Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man

The Voice of Reason

Regulars
  • Content Count

    1,455
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by The Voice of Reason


  1. Maybe not just un PC but  insulting to those who had to deal with the consequences of the raid on the “Fairy Cottage “  (ha ha v funny). You are indeed what you are.

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1

  2. 2 hours ago, La Colombe said:

    Here's a perfect example of them being used as role models. You'll note the emphasis is on setting and achieving personal goals. Anyone suggesting that they are not being promoted as role models to the kids is an idiot. 

    And all these mountain climbers etc who go into schools and give motivational talks knowing that their pursuit is a dangerous one.

    Not forgetting those T V ads encouraging young people to join the army showing how they will become much better people if they do without mentioning the risks.

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1

  3. On 9/2/2018 at 11:52 PM, Roger Mexico said:

    If you look at the Terms and Conditions, it appears that:

    So after a year (not 15 months) you lose both the £2 cost of the card and any balance you happen to have on it.  There's no facility for cashing in the card (either the basic price of balance) except for the school ones at the end of the academic year (and even then it's only the balance you get back and of course they're obliged to replace faulty ones.  Both these are unlike the Oyster system when they will refund on both cards and balance (though finding somewhere to do it may be the problem).

    Thanks Roger for clearing that up. I will be using my GOv card at least once a year so it should not expire 15 months after purchase. 

    That will teach me not to take everything posted on MF as gospel. Still I should have known that already!

    • Like 1

  4. I understand that B & O on the island have had rather a lot of problems delivering their acclaimed service levels over the last couple of years (maybe longer). And no this is not from the man in the pub.


  5. 4 hours ago, John Wright said:

    Isn’t that what happens with pre paid minutes or data on phones?

     Maybe but that doesn’t make it acceptable though. My journeys that I have yet to make for which I have paid may be stolen from me. For what? An accounting convenience for Isle of Man Transport? Just because other organizations indulge in dubious business practices (eg MT not reducing your monthly payment once your phone has been paid off) should not be a license for all to do.

    Two wrongs don’t make a right.

     

     

     

     


  6. I didn’t know about the 15 month expiration date on the Go card Although an infrequent bus user I find it useful to have one in my wallet for the odd time I use the bus.

    Im sure this was not brought to my attention when I purchased my card and I have a number of journeys left which I imagine will be lost upon expiration which I think must be approaching.

    Is there a facility to “cash in” my card? . I could then rebuy my journeys with a new starting date.

    It doesn’t seem right, albeit that it may be in the T & C’s, that they can just take away something you have paid for.

    It is stealing.

    • Like 4

  7. 1 hour ago, Kopek said:

    Yes really, if you read the papers account of the court evidence there is nothing to indicate that the Mother had decided to exaggerate on what her Daughter had told her .

    Whether it was wise to rely on a four year olds interpretation of the situation, whether it was prudent of the Police and prosecution to take the matter further is open to debate but we cannot doubt the Mothers' concern at what she had been told by her Daughter.

    Who, in a similar situation, would not have reacted in the same way to the Mother? Would a psychologist have recommended to brush it off, not draw attention to it? Who knows.

    Did the Child have a heightened awareness of 'abuse' due to overhearing adult conversations? Did the Mother, due to those conversations, have a lowered tolerance of "" totally innocent"" situations? It was hours before the Mother reported the matter to the Police, did she have conversations that led her to take that step?

    These we will never know.

    To call for the naming the Mother and therefore the Child , is a vengeful call for 2 wrongs make a right. The Mother acted as most parents would, bearing in mind the psychologists opinion and to infer some deeper vindictive motive is way off the mark.

    How can it be other than a vindictive motive proven by the speed at which the jury. came to their decision? What is sad about all this is that people (myself included) would hesitate before coming to the aid of a distressed child in case their motives were misinterpreted.

    What sort of a society have we become? 

     

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 2

  8. Can I recommend Naked Wines. You see their little slips advertising Sixty quid off a case falling out of Sunday magazine supplements etc.

    I was initially sceptical as you are but you are invited to become an “angel “ and invest twenty pounds a month (which you can increase) which entitles you to buy. Wines at a discount (eg ten pounds not fourteen a bottle) . Whether this is a genuine discount I don,t know but the wine is very good. Shipping over  100 quid worth is free including the Island and the service is great. I wasn’t in when one case was due for delivery .so had to collect it from the post office for which NW credited my account with a tender .

    So there you go

     

     

     

    • Thanks 1

  9. 23 hours ago, Declan said:

     

    Lets imagine the government orders a blanket ban on the use of phones at all times. But the computer studies teacher at QEII wants to run a project on mobile ap design. The head can’t grant him an exception. 

