BBC iPlayer petition

4 views
Skip to first unread message

Richard Porter

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 10:41:43 AM3/13/07
to
Please sign this petition if you haven't already:

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/iplayer/

"We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to prevent the BBC
from making its iPlayer on-demand television service available to
Windows users only, and instruct the corporation to provide its
service for other operating systems also."

--
Richard Porter
Mail to username ricp at domain minijem.plus.com
"You can't have Windows without pains."

Alan Calder

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 12:11:55 PM3/13/07
to
In article <4059f9c...@user.minijem.plus.com>,

Richard Porter <dontu...@address.uk.invalid> wrote:
> Please sign this petition if you haven't already:

> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/iplayer/

> "We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to prevent the BBC
> from making its iPlayer on-demand television service available to
> Windows users only, and instruct the corporation to provide its
> service for other operating systems also."


And why not? You never expect aerobatic porkers.

Cheers

Alan

--
Alan Calder, Milton Keynes, UK.

Dr Peter Young

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 12:43:50 PM3/13/07
to
On 13 Mar 2007 Richard Porter <dontu...@address.uk.invalid> wrote:

> Please sign this petition if you haven't already:
>
> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/iplayer/
>
> "We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to prevent the BBC
> from making its iPlayer on-demand television service available to
> Windows users only, and instruct the corporation to provide its
> service for other operating systems also."

Dunnit, but:

<cynic> Does anyone have any evidence that these petitions have any
effect on anything, or is it just a case of "they" pretending to let
us have our views? </cynic>

With best wishes,

Peter.

--
Peter \ / \ Prestbury, Cheltenham, Glos. GL52
Anne \ / __ __ \ England.
and / / \ | | |\ | / _ \ http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk
family / \__/ \_/ | \| \__/ \______________ pny...@ormail.co.uk.

Bryn Evans

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 12:55:07 PM3/13/07
to
In a mad moment - Dr Peter Young mumbled :

> On 13 Mar 2007 Richard Porter <dontu...@address.uk.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Please sign this petition if you haven't already:
>>
>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/iplayer/
>>
>> "We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to prevent the BBC
>> from making its iPlayer on-demand television service available to
>> Windows users only, and instruct the corporation to provide its
>> service for other operating systems also."
>
> Dunnit, but:
>
> <cynic> Does anyone have any evidence that these petitions have any
> effect on anything, or is it just a case of "they" pretending to let
> us have our views? </cynic>
>

<fx thwap thwap thwap>
But now WE know where you live!
</black helicopter effect>

--
|) [
|)ryn [vans mail to - Bryn...@bryork.com

http://www.bryork.com


Rob Kendrick

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 1:13:20 PM3/13/07
to
On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 16:43:50 +0000, Dr Peter Young wrote:

> <cynic> Does anyone have any evidence that these petitions have any
> effect on anything, or is it just a case of "they" pretending to let
> us have our views? </cynic>

E-Petitions are more speedy and efficient than traditional
paper-and-signature petitions.

This allows the government to acknowledge that a sizable number of people
have a certain feeling, and completely ignore their concerns with a
condescending reply about why they know better, quicker than was ever
possible before!

B.

Doug Webb

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 2:28:48 PM3/13/07
to
In message <978704c34...@pnyoung.ormail.co.uk>

Dr Peter Young <pny...@ormail.co.uk> wrote:

> On 13 Mar 2007 Richard Porter <dontu...@address.uk.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Please sign this petition if you haven't already:
>>
>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/iplayer/
>>
>> "We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to prevent the BBC
>> from making its iPlayer on-demand television service available to
>> Windows users only, and instruct the corporation to provide its
>> service for other operating systems also."
>
> Dunnit, but:
>
> <cynic> Does anyone have any evidence that these petitions have any
> effect on anything, or is it just a case of "they" pretending to let
> us have our views? </cynic>
>
> With best wishes,
>
> Peter.
>

Well if they seem intent on ignoring 1M plus signups, as has been
widely reported, to stop the introduction of legalised road
robbery...sorry stealth tax..sorry Green tax/Road pricing then I
suppose the answer is no!

Anyway I've signed up for what it is worth.

Doug
--
Using a Iyonix PC and RISC OS 5.13, the thinking persons alternative
operating system to Microsoft Windows.

Stuart

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 2:15:39 PM3/13/07
to
In article <pan.2007.03.13....@rjek.com>,

Rob Kendrick <nn...@rjek.com> wrote:
> E-Petitions are more speedy and efficient than traditional
> paper-and-signature petitions.

> This allows the government to acknowledge that a sizable number of people
> have a certain feeling, and completely ignore their concerns with a
> condescending reply about why they know better, quicker than was ever
> possible before!

Well, as I understand it, so many people objected to thr governments plans
for road charging, the servers overloaded and the site went down. As far
as I am aware road charging is still very much on the agenda.

--
Stuart Winsor

From is valid but subject to change without notice if it gets spammed.

For Barn dances and folk evenings in the Coventry and Warwickshire area
See: http://www.barndance.org.uk

druck

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 3:55:49 PM3/13/07
to

If its anything like the previous responses to No to ID Card and Anti Road
Pricing petitions, whoever has their arm up Bliars backside these days will
spew out pages of the same discredited lies, in the tone of "we know best"
and "how dare you decent, what do you think this is, a democracy?" before
ending with a patronising "run along now".

But I've signed this one too, although a direct approach to the BBC reminding
them of the precarious position of the licence fee would be better. Although
we'll probably never be able to view any of the programs on RISC OS, we damn
well don't want to have to pay Gates to watch the BBC.

---druck

--
The ARM Club Free Software - http://www.armclub.org.uk/free/
The 32bit Conversions Page - http://www.quantumsoft.co.uk/druck/

Russell Hafter News

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 4:17:59 PM3/13/07
to
In article <ce230ec34e...@btopenworld.com>, Doug
Webb <doug....@btinternet.com> wrote:

> Well if they seem intent on ignoring 1M plus signups, as
> has been widely reported, to stop the introduction of
> legalised road robbery...sorry stealth tax..sorry Green
> tax/Road pricing then I suppose the answer is no!

> Anyway I've signed up for what it is worth.

