Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by guzzi

  1. On 5/24/2018 at 3:48 PM, Snorri said:


    I recently moved to the Isle of Man to work for a local e-gaming company.

    I like the island so far. The people are very friendly and the countryside is gorgeous.

    Well done. :flowers:

    It would be great if there was a major league basketball team, though Nick.

  2. 24 minutes ago, b4mbi said:

    :lol: what other cool things make your balls ache? 

    Ailsa from Frozen?! :lol::lol:

    Whoosh - straight over my head. Never seen it.

    But I once had a very cool set of motorcycle leathers that made my balls ache. In fact these days, a lot of things are a ball-ache.

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
  3. Oh, and  the death of shopping in the town centre draws closer. Which is happening everywhere, as surely as the cotton mills of Manchester are empty today, converted into loft apartments, ball achingly cool hotels etc. 

    Brownfield habitats are excellent for wildlife, especially invertebrates, so one day perhaps it could be dynamited and left as ruins.

  4. 55 minutes ago, Barrie Stevens said:

    What happens if the building becomes empty that is the "What if?"

    So? They deliver to your home, just like Amazon.


  5. Just now, b4mbi said:

    pointless what if, as I would be willing to bet that Douglas is one of it's most profitable stores...

    Yes, I was going to say that. But I was going mainly by the food store, which always seems busy. But what about the rest?  I'd be less inclined to say that the clothing is profitable. Lot of space, a lot of staff and they need to sell a lot of knickers to pay for that/them.

  6. 13 hours ago, Freggyragh said:

    Both the government and people of America have an extremely violent history and culture. Their worlview is pretty unique and it’s no easier to understand why they think car ownership and voter registration should have more restrictions than assault rifle ownership that it is to understand why they want to go to war every year or two, even when they lose as often as they win. 



    That's a very sweeping statement!  Britain has a far more violent history than the US, having participated as an ally or an enemy in most of the wars the USA has fought, and very many more besides.   Most of the old European states have similar histories to Britain. We have fought between ourselves, and very notably, created empires through military and economic might,  fought over them and with their people for centuries.

    No doubt you could come up with many egregious examples of aggressive foreign policy by the US, but I very much doubt that they exceed foreign atrocities of their Old World progenitors. 

    Nevertheless, American gun culture is clearly a thing.  Rightly or wrongly, some Americans see the right to carry a gun as important. And I can see the point. America is big. If you live in an East Coast metropolis, it doesn't feel much different to anywhere in Europe. A policeman can be on the scene just as quickly in Boston as in Douglas, probably. But if you happen to live in the South Western US for example, on a  farm where anywhere is a few hundred miles away across empty scrub, then having a gun in the house probably feels quite reassuring.

    I do think the whole Second Amendment/NRA libertarian 'right to bear arms' is a nonsense, though, in a democratic state.  I think the second amendment, having been written not long after the War of Independence and in the absence of a standing American army, was intended to facilitate the raising of militias:  "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."   Take out that first and last comma, and the meaning is clearer.

    Rather than being a right per se, firearms ownership ought to be regulated along the same lines as in the UK, where you have to show that you need a gun for genuine sporting or practical purposes.  The type of weapon, and particularly the capacity for rapid firing of multiple rounds has to be limited, as it is here. 

    • Like 1
  7. 13 minutes ago, gerrydandridge said:

    As silly as this seems to you lot, there is much truth to this mans claims about the court summoning a legal fiction. 

    I will wager the summons arrived in the format "MR EDWARD GLEN" and not Edward Glen....

    Totally irrelevant. If the Court has the correct Individual in front of it, he can call himself anything he wants. It makes no difference. He still has to answer for his offences.

  8. The link back to manxman1980's post doesn't seem to work. Here's the FB post in question.

    Like Declan, I saw the obituary.

    There is an online site that debunks scams including the 'freeman'/Kate of Gaia stuff which covered TameElf's court appearance, and that reported that he appeared in very frail health at the time of his Court appearance.




    • Sad 1
  9. I'd support making 50 mph the maximum limit permanently. The coast road, like all our major roads, is a rural A road and it has numerous villages and settlements along the way, many bends and hazards and  quite poor surfaces in places. It is really unsuitable for high speeds.

    • Like 6
  10. 1 hour ago, quilp said:

    Sums it up. Almost every 'addict' I've seen interviewed have also been obese. Male or female. Some connection to the reward/compensatory centres of the brain at work, perhaps... 


    Accepting your say so on that, it doesn't necessarily show cause and effect.  Gambling and obesity could quite well both have a link to something else. Poverty is the first thing that comes to mind. Take a stroll through any deprived neighbourhood and you find a high street lined with betting shops.  

    I'd find it easier to accept that there is a kind of symbiosis between poverty and gambling, and a link between poverty and obesity.


  11. 3 hours ago, the stinking enigma said:

    Can anyone please give me a simplified explanation of occams razor? I did try reading about it one time but gave up.

    In a nutshell, the explanation that requires the fewest assumptions is usually the best. 

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  12. 24 minutes ago, the stinking enigma said:

    You forgot conspiracy theory. Probably one of the first to fall victim to newspeak

    If you mean that something can tend to be discredited simply by describing it is a conspiracy theory, I agree.

    Probably the best approach is to forget the vocabulary being used, look for the known facts, and in the case of alleged conspiracy theories, apply occams razor with care.

  13. Declan, you make a very good point.  'Fakenews' is a case in point.  It has been repeated, so frequently and so widely since Trump injected it into the political conversation that now it has come into common use. When he first started using it, with the hand gestures to emphasise it, I just thought he was a clown, and that people wouldn't ever buy that as any kind of considered rebuttal.  But repetition has given the word some sort of credibility, so that just reciting it casts a doubt on the authenticity of a piece of news. That isn't to say that the news oughtn't to be challenged, but credible challenges consist of a proper critique, disclosing facts, not the recital of a word that has some resonance for the audience.

    George Orwell's explanation of Newspeak:  "The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world view and mental habits proper to the devotees of IngSoc but to make all other modes of thought impossible. Its vocabulary was so constructed as to give exact and often very subtle expression to every meaning that a Party member could properly wish to express, while excluding all other meaning and also the possibility of arriving at them by indirect methods. This was done partly by the invention of new words, but chiefly by eliminating undesirable words and stripping such words as remained of unorthodox meanings, and so far as possible of all secondary meaning whatever."

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  14. 13 minutes ago, woody2 said:

    so in your world:rolleyes: innocent people sat outside a cafe in paris get murdered because of a policy you support......

    how much collateral damage is ok to you?

    you don't seem bothered about murders unless it effects your family- typical selfish lefty snowflake..... 


    I keep telling you, it is affect in that context and not effect.

    I have no idea where you find the things that you attribute to me above. Certainly not in anything I have written. But as I have observed already, your comprehension of written English is very limited.

    The correct things for you to do now are:

    1. Apologise for expressing the hope that I or my family are killed in a terrorist attack because my opinion differs from yours.

    2. Apologise for falsely accusing me of hiding behind a keyboard.

    3. Refrain from being making distressing and insulting posts in future.

  15. 1 hour ago, woody2 said:

    have you read the forum rules.....


    Irrelevent. You accused me of hiding behind my keyboard., when it is the very thing that you do and which I do not. After you wished me and my family dead in a terrorist attack.

  • Create New...