     

    He doesn’t have to. At school I learnt about the human reproductive system without having to take my clothes off.


  10. On 8/19/2018 at 7:50 PM, Gizo said:

    Use your brain when overtaking or read this idiot guide 

    6F209A60-AD8C-4C54-B7EF-2B42929048B7.jpeg

    Okey dokey. I’m having a bit of a hard time in getting my head round the idea that the scenario on the right is a courtesy to motorists. In the middle and right scenarios why are the cyclists, whether in a row of 1 or 3 all bunched together? 

    Why don’t they leave a sufficient gap between each row that a motorist , or even a fellow cyclist (in the case of the right hand scenario) can overtake one or two rows safely when it would be unsafe to overtake the whole lot at one go?

    As a motorist if I am following a car that I don’t wish to overtake I leave sufficient room so that if someone behind wishes to pass me they can do so safely and if safe they can overtake the car in front of me as well, or if not safe, wait for the next safe opportunity to do so. That is courtesy, a concept which appears alien to most, but I stress not all, pedal cyclists.

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1

  11. 20 hours ago, Neil Down said:

    Amazing the number of anti cyclist rants that boil down to “road tax” evasion... :whistling:

    Perhaps because it is a legitimate argument?

    Anyway on another matter cyclists may and do suggest that they should be exempt as they do not create any emissions. To which I would  say what about the extra emissions unavoidably created by a queue of traffic stuck behind a pack of selfish cyclists, riding three or four abreast, which cannot be safely overtaken.

    Surely it is only equitable that cyclists should make some contribution towards the environmental costs that they create?


  12. 12 hours ago, Derek Flint said:

    I already do on the cars up the driveway

     

    Is this the same old spurious argument that cyclists use in respect of Road Tax (or whatever you want to call it) that because they pay tax for a car it somehow covers their cycle as well?

    Its complete nonsense. If I have two cars I can’t just pay the tax on one and say I don’t need to pay tax on the other because I have already paid one lot.

     

     

    • Like 1

  13. 40 minutes ago, yootalkin2me said:

    According to the UK Highway Code:

    Stationary idling is an offence under section 42 of the Road Traffic Act 1988.

    The Act enforces rule 123 of the Highway Code which states: "You must not leave a vehicle engine running unnecessarily while that vehicle is stationary on a public road."

    Does this rule apply on the Isle of Man, if so, then the law is being broken on a regular basis by a great many people?

    Is this really worth creating a new topic for? People park on double yellow lines -shock horror 


  14. 21 hours ago, thesultanofsheight said:

    You use the word ‘would’ so I assume you dont even have kids so who’s bothered what you think on the practicalities for children and parents. 

    Why do you have to be so rude?

    Your assumption is incorrect however. I do have children who are now past the school leaving age. My use of the word “would” in this context means “to refer back to a time in the past” (Cambridge English Dictionary) . Suggest you re-read my post in the light of this information 

    Whether people are bothered what I think is up to them. I thought this was a forum for discussion not naked aggression.

     


  15. Just now, dilligaf said:

    Our daughters phone was taken off her along with every other pupils phone for her A level exams

    The arsehole of a teacher dropped the bag and broke loads of the phones

    Cost us hundreds to replace hers

    Insurance? Accidents  happen  - that’s what it’s for


  16. But not impossible. Yes it may be cumbersome but it’s for the greater good.

    OK let the children keep their mobile phones in their possession but make it clear that if they are caught using them in school hours they (the phones, not the children) will be taken to the nearest disposal point. Once it’s happened a couple of times it should encourage adherence to the policy.

    Bit draconian I admit and a probably not legal but something must be done to stop this scourge. As a parent I would tell my children to leave their phone untouched from the beginning of the school day until the end. Unfortunately there are many parents who are not quite so responsible including those who unbelievably will text their children during the school day. Yes I have seen it happen

     


  17. Of course mobile phones should be banned from schools during the course of the school day. If necessary hand them in at 9 and retrieve them at 3:30 (or whenever schools finish these days). Then they can ring if they have missed the bus home or whatever .

    In the event of an emergency any parent can ring the school and vice versa.

    It would show children that there is life without  a mobile phone. Maybe they could relearn hopscotch, games etc in the playground at lunchtime which would be a damn sight more useful than spending the time spreading gossip via Facebook etc.

    As an adult I can live my working life 9 to 5 without touching my mobile phone. It really is not difficult.

×
×
  • Create New...