Better if you had all signed this one instead:

<http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/proroad-pricing/>

--
Russell

http://www.russell-hafter-holidays.co.uk
Russell Hafter Holidays E-mail to enquiries at our domain
Holiday specialists for Germany, Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic
Tel 01946 861652 Fax 01946 862085

Bryn Evans

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 4:41:25 PM3/13/07
to
In a mad moment - druck mumbled :

> "how dare you decent,

I will do the decent thing and dissent with your spelling.

druck

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 4:44:18 PM3/13/07
to
On 13 Mar 2007 Russell Hafter News <see...@walkingingermany.invalid> wrote:
> Better if you had all signed this one instead:
>
> petitions.pm.gov.uk/proroad-pricing

You wont find many people that stupid, not even on these groups.

Alan Calder

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 4:57:13 PM3/13/07
to
In article <4ec31822...@walkingingermany.invalid>,

Russell Hafter News <see...@walkingingermany.invalid> wrote:
> In article <ce230ec34e...@btopenworld.com>, Doug
> Webb <doug....@btinternet.com> wrote:

> > Well if they seem intent on ignoring 1M plus signups, as
> > has been widely reported, to stop the introduction of
> > legalised road robbery...sorry stealth tax..sorry Green
> > tax/Road pricing then I suppose the answer is no!

> > Anyway I've signed up for what it is worth.

> Better if you had all signed this one instead:

> <http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/proroad-pricing/>

Good on you, Russell! Rattle their petrolhead cages!

Cheers

Alan
(Who has sold 2 of his 3 mobile cars. Ok, there is another one in the
garage but it is 73 years old and may never run under its own power again).

Doug Webb

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 5:13:43 PM3/13/07
to
In message <4ec31822...@walkingingermany.invalid>

Russell Hafter News <see...@walkingingermany.invalid>
wrote:

> In article <ce230ec34e...@btopenworld.com>, Doug


> Webb <doug....@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> Well if they seem intent on ignoring 1M plus signups, as
>> has been widely reported, to stop the introduction of
>> legalised road robbery...sorry stealth tax..sorry Green
>> tax/Road pricing then I suppose the answer is no!
>
>> Anyway I've signed up for what it is worth.
>
> Better if you had all signed this one instead:
>
> <http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/proroad-pricing/>
>

Well as they only have 818 signatures against the 1M against then it's
a forgone conclusion the government will cite this as proof that
people want road pricing. As usual the willingness they seem to have
to listen to some of the usual focus/pressure groups is astounding.

Everyone wants climate change initiatives like Wind turbines, wave
power etc but not in their back yard and the government are quick to
jump on anything that they seem to be able to tax and then use the
excuse that they are helping the planet.

Why not do something useful like actual give tax relief for energy
saving lamps as something like 10% of the energy we use comes from the
use of lights. Ooh I forgot that means they can't tax it to make us
use less..well excuse me who is going to sit in the dark to save
energy , answer is no one so they get more tax and do nothing to help
reduce the energy we use.

fwibbler

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 5:28:42 PM3/13/07
to
druck <ne...@druck.freeuk.com> wrote:

> On 13 Mar 2007 Russell Hafter News <see...@walkingingermany.invalid>
wrote:
> > Better if you had all signed this one instead:
> >
> > petitions.pm.gov.uk/proroad-pricing
>
> You wont find many people that stupid, not even on these groups.
>

I wouldn't bet on that. There is a depressing number of loony left wing
nutters in this country.
You watch, they'll be running it soon.
Oh wait, hang on....

--
Graham
Website - http://www.thedeathzone.free-online.co.uk

Martin Wynn

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 6:38:31 PM3/13/07
to
In message <4ec31bba2c...@orpheusmail.co.uk>
Alan Calder <alan_...@orpheusmail.co.uk> wrote:


[snip]


>
> (Who has sold 2 of his 3 mobile cars. Ok, there is another one in the

^^^^^^


> garage but it is 73 years old and may never run under its own power again).

Hmmm just pondering over the use of the word "mobile" here...


--
Martin Wynn, Newport, Shropshire.
A. HTML.
Q. What are the two most annoying things about emails?

John Cartmell

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 6:39:35 PM3/13/07
to
In article <071b16c3...@druck.freeuk.net>, druck <ne...@druck.freeuk.com>
wrote:

> Although we'll probably never be able to view any of the programs on RISC
> OS, we damn well don't want to have to pay Gates to watch the BBC.

Perhaps the BBC could be reminded that the last time they supported a single
platform they had the excuse that:
it was British;
they had extensive input into its development;
they used it for an innovative educational programme;
the BBC received income for every machine sold.

--
John

Stuart

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 5:48:58 PM3/13/07
to
In article <4ec31bba2c...@orpheusmail.co.uk>,

Alan Calder <alan_...@orpheusmail.co.uk> wrote:
> > Better if you had all signed this one instead:

> > <http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/proroad-pricing/>

> Good on you, Russell! Rattle their petrolhead cages!

With the present cost of fuel we already have "road pricing"

Russell Hafter News

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 6:49:49 PM3/13/07
to
In article <f33c1dc34e...@btopenworld.com>, Doug
Webb <doug....@btinternet.com> wrote:

> Everyone wants climate change initiatives like Wind
> turbines, wave power etc but not in their back yard

Wrong.

I have argued strongly against nimby anti wind turbine
campaigners round here in the Lake District.

I think wind turbines are attractive and elegant, and
suspect that in 200 years time people will be campaigning to
keep the old ones running as beautiful historical artifacts.

I would have a small one in my own back yard to power this
computer; but my concern here is that the wind is so strong
that a small, private one could not stand up to the gales.

> and the government are quick to jump on anything that
> they seem to be able to tax and then use the excuse that
> they are helping the planet.

You will be arguing for the return of the Community Charge
soon.

We may not like paying taxes, but the costs of transport
networks, pensions, NHS, police, armed forces, coastguard,
education and a host of other things have to be paid for
somehow.

We pay comparatively little income tax and a lower rate of
VAT in this country compared with many others, while our
armed forces budget here is massively bigger than other
European countries.

How else do you suggest that money is raised?

Doug Webb

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 7:37:44 PM3/13/07
to
In message <4ec32609...@walkingingermany.invalid>

Russell Hafter News <see...@walkingingermany.invalid>
wrote:

> In article <f33c1dc34e...@btopenworld.com>, Doug


> Webb <doug....@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> Everyone wants climate change initiatives like Wind
>> turbines, wave power etc but not in their back yard
>
> Wrong.
>
> I have argued strongly against nimby anti wind turbine
> campaigners round here in the Lake District.


