All that Jaz
 

In message , Robin writes
You don't remember the "No Spitting" signs on the buses in the late
40's and 50's, before all this
immigration started.

My memory of buses does go back beyond the mid 50's, but no.
Certain I didn't see such in the 60's.

I well remember seeing the *signs* on older buses (and trolley buses) in
the 50s. I don't remember seeing anyone actually spitting then. But in
those days there was rather less emphasis on individual rights and more
on community action so I suspect offenders might well have fallen down
the stairs/off the back of the bus given how many passengers would have
known first-hand or heard much about the effects of TB.

Undoubtedly the inspiration for the well-known limerick:
"There was a young man of Darjeeling
Who boarded a bus bound for Ealing.
It said on the door
'Don't spit on the floor',
So he lay down and spat on the ceiling."
--
Ian

All that Jaz
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:


I don't accept all Bill's attempts to claim 'bias' by the BBC. But I do
think they suffer from poor management and lazy journalism at times.

OK, well listen to 'Pick of the Week' on iPlayer. Can't remember exactly
but as I listened it was one left-biased item after another. An attack
on Edward Heath. An attack on UKIP. The glorification of St Mandela. etc
etc. No item to balance these at all.

Item at 8am this morning, someone from the CBI 'said' employers should
give low paid workers more money. Except when you actually look at the
press release this was a lie. He actually said that when the economy
picked up it would be possible to raise wages.

The ship stuck in the ice. If you got all your news from the BBC you
wouldn't know that the whole mission was financed by the BBC and ABC
Australia as a greeny-promoting exercise, nor would you know that the
Antarctic ice is bigger than normal (hence the ship got stuck). You
wouldn't be shown the film made in 1912 showing the whole area as open sea.

The chief greeny in the BBC is Roger Harrabin, top Environment 'expert'
who has no science qualifications whatsoever (OK, he might have an O
Level). He's given unlimited time to promote his green agenda on the
BBC. As a scientist what do you make of that Jim?

Bill

All that Jaz
 

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Yes, but how many are there compared to the numbers who would prefer
some other channel in HD?

Come now, let's be sensible. Al Jaz versus Dave or Pick or ITV2 or...
anything really?

Or do you consider you and you alone speak for the public?
Some form of community spokesman?

What gives you that idea? Your illogical leaps are astounding.

Then just speak for yourself - not 'the public'.


I'm expressing an opinion about the public's preferences. Is that so
hard to grasp?

Bill

All that Jaz
 

In article ,
Bill Wright wrote:
Then just speak for yourself - not 'the public'.


I'm expressing an opinion about the public's preferences. Is that so
hard to grasp?

What is hard to grasp is you actually believing you speak for everyone.
You don't. Thank gawd.

--
*Vegetarians taste great*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

All that Jaz
 

In message , Robin writes
You don't remember the "No Spitting" signs on the buses in the late
40's and 50's, before all this
immigration started.

My memory of buses does go back beyond the mid 50's, but no.
Certain I didn't see such in the 60's.

I well remember seeing the *signs* on older buses (and trolley buses) in
the 50s. I don't remember seeing anyone actually spitting then. But in
those days there was rather less emphasis on individual rights and more
on community action so I suspect offenders might well have fallen down
the stairs/off the back of the bus given how many passengers would have
known first-hand or heard much about the effects of TB.


I remember that to teens in the '50s, spitting was up there with smoking
and constantly combing your Brylcreemed hair to show that you were
"cool" and grown up.
--
Ian

All that Jaz
 

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

I'm expressing an opinion about the public's preferences. Is that so
hard to grasp?

What is hard to grasp is you actually believing you speak for everyone.
You don't. Thank gawd.


Let's take this slowly. You (Dave) find it hard to grasp that I (Bill)
believe that I (Bill) 'speak for everybody'. So what's happened is that
you have constructed an unsubstantiated hypothesis (that I [Bill]
'speaks for everybody') yet you go on to say that you find your own
hypothesis 'hard to grasp'. You then go on to say that it is wrong.

Assuming that you are critical of me because you feel that I break your
rule that people shouldn't speak for other people, where does that leave
every political and social commentator?

Where in fact does it leave you? You purport to speak for me when you
assert that I believe that I speak for everyone.

Bill

All that Jaz
 

In article , Bill Wright
wrote:
Jim Lesurf wrote:


I don't accept all Bill's attempts to claim 'bias' by the BBC. But I
do think they suffer from poor management and lazy journalism at times.

[big snip of tedious and predictable rant]

As a scientist what do you make of that Jim?

That your mind has become stuck in a narrow groove.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

All that Jaz
 

On Tue, 31 Dec 2013 00:39:31 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

What is hard to grasp is you actually believing you speak for everyone.

Well, you seem to believe you can speak for everyone, so why not him?
Or does hypocrisy only apply to other people?

You don't. Thank gawd.

Likewise for you.

All that Jaz
 

In article ,
Bill Wright wrote:
Let's take this slowly. You (Dave) find it hard to grasp that I (Bill)
believe that I (Bill) 'speak for everybody'. So what's happened is that
you have constructed an unsubstantiated hypothesis (that I [Bill]
'speaks for everybody') yet you go on to say that you find your own
hypothesis 'hard to grasp'. You then go on to say that it is wrong.

Assuming that you are critical of me because you feel that I break your
rule that people shouldn't speak for other people, where does that leave
every political and social commentator?

Where in fact does it leave you? You purport to speak for me when you
assert that I believe that I speak for everyone.

Try again sober.

--
*(on a baby-size shirt) "Party -- my crib -- two a.m

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

All that Jaz
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Bill Wright
wrote:
Jim Lesurf wrote:

I don't accept all Bill's attempts to claim 'bias' by the BBC. But I
do think they suffer from poor management and lazy journalism at times.

[big snip of tedious and predictable rant]

If you mean the examples of bias I gave, how was that a rant? It was a
factual list, calmly delivered.


As a scientist what do you make of that Jim?

That your mind has become stuck in a narrow groove.

That's bad science. And anyway, when the groove narrows, that's when the
needle is most likely to jump out. For our younger readers, the metaphor
refers to an obsolete method of recording sound, in which the audio
waveforms were physically engraved on a disc.

Bill