sabotaging, telling people to piss off, on FTN does not help the negative press that Corbyn's supporters get. That's why people use sweeping statements about them in the media.
Instead of you all getting peed off, just behave better, that'll help Corbyn more than anything else.

Yes, I'm angry. Fed up at being misrepresented.

[danesclose]

Interesting letter from Arlene Foster & Martin McGuinness to Theresa May outlining Northern Ireland's demands/concerns following Brexit.

NI1.jpg (100.64 KiB) Viewed 8248 times

NI2.jpg (117.99 KiB) Viewed 8248 times

As I mentioned earlier, I was in Ireland on holiday recently (my wife is from the south, and we went with good friends from Belfast). For anyone who's not been there, Northern Ireland is a beautiful, but strange country, almost like its two countries in one that never have anything to do with each other. As a Catholic I got a bit nervous going through Loyalist areas & villages, yet while we were there we went from Belfast to Stroke City via Omagh & Strabane, as I wanted to see some areas I'd only seen on the news, such as Free Derry. My friend, who's an Ulster Protestant, East Belfast born & bred, had never been to these places in his life & felt as nervous as I had! However it must be mentioned that Stormont is an absolutely magnificent building. It makes Buckingham Palace look like a council house.
Whilst there I talked with my friends brother-in-law & some of his mates. They are upwardly mobile Protestants in professional jobs & were all concerned with the plans for Brexit. As far as they were concerned, the fact that May & Enda Kenny were adamant that there would be no hard border between NI & ROI meant that the hard border would be at NI airports & ferry ports. As one told me, they would have all the disadvantages of being in Europe without any of the advantages, or as another one put it, once again the British were treating them (the Unionists) as 2nd class citizens. They did say that there were murmurings amongst some of the more extreme Loyalists that it was part of a plot by "the Brits" to sell them out to Dublin, and were worried about an escalation of violence as a result.

[oneofthoseawfulYanks]

I've been one of your anonymous "Guests" for over a year, having followed onebuttonmonkey, Robert Snozers, ephemerid, and Jonny123 from The Graun. I haven't registered or posted before because, frankly, I'm embarrassed that our 25 years of American political circus seems to have infected your own lovely countries. But it has been disturbing to see a segment of posters turn this into the forum equivalent of the PLP, and unfortunately this sentiment seems to be the majority now. One of you has a very disturbing passive-aggressive pattern of feeling entitled to say whatever she wants to say, then posting her offended outrage at a perceived slight and "signing off"...although she never goes very far away, does she? Calling the moderator by his first name to create an illusion of authority and personalizing even the smallest unrelated remark to get attention do you no favors, either, yahyah. I can't be the only "Guest" who feels this way; if your goal is to create a private club for the select, you might want to consider closing forum registration.

There's no need to show me the door, Dan (see what I did there?), I still have a foot in it. This post is only to humbly ask Robert Snozers, ephemerid, and Jonny1234 to post word here if you find another place to call home, or if you're on Twitter (I've found OBM there). Your posts have always been eloquent, coherent, well-informed, thoughtful, and very much appreciated...and I need all of the sanity I can find during our own Tribulation of Cheeto Jesus.

Thanks,
Sharon

P.S. I'm very proud that I got through this without profanity--it wasn't easy.

P.P.S. #CORBYNCORBYNCORBYN

[yahyah]

To be frank I am not really bothered whether you think Dan shouldn't be called Dan.
If you'd actually been part of the forum you'd know that others too call him that when we are thanking him. It's not 'currying favour' it is called human interaction.

No doubt if I was going to vote Corbyn again you'd be praising me for it.

[yahyah]

I've been had, haven't I....is that you Hugo...well done, good bit of trolling whoever it is.

[yahyah]

Actually it is very funny...well done. Deserves a bit of cake.

[Lost Soul]

Cpb80t1XYAAv-xJ.jpg

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/d ... b70dc0f646" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

OMG !!!

I struggle with his delivery...

The message too of course.

My head aches.

[RogerOThornhill]

If that's a dig at me, you should have had the courage to say so.

Sorry but the comprehensive backing given by the 3rd biggest union to the underdog in the fight, IS news. You may not like the news but it still exists.