All it takes is a little thought on the design and they could do a
retro one which people may like better.

>> and the government are quick to jump on anything that
>> they seem to be able to tax and then use the excuse that
>> they are helping the planet.
>
> You will be arguing for the return of the Community Charge
> soon.

Well at least if the present system had a universal approach then it
might work instead of 20% if that funding the lot.

> We may not like paying taxes, but the costs of transport
> networks, pensions, NHS, police, armed forces, coastguard,
> education and a host of other things have to be paid for
> somehow.
>
> We pay comparatively little income tax and a lower rate of
> VAT in this country compared with many others, while our
> armed forces budget here is massively bigger than other
> European countries.
>
> How else do you suggest that money is raised?
>

I'm not against taxes just against the way in which certain taxes are
levied or portrayed i.e solution to landfill is to tax it and then you
end up with more fly tippers which completely negates what you are try
to do and makes it more likely that hazardous waste of some sort will
end up being dumped.

Well I thought the idea of road tax and fuel duty was for the
transport infrastructure and NI for the NHS but of course it isn't and
thats one of the problems. No doubt when we all ride cycles they'll
introduce a cycle tax based on the number of gears and size of the
wheels..perhaps I ought to get a focus group of 10 people up and see
if they'll listen.

Tax on drink is another fine example as this is supposed to stop
people drinking, but does it, and then they abolish closing times. If
you look at the money they get in from drink alone and the amount that
is spent on encouraging people to stop drinking then I'd say it is
heavily waited in one direction.

Joking aside todays "green" taxes are just another way of getting
money rather than making a coherent policy to do so. It is also down
to the fact that we don't like being taxed on our pay packets/income
so they have to come up with other ways to get it back to fund
everything we want in modern society whilst coming up with the
illusion that we have low income tax rates.

Brian Howlett

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 8:56:16 PM3/13/07
to
On 13 Mar, fwibbler wrote:

> druck <ne...@druck.freeuk.com> wrote:
>
>> On 13 Mar 2007 Russell Hafter News <see...@walkingingermany.invalid>
> wrote:
>>> Better if you had all signed this one instead:
>>>
>>> petitions.pm.gov.uk/proroad-pricing
>>
>> You wont find many people that stupid, not even on these groups.
>>
> I wouldn't bet on that. There is a depressing number of loony left
> wing nutters in this country.
> You watch, they'll be running it soon.
> Oh wait, hang on....
>

I think you'll find the present incumbents are a bunch of loony right
wing nutters.

Unless you expect the Lib-Dems to gain power?
--
Brian Howlett - Email to From: address deleted unseen
-----------------------------------------------------
Karl Marx's grave. Just another Communist Plot?

Peter Naulls

unread,
Mar 13, 2007, 9:49:23 PM3/13/07
to
In message <4059f9c...@user.minijem.plus.com>
Richard Porter <dontu...@address.uk.invalid> wrote:

> Please sign this petition if you haven't already:
>
> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/iplayer/
>
> "We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to prevent the BBC
> from making its iPlayer on-demand television service available to
> Windows users only, and instruct the corporation to provide its
> service for other operating systems also."

Allow me to buck the trend and make an on-topic post here. There are
plenty of open and closed formats that can be played on Windows, Mac OS
X and Linux. But which one did have you in mind that would work on RISC
OS? There's MPEG2, and that's about it, and even an Iyonix will be
limited in what it can play back.

Whilst the principle of the opposition is good, it doesn't in practice
have much relevance to RISC OS.

--
Peter Naulls - pe...@chocky.org | http://www.chocky.org/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
RISC OS Community Wiki - add your own content | http://www.riscos.info/

Mr John FO Evans

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 2:55:03 AM3/14/07
to
In article <4059f9c...@user.minijem.plus.com>, Richard Porter
<dontu...@address.uk.invalid> wrote:
> "We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to prevent the BBC
> from making its iPlayer on-demand television service available to
> Windows users only, and instruct the corporation to provide its
> service for other operating systems also."
>
I wonder what Macintosh or Sun think about this?


--
_ _________________________________________
/ \._._ |_ _ _ /' Orpheus Internet Services
\_/| |_)| |(/_|_|_> / 'Internet for Everyone'
_______ | ___________./ http://www.orpheusinternet.co.uk


Dave Symes

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 3:05:18 AM3/14/07
to
In article <4ec32609...@walkingingermany.invalid>,

Russell Hafter News <see...@walkingingermany.invalid> wrote:

> Wrong.

> I have argued strongly against nimby anti wind turbine
> campaigners round here in the Lake District.

> I think wind turbines are attractive and elegant, and
> suspect that in 200 years time people will be campaigning to
> keep the old ones running as beautiful historical artifacts.

[Snippy]

I suggest a reading of "The Subways of Tazoo" by Colin Kapp before you get
too excited...

Dave S

--

Dave Symes

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 2:18:01 AM3/14/07
to
In article <f33c1dc34e...@btopenworld.com>,
Doug Webb <doug....@btinternet.com> wrote:

> Why not do something useful like actual give tax relief for energy
> saving lamps as something like 10% of the energy we use comes from the
> use of lights. Ooh I forgot that means they can't tax it to make us
> use less..well excuse me who is going to sit in the dark to save
> energy , answer is no one so they get more tax and do nothing to help
> reduce the energy we use.

> Doug

One of my pet gripes ATM...

Energy saving lamps... Farting in the wind... Looks good in the News,
but...

I forget the minutia as it's a while since I read up on the subject...
They cost a great deal more to produce in both money and energy resources,
they contain toxic materials and are useless with dimmers and light
enclosures.

It's a quickness of the hand decieves the eye con.

Granted if you leave them running all the time they will last longer, but
unless it's something like hall lighting or similar, we'll turn them on
and off as required... Short life.

Quality of the light is harsh, and by the time they are up to full output,
you will have crapped, flushed the toilet, washed your hands and turned it
off to leave the bathroom.
GD

--

Dave Symes

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 3:08:01 AM3/14/07
to
In article <na.0352764ec...@orpheusmail.co.uk>,

Mr John FO Evans <mi...@orpheusmail.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <4059f9c...@user.minijem.plus.com>, Richard Porter
> <dontu...@address.uk.invalid> wrote:
> > "We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to prevent the BBC
> > from making its iPlayer on-demand television service available to
> > Windows users only, and instruct the corporation to provide its
> > service for other operating systems also."
> >
> I wonder what Macintosh or Sun think about this?

