Paul Morley 0 Report post Posted January 21, 2009 Am I the only one who is completely baffled by most of the above?!? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest drd Report post Posted January 21, 2009 Potential for bafflement removed above. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jonathan Thorne 0 Report post Posted January 21, 2009 I’m too am baffled. There seems no certainty of where this is leading. What’s the point in starting something like this? It’s got nothing to do with organs whatsoever. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jonathan Lane 0 Report post Posted January 21, 2009 I'm just wondering when we get to scale the houses of parliament and undo a banner! Jonathan Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Echo Gamba Report post Posted January 21, 2009 And, not having looked at this topic for a day or so, I am baffled as to what we were supposed to be baffled about! Enlightenment by PM.... ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gazman 0 Report post Posted January 21, 2009 I'm just wondering when we get to scale the houses of parliament and undo a banner! Enlightenment by PM.... ? Having listened to Prime Minister's Question Time this lunchtime, I note that the prime minister still refuses to give straight anwers, so "Enlightenment by PM" seems rather unlikely! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Echo Gamba Report post Posted January 21, 2009 And, not having looked at this topic for a day or so, I am baffled as to what we were supposed to be baffled about! Enlightenment by PM.... ? Duly received - thank you! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davidh 0 Report post Posted January 21, 2009 Having listened to Prime Minister's Question Time this lunchtime, I note that the prime minister still refuses to give straight anwers, so "Enlightenment by PM" seems rather unlikely! According to Hansard published today, "Mr. Barry Sheerman (Huddersfield) (Lab/Co-op) said: "... Little did I know that there would be two significant events toady ..." I don't know which toady he was referring to. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Echo Gamba Report post Posted January 21, 2009 According to Hansard published today, "Mr. Barry Sheerman (Huddersfield) (Lab/Co-op) said: "... Little did I know that there would be two significant events toady ..." I don't know which toady he was referring to. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jonathan Lane 0 Report post Posted January 21, 2009 According to Hansard published today, "Mr. Barry Sheerman (Huddersfield) (Lab/Co-op) said: "... Little did I know that there would be two significant events toady ..." I don't know which toady he was referring to. Just proves parliament is no different to Wind in the Willows! Jonathan Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jonathan Lane 0 Report post Posted January 21, 2009 Or is it someone from Neighbours! Jonathan Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
David Coram 0 Report post Posted January 22, 2009 I’m too am baffled. There seems no certainty of where this is leading. What’s the point in starting something like this? It’s got nothing to do with organs whatsoever. The point was, in a distant galaxy far far away, that I observed one or two people being unusually guarded and deleting posts which were so risky as to dare contain an opinion, presumably to avoid being misquoted. This, I surmised, would eventually lead to a web forum filled entirely with "..." and "edited blank", instead of anything useful, provocative or interesting to read, thereby making it totally pointless to have open to the general public anyway. (I note that DRD has blanked out all his posts, making this topic one of the duller reads available this morning.) So I suggested we might have a members-only policy. Some were for, some were against, I changed my mind and went 'against' too and from that point on we appear to have been discussing the relative positions of programmers and end users in the food chain and goings-on in Parliament. Now, I'm not advocating a ban on digression, but I do think it's worth defending the promulgation of this topic as one which could affect the content and interest of future posts, and that does have something whatsoever to do with organs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vox Humana 0 Report post Posted January 22, 2009 It is a worthwhile topic for discussion, David. I think it is regrettable when members ruin the continuity of threads by deleting their posts. In the recent cases I can understand why they have done it, but I think in all cases the need could have been avoided with a bit more thought about how to word the posts. Mind you, I'm a fine one to talk. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest drd Report post Posted January 22, 2009 I deleted mine because I had obviously contributed to bafflement, and had digressed rather too far into the area of systems programmers vs. application programmers! Furthermore, thinkiing about it, I would not expect my opinions when expressed with my "IT person" hat on to be of much use unless on purely technological subjects relevant to the general thrust of the topic. I had already had my say on that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Henry Willis 0 Report post Posted January 22, 2009 There are definitely problems associated with contributing to any list which has an open access policy - Gareth has, we know, been abused by someone with an axe to grind, as have others. For what it's worth, there are those, one or two of whom actually contribute to this list anyway, who have quoted ME, as usual out of context and only in part, for their own ends and on their own website, so preventing 'Public' access to this board would not have prevented that. What we all forget, from time to time, I think, is that every word written in this medium will be here, for all to see and to be used for whatever purposes, probably long after we are gone. Engaging brain before posting is what's required! DW Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pcnd5584 0 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 The point was, in a distant galaxy far far away, that I observed one or two people being unusually guarded and deleting posts which were so risky as to dare contain an opinion, presumably to avoid being misquoted. This, I surmised, would eventually lead to a web forum filled entirely with "..." and "edited blank", instead of anything useful, provocative or interesting to read, thereby making it totally pointless to have open to the general public anyway. (I note that DRD has blanked out all his posts, making this topic one of the duller reads available this morning.) So I suggested we might have a members-only policy. Some were for, some were against, I changed my mind and went 'against' too and from that point on we appear to have been discussing the relative positions of programmers and end users in the food chain and goings-on in Parliament. Now, I'm not advocating a ban on digression, but I do think it's worth defending the promulgation of this topic as one which could affect the content and interest of future posts, and that does have something whatsoever to do with organs. Surely the answer is simple: we request that Mr. Mander simply re-assigns all our sign-in names (in a random order) - then not only will we be unaware of the identity of other contributors, we may not even know who we are ourselves.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Echo Gamba Report post Posted January 23, 2009 Surely the answer is simple: we request that Mr. Mander simply re-assigns all our sign-in names (in a random order) - then not only will we be unaware of the identity of other contributors, we may not even know who we are ourselves.... Do the Chamades go with the name? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pierre Lauwers 0 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 Quite interesting idea; even "better", this assignment could change every time ones posts. Imagine the results! Pierre Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