If people don't like what Hugo posts, ignore it ! Why is it so hard ? I've skipped past a great number of posts over the years this site & it's predecessor has existed because they're a topic that doesn't interest me but I'd never have the audacity to complain about them being posted.

1. Partly, yes.
2. What you posted was news. I have no problem with that. What normally gets posted though are opinion pieces about Corbyn which go back over the same ground as has been discussed many times before.
3. It was only for one day. hardly worth arguing about really....

[tinyclanger2]

Rio!

D'oh of the day (so far) - Chris Boardman commentating on the women's time trials: "She's good at going uphill. She's also good at going down hills. You need that in an event like this".

Er, yes. You do.

Was it a hilly event?

[TR'sGhost]

A quick thought.... given the mess that will be brexit if I ran a party I would be rather keen on not being PM when the sh*t hit the fan.

I've thought the same about the UK's housing crisis.

No-one wants to tackle it because tackling it must result in a drop in house values = lots of upset people and a likely negative equity crisis like 1992 only much more so. So no-one tackles it, despite the longer it remains untackled the more likely an unmanaged disastrous crash becomes.

[tinyclanger2]

It really doesn't work, does it?

I'm not the one to criticise Robert and his frustrations, having taken exactly the same steps, but it's very noticeable that, on a day when we've set ourselves not to mention Topic A, it still comes up and there's another fracture.

Can we really not get through a single effing day without the same damned thing coming up? I am coming to question the worth of still following this site at all.

Separate thread for Labour leadership and leave it open for those who want to post in it?

Perfect.

[yahyah]

Anyone here think that some members recent behaviour maybe resembling the behaviour we have deplored from the NEC. Because I do.

Examples:
a) this morning, we are asked not to discuss a quite pertinent topic - the Labour Leadership contest.
b) last week, we were instructed to only write about it on a separate page and even then, discussion around the topic is not encouraged. As a consequence, only about 2 people are regularly contributing to those pages.
c) now there is talk of banning members who discuss the Labour Leadership contest on The Daily Politics page (yes, the section that everybody reads). Is this a dictatorship, you hear me cry.
d) now there is talk of banning a particular member who irritates some members but not all. Again, you hear me cry.

IMO:
a) it was a very bad idea setting up a separate section to discuss a very important issue to a lot of members.
b) I dislike being told that I can't discuss a certain issue.
b) how dare someone suggest that members get banned for daring to mention this very important issue.
c) how dare someone suggest that a member get banned because he happens to irritate said person.

Perhaps, I am oversharing.

That is your misinterpretation. Unless that is the way you want to view it, in order to feel aggrieved.

What I asked for, and Dan ...see what I did there 'Sharon' ?, and other people clearly understood clearly what was meant.

It was meant as a place where all this 'Smith is a ****' or 'Corbyn is a ****' [although no one seems to refer to him in a sweary way, even those who didn't vote for him, or don't want to vote for him again...funny that] could be left behind. The idea was, as we used to have on our old forum, a place
where information and positive information could be posted. It acts as a repository for information as, unless you keep links notebooked, it can be hard to find info again on the net.

This is a place where people share their views, you know, their opinions.
Again, for a person who must be very intelligent, the conflation of separate issues, and comments from various people about how they think things should proceed, cobbled together to support your position is a little...well odd frankly.

[TR'sGhost]

And this on Brexit is superb

https://flipchartfairytales.wordpress.c ... s-serious/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yes it is good. In my dim and distant past I understood all about customs clearances and checks on non-EU exports.

Wonder if the Brexit department has seconded people from HMRC who are now telling ministers exactly this kind of thing?

It backs up some of what Prof Michael Dougan has been saying. Many people seem to think 'trade agreements' only involve the setting of tariffs and don't realise the complexity of what it would involve. In any case it's a bit academic right now as we can't start negotiating what comes next until the two years are up and we've left.

If only we could have seen some of this discussed during the campaign. But then it would have just been denounced as 'project fear' or 'talking Britain down' no doubt.

The article misses a third factor. Many, maybe most, Brexiters are adamantly opposed to the UK making any payments to the EU at all.