My Mac is in the cupboard under tha stairs along with my Anorak, and I'm
quite sure the Newspaper can fight its own corner. ;-)

GD

--

Steven Pampling

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 3:29:11 AM3/14/07
to
In article <4ec34f...@ukgateway.net>, Dave Symes
<d...@ukgateway.net>
wrote:

> Quality of the light is harsh, and by the time they are up to full
> output, you will have crapped, flushed the toilet, washed your hands and
> turned it off to leave the bathroom.

Interesting idea.
If I sit and think for a few hours I might recall when I last turned on the
light in the middle of the night in order to go to the bathroom.

There are a number of things you just don't need to see.

David Holden

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 4:24:00 AM3/14/07
to

You've obviously got some of those night vision goggles so you can see to
aim in the dark ;-)

--
David Holden - APDL - <http://www.apdl.co.uk>

Message has been deleted

Alan Calder

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 6:23:21 AM3/14/07
to
In article <4ec34f...@ukgateway.net>, Dave Symes <d...@ukgateway.net>
wrote:

[Snip]

> Energy saving lamps... Farting in the wind... Looks good in the News,
> but...

> I forget the minutia as it's a while since I read up on the subject...
> They cost a great deal more to produce in both money and energy
> resources, they contain toxic materials and are useless with dimmers and
> light enclosures.

Bit out of date - versions that work with dimmers are just appearing on the
market. No idea what the problem with light enclosures might be. My
bathrooms have them in fully enclosed fittings and seem to be doing ok.

Remember Total Cost of Ownership? That big Acorn plus of the nineties?
Was it a con? Well my RPC is over 12 years old now and still going strong
and has really not cost a lot on a per year basis. It too was expensive in
money and energy resources but turned out cheaper in the end.

[Snip]

> Granted if you leave them running all the time they will last longer,
> but unless it's something like hall lighting or similar, we'll turn them
> on and off as required... Short life.

One of my compact fluorescents has survived 3 house moves and 8 years of
being switched on and off. Undoubtedly frequent switching does shorten
their life but unless you cycle them every 5 minutes or so it doesn't make
a lot of difference in real life as far as I can find out. Incandescents
also hate being switched on and off rapidly.

> Quality of the light is harsh, and by the time they are up to full
> output, you will have crapped, flushed the toilet, washed your hands and
> turned it off to leave the bathroom. GD

True of the old magnetic ballast types and also of those with cheap
electronic ballasts. Newer high quality electronic ballast versions are
virtually instantaneous ie <1 second. Even my worst ones, in the bathroom
as it happens, produce light in one second and are fully on at 3 seconds.
OK, they probably need a few more seconds to build to full output that
doesn't matter in this scenario. If that isn't fast enough for you to fins
the loo then your prostate must really be in trouble, Dave!

Light quality is difficult to assess but modern types can be bought that
are not harsh and are very similar to incandescent output.

Cheers

Alan

Richard Porter

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 7:09:27 AM3/14/07
to
The date being 13 Mar 2007, Russell Hafter News
<see...@walkingingermany.invalid> decided to write:

> In article <ce230ec34e...@btopenworld.com>, Doug
> Webb <doug....@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> Well if they seem intent on ignoring 1M plus signups, as
>> has been widely reported, to stop the introduction of
>> legalised road robbery...sorry stealth tax..sorry Green
>> tax/Road pricing then I suppose the answer is no!
>
>> Anyway I've signed up for what it is worth.
>
> Better if you had all signed this one instead:
>
> <http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/proroad-pricing/>

1. Petitions aren't mutually exclusive!
<OT>
2. Road pricing is flawed because it assumes that drivers who drive on
the busiest roads at the busiest times actually have a choice. The
investment in alternative transport must come up front, and then road
pricing wouldn't be necessary. Most of the money collected would go on
collecting the money. Also the consequences of having a 'spy in every
car' are completely unacceptable to most people.
</OT>

--
Richard Porter
Mail to username ricp at domain minijem.plus.com
"You can't have Windows without pains."

Richard Travers

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 6:39:10 AM3/14/07
to
In article <4059f9c...@user.minijem.plus.com>,
Richard Porter <dontu...@address.uk.invalid> wrote:

> "We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to prevent the BBC
> from making its iPlayer on-demand television service available to
> Windows users only, and instruct the corporation to provide its
> service for other operating systems also."

I'm sorry Richard, but one of the big pluses that the BBC has is its
independence from government. If the prime minister were able to 'prevent'
and 'instruct' the BBC, then the BBC would be nothing more than a state
propaganda organ and would lose any value it has.

Direct your complaint to the board of governers or whatever body it is that
now oversees the BBC.

R

--

Richard Travers
rich...@uwclub.net
Truro, Cornwall
01872 271125

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Richard Porter

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 7:22:02 AM3/14/07
to
The date being 13 Mar 2007, Doug Webb <doug....@btinternet.com>
decided to write:

> Well as they only have 818 signatures against the 1M against then it's
> a forgone conclusion the government will cite this as proof that
> people want road pricing.

1.8M against, but your conclusion is right.

> Everyone wants climate change initiatives like Wind turbines, wave
> power etc but not in their back yard and the government are quick to
> jump on anything that they seem to be able to tax and then use the
> excuse that they are helping the planet.

Not everyone wants climate change initiatives. Why can't polititions
realise that they haven't got a hope in hell of avoiding climate
change and the best thing they can do is start building up our sea
defences now (and not our nuclear defences). Trident missiles won't
deter the sea!

> Why not do something useful like actual give tax relief for energy
> saving lamps as something like 10% of the energy we use comes from the
> use of lights.

Lamps don't save energy they use it (more accurately they convert
electrical energy to light and heat).

The first thing to do is turn off street lighting on motorways in good
visibility, stop floodlighting public buildings and ban the use of
electricity for advertising displays. Compact flourescent lamps are
cheaper than GLS (incandescent) lamps over their lifetime so people
who still buy tungsten filiament lamps are daft. I've been using CFLs
since thorn 2Ds came out 25 years ago.

Richard Porter

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 7:29:11 AM3/14/07
to
The date being 13 Mar 2007, Russell Hafter News
<see...@walkingingermany.invalid> decided to write:

> You will be arguing for the return of the Community Charge
> soon.

The community charge was brilliant! Local income tax would be fairer.

> We may not like paying taxes, but the costs of transport
> networks, pensions, NHS, police, armed forces, coastguard,
> education and a host of other things have to be paid for
> somehow.
>
> We pay comparatively little income tax and a lower rate of
> VAT in this country compared with many others, while our
> armed forces budget here is massively bigger than other
> European countries.
>
> How else do you suggest that money is raised?

The first thing we can do is stop going off on military adventures and
waging illegal wars when we are not under threat. Secondly we can stop
pretending to be a major nuclear power and drop plans to renew
Trident. That would leave more of our taxes to be spent on our
transport infrastructure and other esential services.

Alan Calder

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 7:44:24 AM3/14/07
to
In article <d98e6bc...@user.minijem.plus.com>,

Richard Porter <dontu...@address.uk.invalid> wrote:
> The date being 13 Mar 2007, Russell Hafter News
> <see...@walkingingermany.invalid> decided to write:

> > You will be arguing for the return of the Community Charge
> > soon.

> The community charge was brilliant!

You seemed to have left off the :-). It was an utter disaster and
fundamentally unfair.

> Local income tax would be fairer.

Probably. Worth a good luck at least, though I wonder about the cost and
new bureacracy needed.

> > We may not like paying taxes, but the costs of transport
> > networks, pensions, NHS, police, armed forces, coastguard,
> > education and a host of other things have to be paid for
> > somehow.

[Snip]

> > How else do you suggest that money is raised?

> The first thing we can do is stop going off on military adventures and
> waging illegal wars when we are not under threat. Secondly we can stop
> pretending to be a major nuclear power and drop plans to renew
> Trident. That would leave more of our taxes to be spent on our
> transport infrastructure and other esential services.

All very good and fully agreed with here. However, I have a sad feeling
that the demand would then be for tax cuts not increased spending on
transport etc. Reading the BBC's comment pages makes very sobering reading
for those who believe in the innate intelligence and altruism of the
average human being!

Isn't this getting a bit OT?

Richard Porter

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 7:36:40 AM3/14/07
to
The date being 14 Mar 2007, Peter Naulls <pe...@chocky.org> decided to
write:

> In message <4059f9c...@user.minijem.plus.com>
> Richard Porter <dontu...@address.uk.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Please sign this petition if you haven't already:
>>
>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/iplayer/
>>
>> "We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to prevent the BBC
>> from making its iPlayer on-demand television service available to
>> Windows users only, and instruct the corporation to provide its
>> service for other operating systems also."
>
> Allow me to buck the trend and make an on-topic post here. There are
> plenty of open and closed formats that can be played on Windows, Mac
> OS X and Linux. But which one did have you in mind that would work on
> RISC OS? There's MPEG2, and that's about it, and even an Iyonix will
> be limited in what it can play back.
>
> Whilst the principle of the opposition is good, it doesn't in practice
> have much relevance to RISC OS.

Firstly it's not my petition, but I'm supporting it on principle.
Although a platform-agnostic solution is preferable, the way that the
petition has been worded suggests that software could be provided for
other OSs, even if that's unlikely.

Richard Porter

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 7:40:41 AM3/14/07
to
The date being 13 Mar 2007, druck <ne...@druck.freeuk.com> decided to
write:

> But I've signed this one too, although a direct approach to the BBC
> reminding them of the precarious position of the licence fee would be
> better. Although we'll probably never be able to view any of the


> programs on RISC OS, we damn well don't want to have to pay Gates to
> watch the BBC.

I think one can assume that the BBC would notice such petitions
concerning it even if it did nothing about them.

Chris Ward

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 7:48:01 AM3/14/07
to
In article <81e76ac...@user.minijem.plus.com>, Richard Porter

stated
<<<<others snipped out>>>>


> The first thing to do is turn off street lighting on motorways in good
> visibility, stop floodlighting public buildings and ban the use of
> electricity for advertising displays. Compact flourescent lamps are
> cheaper than GLS (incandescent) lamps over their lifetime so people
> who still buy tungsten filiament lamps are daft. I've been using CFLs
> since thorn 2Ds came out 25 years ago.
>


And get the Government to switch off their lights in public buildings
and offices when they are not being used.


Chris
--
If Carlsberg made computers, they would say that:

RiscOS technology with ARM chips make:


'.... the best Computer System in the world.... '

Michael Lowe

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 8:54:01 AM3/14/07
to
In message <939c6cc...@user.minijem.plus.com>
Richard Porter <dontu...@address.uk.invalid> wrote:

> The date being 13 Mar 2007, druck <ne...@druck.freeuk.com> decided to
> write:
>
>> But I've signed this one too, although a direct approach to the BBC
>> reminding them of the precarious position of the licence fee would be
>> better. Although we'll probably never be able to view any of the
>> programs on RISC OS, we damn well don't want to have to pay Gates to
>> watch the BBC.
>
> I think one can assume that the BBC would notice such petitions
> concerning it even if it did nothing about them.

This particular petition appears to be a complete waste of time. Far
better to look at what the BBC has actually said and make your views
known directly to the BBC.

Look at

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/news/press_releases/31_01_2007.html

The BBC Trust (the governing body of the BBC) are proposing a
platform-agnostic approach and specifically mentions Apple and Linux.

There is a public consultation on this by the BBC Trust open until 28
March. The BBC Trust expects to make a final decision before 2 May.
There is a form on the BBC Trust website for this consultation, why
not use it and make your views known directly to the body that makes
the decision.


--
Michael Lowe
Loughton
Essex

Ben Crick

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 9:01:09 AM3/14/07
to
In article <81e76ac...@user.minijem.plus.com>, Richard Porter
<dontu...@address.uk.invalid> wrote:
> Not everyone wants climate change initiatives. Why can't polititions
> realise that they haven't got a hope in hell of avoiding climate
> change and the best thing they can do is start building up our sea
> defences now (and not our nuclear defences). Trident missiles won't
> deter the sea!

Nor will Tony Blare doing his "King Canute" thing.

The High Tide mark at Margate Harbour is exactly the same in 2007
as it was in 1937, when I first had a beach holiday at the age of
4.

The narrowing effect of the Thames Estuary causes the flood
tide to build up as it gets nearer London. A 5-metre high tide
at Margate becames a 6-metre high tide at Gravesend, and 7-metre
high tide at the Thames Barrier between Woolwich and Charlton.

The peak flood tide of the Canvey Island Flood in 1953 has
still not been topped, in spite of Global Warming.