They often couldn't care less about free trade either, regarding tariffs between the EU and UK as something that won't affect them in the same way the value of sterling doesn't affect them because they're not millionaire investors or bankers(!).

As for common European standards, CE marking etc. they consider that only affects big companies and UKIP in particular have put a lot of effort into convincing small businesses that the CE system, cross-EU consumer protection and easy trade across national borders, with consumers buying directly and easily from anywhere in the EU, are "tricks" that big companies use to strengthen their monopoly positions and keep the little guy down.

A Norway-style deal is likely to be completely unacceptable to many leavers for multiple, often conflicting, reasons. In fact, pretty much any deal other than "the world obeys Great Britain" is going to upset them one way or another.

[yahyah]

Gotta love people who have either been here a few weeks or turn up only every now and again throwing their toys out of the pram over a specific request that we not discuss Corbyn or the Labour leadership every sodding day and maybe talk about something else.

And no, the Labour leadership isn't the same as "politics" - it shouldn't dominate the discussion as it has a tendency to do.

All it seems to be is going over the same old ground. It's boring. Sorry.

Don't be put off Rog, Not having kids means I don't get involved with education/school stuff so your constant vigilance about, and reporting on those topics is invaluable.

[tinyclanger2]

Uhm.
I'm interested (at some point) in what everyone on the board says - that's why I come to it. I have been doing a fair bit of speed reading since June 24 (when we started on the Labour leadership), sometimes wish there was a bit more drafting and saving before posting (as with e-mails at work so that you don't lose your job by mistake) and could do with a bit more variety. But if the worst comes to the worst I find I can always (and I mean that almost literally) watch NCIS. Or NCIS Los Angeles. Or NCIS New Orleans. Or NCIS Langthwaite in Arkengarthdale.

edited for unsanctioned spelling of watch (as what)

[citizenJA]

Cpb80t1XYAAv-xJ.jpg

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/d ... b70dc0f646" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

OMG !!!

I struggle with his delivery...

The message too of course.

My head aches.

I get the distinct impression Trump is terrified of himself and wants out of his own spectacle.
Today isn't the first day I've thought this.

[citizenJA]

Uhm.
I'm interested (at some point) in what everyone on the board says - that's why I come to it. I have been doing a fair bit of speed reading since June 24 (when we started on the Labour leadership), sometimes wish there was a bit more drafting and saving before posting (as with e-mails at work so that you don't lose your job by mistake) and could do with a bit more variety. But if the worst comes to the worst I find I can always (and I mean that almost literally) watch NCIS. Or NCIS Los Angeles. Or NCIS New Orleans. Or NCIS Langthwaite in Arkengarthdale.

edited for unsanctioned spelling of watch (as what)

Naval Criminal Investigative Service?

[JonnyT1234]

Cpb80t1XYAAv-xJ.jpg

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/d ... b70dc0f646" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

OMG !!!

It is now well beyond the stage where I can tell whether or not Trump quotes are people taking the piss out of him as a spoof or Trump is taking the piss out of himself as a spoof. As someone who quite enjoys good satire, I've got a soft spot for just how unbelievably good he is at it, whether it is intended or not. I mean, you can't read that [shorn of its context] and not instantly think, 'damned good comedian'.

[yahyah]

It is an open forum. People have suggested what they want.
That's how decisions get made.
The forum was a fairly small group for a while. Some people kept it going through thick and thin.

When people not part of that core group pop in, come back, or turn up...like 'Sharon' who sweetly registers to attack me [am I bovvered, no dear ] then the dynamics change.

When the poop started flying recently I did suggest we all discussed democratically some guidelines to help negotiate around the problems that were occurring.

The problems here mirror the wider problems of the Labour party, and British politics in general.

Good night all. No point despairing, it is actually all very instructive. What it teaches is just very sad.

[pk1]

That is your misinterpretation. Unless that is the way you want to view it, in order to feel aggrieved.

I maybe misunderstood what FOTP meant there. I assumed it was a reference to page 1 of today's thread.

This all seems a nonsense doesn't it ?

I'd made 3 posts today - one on homelessness, one on Militant hoping to be admitted to Labour & 1 on the GMB yet I'm accused of derailing the thread & insisting on posting about the Labour leadership - on the politics (which apparently should not discuss anything to do with the leadership of the party which most of us allegedly support) thread !!