Ben

--
_ __________________________________________


/ \._._ |_ _ _ /' Orpheus Internet Services
\_/| |_)| |(/_|_|_> / 'Internet for Everyone'
_______ | ___________./ http://www.orpheusinternet.co.uk

Revd Ben Crick BA CF <ben....@NOSPAM.argonet.co.uk> ZFC Ta
232 Canterbury Road, Birchington on sea, Kent CT7 9TD (UK)
Acorn RPC700 Kinetic RO4.03 and Castle Iyonix X100 RO 5.06 Ethernet
* God answers Knee-mail.

Ben Crick

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 9:02:38 AM3/14/07
to
In article <939c6cc...@user.minijem.plus.com>, Richard Porter

<dontu...@address.uk.invalid> wrote:
> I think one can assume that the BBC would notice such petitions
> concerning it even if it did nothing about them.

It was the BBC who promoted Acorn Computers in 1981, long before
Windows. Let them go back to their roots!

Ben

--
_ __________________________________________
/ \._._ |_ _ _ /' Orpheus Internet Services
\_/| |_)| |(/_|_|_> / 'Internet for Everyone'
_______ | ___________./ http://www.orpheusinternet.co.uk
Revd Ben Crick BA CF <ben....@NOSPAM.argonet.co.uk> ZFC Ta
232 Canterbury Road, Birchington on sea, Kent CT7 9TD (UK)
Acorn RPC700 Kinetic RO4.03 and Castle Iyonix X100 RO 5.06 Ethernet

* God prefers "fruit of the Spirit" over "religious nuts".

Russell Hafter News

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 9:44:04 AM3/14/07
to
In article <4ec36cf387...@orpheusmail.co.uk>, Alan
Calder <alan_...@orpheusmail.co.uk> wrote:

> In article <d98e6bc...@user.minijem.plus.com>,
> Richard Porter <dontu...@address.uk.invalid> wrote:

> > The date being 13 Mar 2007, Russell Hafter News
> > <see...@walkingingermany.invalid> decided to write:

> > > You will be arguing for the return of the Community
> > > Charge soon.

> > The community charge was brilliant!

> You seemed to have left off the :-). It was an utter
> disaster and fundamentally unfair.

Quite. Which why I mentioned it. The professional
politicians all profoundly hope that we have all completely
forgotten about it.

> > Local income tax would be fairer.

> Probably. Worth a good luck at least, though I wonder
> about the cost and new bureacracy needed.

It can be done with very little cost and beaurocracy.

When I lived in Vermont there was both a state and a federal
income tax return (like most US states).

The Vermont tax return was a single page. Apart from the
Name, Address, Reference number fields, and date and
signature boxes at the end, there were two boxes to
complete.

1. Enter the amount of tax payable on your Federal Tax
Return.

2. Calculate 27% of this sum and enter it in the box on the
right.

In Switzerland, by contrast, there is a constitutional ban
on Federal income taxes, so income tax is levied at the
(very) local level.

Each community has its own income tax dept, even a village
with a few hundred inhabitants.

> Isn't this getting a bit OT?

A bit?

Totally, I would have thought!

John Cartmell

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 10:28:40 AM3/14/07
to
In article <81e76ac...@user.minijem.plus.com>, Richard Porter

<dontu...@address.uk.invalid> wrote:
> Why can't polititions realise that they haven't got a hope in hell of
> avoiding climate change and the best thing they can do is start building
> up our sea defences now.

Such political statements should be accompanied by the height above sea level
of your home. At a potentially soggy 66 feet I strongly reject your careless
attitude - but suggest that further discussion be limited to the development
of waterproof versions of RISC OS hardware.

--
John Cartmell jo...@finnybank.com 0845 006 8822 or 0161 969 9820
Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com
Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing

Jess

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 11:21:16 AM3/14/07
to
In message <4ec32609...@walkingingermany.invalid>

Russell Hafter News <see...@walkingingermany.invalid>
wrote:
> I have argued strongly against nimby anti wind turbine
> campaigners round here in the Lake District.
>
> I think wind turbines are attractive and elegant, and
> suspect that in 200 years time people will be campaigning to
> keep the old ones running as beautiful historical artifacts.
>
> I would have a small one in my own back yard to power this
> computer; but my concern here is that the wind is so strong
> that a small, private one could not stand up to the gales.

Perhaps you should get a PC to act as a suitable load for the
generator when the wind blows really hard :)

--
Jess Iyonix
contact http://jess.itworkshop-nexus.net
Hotmail is my spam trap - don't email
valid - mailto:nos...@jess.itworkshop-nexus.net

Jess

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 11:26:27 AM3/14/07
to
In message <4ec34f...@ukgateway.net>
Dave Symes <d...@ukgateway.net> wrote:

> One of my pet gripes ATM...
>
> Energy saving lamps... Farting in the wind... Looks good in the News,
> but...
>
> I forget the minutia as it's a while since I read up on the subject...
> They cost a great deal more to produce in both money and energy resources,
> they contain toxic materials and are useless with dimmers and light
> enclosures.
>
> It's a quickness of the hand decieves the eye con.
>
> Granted if you leave them running all the time they will last longer, but
> unless it's something like hall lighting or similar, we'll turn them on
> and off as required... Short life.
>
> Quality of the light is harsh, and by the time they are up to full output,
> you will have crapped, flushed the toilet, washed your hands and turned it
> off to leave the bathroom.

The quality of the light from the ones I use is far better than
tungsten bulbs, they give a daylight colour temperature, which is
nice. (However that may not be desirable because it could lower the
grumpiness factor).

However LEDs is probably the way things will go soon.

Andrew W

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 11:41:09 AM3/14/07
to
On 13 Mar, 22:49, Russell Hafter News
<see....@walkingingermany.invalid> wrote:
> In article <f33c1dc34e.dougjw...@btopenworld.com>, Doug

>
> Webb <doug.j.w...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> > Everyone wants climate change initiatives like Wind
> > turbines, wave power etc but not in their back yard
>
> Wrong.

>
> I have argued strongly against nimby anti wind turbine
> campaigners round here in the Lake District.
>
> I think wind turbines are attractive and elegant, and
> suspect that in 200 years time people will be campaigning to
> keep the old ones running as beautiful historical artifacts.
>

Many people think they are a blight. Many others - including some of
those behind the "great global warming swindle' on Ch.4 last week-
think they are totally ineffective in supplying the energy needs for
the developing world let alone a 21st century country.

> I would have a small one in my own back yard to power this
> computer; but my concern here is that the wind is so strong
> that a small, private one could not stand up to the gales.
>

> > and the government are quick to jump on anything that
> > they seem to be able to tax and then use the excuse that
> > they are helping the planet.
>

> You will be arguing for the return of the Community Charge
> soon.
>

> We may not like paying taxes, but the costs of transport
> networks, pensions, NHS, police, armed forces, coastguard,
> education and a host of other things have to be paid for
> somehow.
>

> We pay comparatively little income tax and a lower rate of
> VAT in this country compared with many others, while our
> armed forces budget here is massively bigger than other
> European countries.
>

So I take it by "many other" countries you are comparing this country
to the small region known as Europe? That's hardly a balanced
comparison given its well known statist, high-tax credentials (at
least the 'old Europe' countries). The tax burden is far lower across
many countries in the Anglophone world.
The armed forces budget is not massively bigger than France nor
Germany. And looking outside - again - Europe, is not massively bigger
than China's (probably smaller), not bigger than Japan's and not
bigger than the USA's.

Yet more taxes are wasted - in the billions - at subsidising notably
French agriculture through the EU which undercuts the developing
world. Then we further insult them by trying to impose inadequate
"green" energy generation on their nascent and often pathetic societal
structure (as seen on the same ch.4 programme). The idea that the UK
is "leading" China and India on this is frighteningly dangerous to my
mind and seems to reflect a total exhaustion in the West that we have
outlived our usefulness and exhausted our wish to progress and instead
impose regressive measures on humanity. Sounds to me like the final
death throes.

Furthermore £68 million of our money has been cut from the science and
engineering budget which generates or contributes to progress across
all the areas you mention because of a government throwing money in a
protectionist manner at MGRover which in many people's minds they have
absolutely no right to do.

Further still, the VAT level is a EU competency like many, many more
areas that have simply been thrown away from self-governance and are
likely impossible to get back because of the so-called "ratchet"
mechanism of the EU regardless of what David Cameron might say.

> How else do you suggest that money is raised?
>

Lowering the tax burden has produced the wealth generating and job
generating economy we still have today. What you seem to suggest is
even more tax which to people paying £500 or more per month at the
start of their careers is truly abhorrent.

Andrew

Ray Dawson

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 12:09:43 PM3/14/07
to
Jess <phant...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > Quality of the light is harsh, and by the time they are up to full
> > output, you will have crapped, flushed the toilet, washed your hands
> > and turned it off to leave the bathroom.
>
> The quality of the light from the ones I use is far better than
> tungsten bulbs, they give a daylight colour temperature, which is
> nice. (However that may not be desirable because it could lower the
> grumpiness factor).

I've been using economy lamps for years now and not had a problem with
harshness. For the bedrooms I use 'soft' effect lamps and, in the bathroom
and toilet, I have them mounted on globes.

> However LEDs is probably the way things will go soon.

130 LEDs wired in series, with a diode, and connected across the mains :-)

About 2.5 Watts in total. Mind you, the light will be a bit blue.

Cheers,

Ray D

John Cartmell

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 12:08:52 PM3/14/07
to
In article <1173886869.8...@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
Andrew W <aw2...@gmail.com> wrote:
[about wind turbines]

> Many people think they are a blight. Many others - including some of
> those behind the "great global warming swindle'

Perhaps the best self-referential title ever.

Alan Calder

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 12:29:30 PM3/14/07
to

[Snip]

>"great global warming swindle' on Ch.4 last week-

Don't get me going on that huge pile of 'poo' that Ch4 put out. Enough
there to power a small city, correctly processed. They couldn't even see
the irony of using a failed Chancellor of the Exchequer as one of their
major contributing 'experts'.

Too of topic! No more.

Cheers

Alan

[Snip]

Jess

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 12:58:18 PM3/14/07
to
In message <gemini.jewi870...@magray.freeserve.co.uk>
Ray Dawson <r...@magray.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

Pretty closed to daylight, a friend has done just that.

Jess

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 12:54:46 PM3/14/07
to
In message <1173886869.8...@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>
"Andrew W" <aw2...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 13 Mar, 22:49, Russell Hafter News

campaigners round here in the Lake District.
>>
>> I think wind turbines are attractive and elegant, and
>> suspect that in 200 years time people will be campaigning to
>> keep the old ones running as beautiful historical artifacts.
>>
>
> Many people think they are a blight.

[snip]

My town has a wind farm out to sea in front of it.

There was a minor local fuss when the neighbouring town started to
refer to it as their farm to attract tourists.

Stuart

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 2:49:23 PM3/14/07
to
In article <216c2ac34e...@btopenworld.com>,
Doug Webb <doug....@btinternet.com> wrote:
> Joking aside todays "green" taxes are just another way of getting
> money rather than making a coherent policy to do so.

Quite so!

--
Stuart Winsor

From is valid but subject to change without notice if it gets spammed.

For Barn dances and folk evenings in the Coventry and Warwickshire area
See: http://www.barndance.org.uk

Stuart

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 4:29:21 PM3/14/07
to
In article <4ec34f...@ukgateway.net>,
Dave Symes <d...@ukgateway.net> wrote:
> Energy saving lamps... Farting in the wind... Looks good in the News,
> but...

Well, lets face it, a large part of the time it isn't "wasted" anyway.

The energy that doesn't produce radiation in the part of the spectrum we
call "light", is given off as "heat". In the winter, which is the time we
need light most, it's just another heater keeping your room warm.

If one were to do a "real world" calculation and calculate the amount of
energy wasted as heat when we use lights during the summer (2hrs per day?)
and express that as a percentage against the total enery used during the
year the economics would look very different!

Stuart

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 4:50:37 PM3/14/07
to
In article <4ec35595best...@dsl.pipex.com>,

Steven Pampling <steve.p...@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:
> In article <4ec34f...@ukgateway.net>, Dave Symes
> <d...@ukgateway.net>
> wrote:

> > Quality of the light is harsh, and by the time they are up to full
> > output, you will have crapped, flushed the toilet, washed your hands
> > and turned it off to leave the bathroom.

> Interesting idea. If I sit and think for a few hours I might recall when
> I last turned on the light in the middle of the night in order to go to
> the bathroom.

The street lights shining in through the windows, provide more than enough
light round here.

Now, /that's/ what I call wasted energy. Thousands of kilowatts being
consumed just for the benefit of a "few" people who wont accept that man
is not a nocturnal creature.