If it wasn't so funny, I think I'd cry

Chin up yahyah & don't be forced into shutting up or leaving this place - it's still a democracy as far as I can tell & as such you are as entitled to your opinion as others are to theirs.

[PorFavor]

Uhm.
I'm interested (at some point) in what everyone on the board says - that's why I come to it. I have been doing a fair bit of speed reading since June 24 (when we started on the Labour leadership), sometimes wish there was a bit more drafting and saving before posting (as with e-mails at work so that you don't lose your job by mistake) and could do with a bit more variety. But if the worst comes to the worst I find I can always (and I mean that almost literally) watch NCIS. Or NCIS Los Angeles. Or NCIS New Orleans. Or NCIS Langthwaite in Arkengarthdale.

edited for unsanctioned spelling of watch (as what)

Have you seen NCIS Stoke Poges yet? It's my favourite. If a little landlocked.

[citizenJA]

I love this forum. I think we're collectively fascinating. Better than the telly or a twitter feed.

[citizenJA]

It is an open forum. People have suggested what they want.
That's how decisions get made.
The forum was a fairly small group for a while. Some people kept it going through thick and thin.

When people not part of that core group pop in, come back, or turn up...like 'Sharon' who sweetly registers to attack me [am I bovvered, no dear ] then the dynamics change.

When the poop started flying recently I did suggest we all discussed democratically some guidelines to help negotiate around the problems that were occurring.

The problems here mirror the wider problems of the Labour party, and British politics in general.

Good night all. No point despairing, it is actually all very instructive. What it teaches is just very sad.

Goodnight, yahyah!

[JonnyT1234]

Vis a vis the posts from this afternoon that I've just caught up on (um, blushing) and having recently been to the Daydreaming with Kubrick exhibition at Somerset House here in the armpit of he... er, London, I am forced, yes forced, to over quote my favourite satirical line in film yet again:

"Gentlemen! You can't fight in here... This is the War Room!"

[youtube]UAeqVGP-GPM[/youtube]

All I can say is, "so to shall this pass."

[PorFavor]

I love this forum. I think we're collectively fascinating. Better than the telly or a twitter feed.

Er, hold on there - I'm individually and uniquely fascinating, I'll have you know.

[JonnyT1234]

I love this forum. I think we're collectively fascinating. Better than the telly or a twitter feed.

Er, hold on there - I'm individually and uniquely fascinating, I'll have you know.

Well that's a relief because I'm uniquely and individually fascinating. We may have had to fight for a moment there, until I realised just how different we are to one another.

[tinyclanger2]

I hate to say it but I er ...

(uniquely and individually fascinating emoticon)

[ephemerid]

Well.

Back to the old routine, seems we couldn't have just one day without a ruckus.

"Sharon" - @ephemerid213

Nighty night all.

[Lost Soul]

Cpb80t1XYAAv-xJ.jpg

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/d ... b70dc0f646" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

OMG !!!

It is now well beyond the stage where I can tell whether or not Trump quotes are people taking the piss out of him as a spoof or Trump is taking the piss out of himself as a spoof. As someone who quite enjoys good satire, I've got a soft spot for just how unbelievably good he is at it, whether it is intended or not. I mean, you can't read that [shorn of its context] and not instantly think, 'damned good comedian'.

Mork calling Orson...Mork calling...




schazzbatt...

[citizenJA]

Well.

Back to the old routine, seems we couldn't have just one day without a ruckus.

"Sharon" - @ephemerid213

Nighty night all.

Goodnight, Ephemerid!

[tinyclanger2]

Guess the Brexit campaigners put this bit in the small print:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/busin ... 81376.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
UK estimated to be a permanent 4% poorer if loses single market.

Luckily the 51.9% voting for "sovereignty", and for Brits of various ethnicities to "go home" think it's a price worth paying. So that's alright.

[HindleA]

Ruckus in the eye of the beholder,it becomes self fullfilling.It ebbs and flows regardless of who is here or not.I had a four hour dispute with myself one early morning which remained unresolved,we're still not talking to each other.When you hang upside down as a bat for at least part of the day you get a different perspective on things.