Interestingly, Wawickshire are looking at the idea of street lights being
turned off at midnight and I support the move fully.

As for the practice of wasting energy floodlighting buildings now that
really makes my blood boil.

Just think, we might be able to sleep better /and/ be able to see and
appreciate the beauty of the night sky again.

Stuart

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 2:48:15 PM3/14/07
to
In article <4ec32609...@walkingingermany.invalid>,

Russell Hafter News <see...@walkingingermany.invalid> wrote:
> In article <f33c1dc34e...@btopenworld.com>, Doug
> Webb <doug....@btinternet.com> wrote:

> > Everyone wants climate change initiatives like Wind
> > turbines, wave power etc but not in their back yard

> Wrong.

> I have argued strongly against nimby anti wind turbine

> campaigners round here in the Lake District.

I am a long way from the Lake distict so cannot be called a nimby. It is a
very beautiful part of the country and I want to see it remain that way.
If they want to put them out at sea, fine, put them on top of buildings in
London, excellent but NOT in the Lake district or other areas of
outstanding natural beauty.

Did anyone see the channel 4 documentry the other night that blew holes in
the ideas that global warming was down to man's activities?

> You will be arguing for the return of the Community Charge
> soon.

There is only /one/ fair means of raising taxes and that is income tax.

Stuart

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 4:53:35 PM3/14/07
to
In article <83c069c...@user.minijem.plus.com>,

Richard Porter <dontu...@address.uk.invalid> wrote:
> <OT>
> 2. Road pricing is flawed because it assumes that drivers who drive on
> the busiest roads at the busiest times actually have a choice. The
> investment in alternative transport must come up front

Added to which, there is talk of commuter fares going up during the rush
hour so you get screwed whatever you do.

Stuart

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 4:58:46 PM3/14/07
to
In article <81e76ac...@user.minijem.plus.com>,

Richard Porter <dontu...@address.uk.invalid> wrote:
> Compact flourescent lamps are cheaper than GLS (incandescent) lamps
> over their lifetime so people who still buy tungsten filiament lamps
> are daft. I've been using CFLs since thorn 2Ds came out 25 years ago.

Almost all our lighting is compact or tube flourescent but I have a couple
of "task lights" with incandescent "spot" bulbs in because I want very
local high level lighting. The light I use when using my microscope to
work with surface mount componemts is a 12V 20W dichoric halogen.

Stuart

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 5:01:23 PM3/14/07
to

> Probably. Worth a good luck at least, though I wonder about the cost and
> new bureacracy needed.

Probably no worse than what we have already or that required to re-asses
property in the manner that is being proposed and collect the income

Stuart

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 5:05:11 PM3/14/07
to
In article <gemini.jewi870...@magray.freeserve.co.uk>,
Ray Dawson <r...@magray.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

> 130 LEDs wired in series, with a diode, and connected across the mains :-)

Depends what proportion of blue, red, yellow and green LEDs you use!

Alan Calder

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 6:33:12 PM3/14/07
to
In article <4ec393c1b...@dsl.pipex.com>, Stuart
<SW_N...@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:

[Snip]

> Did anyone see the channel 4 documentry the other night that blew holes
> in the ideas that global warming was down to man's activities?

Shome mishtake, shurely? You meant to type 'the channel 4 documentry the
other night that blew a load of bollocks in an attempt to blow a hole in
the idea that global warming was down to man's activities?

Didn't you? Or perhaps you also belief the earth is flat? :-)

John Cartmell

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 6:36:15 PM3/14/07
to
> Did anyone see the channel 4 documentry the other night that blew holes in
> the ideas that global warming was down to man's activities?

I hope you saw the holes in that programme. I didn't hear a statement in it
that held up to any form of scrutiny.

Steven Pampling

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 7:01:53 PM3/14/07
to
In article <55ppp4F...@mid.individual.net>, David Holden
<black...@apdl.co.uk> wrote:

> On 14-Mar-2007, Steven Pampling <steve.p...@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:

> > In article <4ec34f...@ukgateway.net>, Dave Symes
> > <d...@ukgateway.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Quality of the light is harsh, and by the time they are up to full
> > > output, you will have crapped, flushed the toilet, washed your hands
> > > and turned it off to leave the bathroom.
> >
> > Interesting idea. If I sit and think for a few hours I might recall
> > when I last turned on the light in the middle of the night in order to
> > go to the bathroom.

> > There are a number of things you just don't need to see.

> You've obviously got some of those night vision goggles so you can see
> to aim in the dark ;-)

Gentlemen may behave as do the ladies and remain seated during the
performance.
Mind you given GD's described performance not remaining seated might well
be a mistake unless the performer has much talent.

But to take your point, an allergic reaction to medication when I was young
has left me with problems with bright light and better than average night
vision.

Michael Finlay

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 8:13:48 PM3/14/07
to
In message <4ec39ef56...@dsl.pipex.com>
Stuart <SW_N...@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:

> Interestingly, Wawickshire are looking at the idea of street lights being
> turned off at midnight and I support the move fully.


A return to days gone-by. When we moved into this house - 1952 - all
of the street lights went out at midnight.

Mike


--

Andrew W

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 8:14:55 PM3/14/07
to

Alan Calder wrote:
> In article <4ec393c1b...@dsl.pipex.com>, Stuart
> <SW_N...@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:
>
> [Snip]
>
> > Did anyone see the channel 4 documentry the other night that blew holes
> > in the ideas that global warming was down to man's activities?
>
> Shome mishtake, shurely? You meant to type 'the channel 4 documentry the
> other night that blew a load of bollocks in an attempt to blow a hole in
> the idea that global warming was down to man's activities?
>

Alan, you can't leave it alone can you? You tell me"enough" and then
you go on to make a further unfair representation of the programme
(discrediting but one part of the whole argument against the CO2
mania and thereby distilling it down to one received wisdom of the
documentary being controversial - as though it was more controversial
than the hatchet job of Al Gore for example).

> Didn't you? Or perhaps you also belief the earth is flat? :-)
>
> Cheers

That's hardly a "cheers" matter is it - it's a piece of condescension
and a piece of abuse. Who do you think you are speaking to - a fool?
He could be far more widely read on this than anybody.

It's not good enough to turn this into a character defamation debate.

Andrew

Michael Finlay

unread,
Mar 14, 2007, 8:28:36 PM3/14/07
to