buying farmed flowers from Tescos (= massive environmental damage in developing countries)

Daffs are different, they grow ’em all in Cornwall.

Although the far SW England is a bit underdeveloped…

admittedly there’s too many cokes now, mainly with stuff removed, should have stopped at coke and cherry coke.

I liked the one with a hint of lemon, like how they serve it in pubs with a slice.

But then I also like the caramelised onion houmous, so I’m always going to be treading the ‘pleb’ line…

Because you’re riding with other such amateurs (in the nicest possible way)? I always think it when I see people with such a mark, but then I’m an elitist prick.

:-)Fair dos, can’t argue with that reasoning!

I can honestly say that I can think of no more than 2 occasions in the last 5 years when it’s happened, and I’ve just rubbed it off, my chain isn’t generally bathed in lube, so it’s not a big issue.

You see, the problem here is that I’m judging you by my (amateur) standards. It happens to me almost every ride, both road (well, commute) and off road. I use Finish Line XC so it gets everywhere, even with the ‘single drop per link’ method of lubing!

No, I think it’s a faux pas generally, it makes you look like a bit of a pleb IMO! Marginally more acceptable if it’s blood rather than just oil, but definitely not a road thing.

Really? Maybe you’re right, just something I’ve never come across. I haven’t had people point at me when I’ve got an oily mark on my leg and accuse me of being a pleb or amateur or anything really. Okay so it’s generally a sign that I haven’t been paying attention and leant my bike up badly/fluffed a clip in or something, but a faux pas? Do you guys go around with alcohol wipes quickly giving your calves a once over if you happen to brush your chainring?!

The chain ring mark is known in road racing circles as a “Cat 4 Tat”, on the basis that amateur racers are more likely to have dirty chains, and hang around with their chain on the inner chainring.

Why would you want to have it permanently and indelibly etched onto your calf?? It’s a faux pas, not a badge of honour! Or are people so desperate for the wider public to know that they’re a cyclist that they would tattoo a dirty mark on their leg???

It’s only a faux pas to road racers, a bit like the whole white sock thing, and the no rucksack rule. STW is an MTB website predominantly so I would think that this kind of tattoo wouldn’t be a faux pas in most peoples eyes.

Basically, your “dirty mark”/faux pas is another persons badge of honour. That’s why there are people with these tattoos out there.

Now, how about a tattoo of the pin marks that I keep getting in my shins from a set of DMR V8s? That probably would be bad form, proof that I can’t land a jump for toffee!

Can’t stand “Baby on board” signs for some reason. They just seem to scream to me: “Look at me, I’m artractive enough to get laid and procreate!”

Ah well, fill yer boots anyway!

I’d like to get married in a church for aesthetic reasons, but im not religious. I was thinking people could take over churches that fall into disuse and run them as a secular licensed marriage venue

I’ve often thought how much richer and better protected the archtecture in this country could be if all assests of the church (C of E, Catholics et al) were handed over to English Heritage/National Trust. Of course they’d need the churches associated financial and human resources to maintain them too. Be interesting to see if it would work, and if everyone died a ‘spiritual’ death too…!!

Take the moral high ground and respect their views (RC Church) even when they appear intolerant.

Should intolerant views not be challenged? Mocking could be argued as a way of challenging these views.

I don’t understand why it’s a joke. It’s the kind of thing a lot of people would put together and put on youtube as a serious attempt at persuading folk to wear helmets.

I’m probably missing something stupidly obvious now and will slap myself when it’s explained to me…

Well done on you marriage, good luck to Holly.

Trouble is it’s not very interesting. Car-crash telly is popular for a reason, just like Jeremy Kyle et al. Happy, good news stuff isn’t. Sorry.

I’m going to start using “Blud” and “Bro”, particularly on those I perceive as elder and better than me!

Isn’t “Shug” short for Sugar?

I quite like being called “Treacle” by the Chip Shop lady! Always used to get “Moi Luvver” when down Bristol way too. I don’t think I’ve ever been offended by it though, it’s nice to be informal.

Also, did anyone else automatically think of “Voice of the Beehive” when reading the thread title? No? Oh, okay…

A part from all the carcinogens that are on them that hang around and get into the enviroment

True, nicotine makes a particularly good pesticide too. Not really what you want in your local watercourse.

It still looks messy. Dumping a load of hardcore in the local beauty spot doesn’t really do any damage to the ecosytem, but it doesn’t make it acceptable.

Yep, this is one of my bug bears with people throwing away banana skins/apple cores etc… in the countryside and saying ” well, it’s biodegradable”. It still attracts vermin and encourages others to do the same thing though.

What about roll up butts?

Would’ve thought rollies without filters or unroached would breakdown pretty quickly. They’re basically just paper mand cured leaves, not much synthetic to stick around in the ecosystem.

Have you asked over on mumsnet yet?

Post a link when you do, actually scratch that, we’ll be able to see the mushroom clouds as thousands of angry-middle class Mums heads explode!

Did the kid accept blame on the spot?

Could the bragging over facebook be used in court to prove fault?

Purely from a legal perspective I hasten to add, not sure on the moral/ethical side of things myself…

When I used to smoke (proper cigarettes, rather than rollies, a long time ago!), I really enjoyed the feeling of taking the cellophane off a new pack of straights, opening the box for the first time and pulling the foiled paper out. A lot like plunging a spoon through the top of a foil covered new jar of instant coffee.

Grand Designs is a great way to see this in action. So often it’s a middle aged couple and they are ALWAYS building an eco house. The house generally is huge with acres of glass and megatonnes of concrete. How is it eco to build a huge house just because you can afford it? If they were poorer they would be forced into being greener by building a house properly sized for their needs.

Nah, they always justify it by saying that it’s either “stepping stone technology” or “it’s a demonstration that eco materials and techniaques are affordable*” (* to a middle aged professional couple from Surrey).

I am jealous of some of their pads though!

So Peyote, do Tom and Dick have the right to take some of Harry’s “excess” leisure time?

It depends on the context I suppose. If Harry has chosen to live in a society that considers it to be a ‘good thing’ to do that, then Tom and Dick (as part of that society) have a right to take some of Harry’s excess leisure time.

It’s all a bit simplistic though!

Don’t talk the talk …. Walk the walk

You’ve got to do both, otherwise the message never gets around.

But then the nobbers are simply abusing the system in the way that the rich are arguably doing now. Is that fair?

Not on an individual level no, but from society’s point of view you have to deal with both ends of the bell shaped curve.

You structure the tax system in the way described above. At first more or less everyone behaves in the way I said I would, i.e. relatively altruistically, contributing as much back in charitable contributions as they do now in taxes.

But a few people don’t behave that way. They act entirely selfishly. Those around them/close to them, see this and feel aggrieved at this and adjust their behaviour accordingly.

This is then replicated among society, passing like a ripple through it, that becomes like a standing wave reinforces itself.

Pretty soon everyone is forced to act entirely selfishly until the system collapses.

It’s a bit too simplistic and again relies on the overwhelming selfish instincts of humans. What about the people who see the benefits to society and despite seeing others shirk, still contribute? What about the wealthy Philanthropists? What about the strong moral conviction that many people still have?

I guess it boils down to your general view of humanity. Me? I’d like to remain optimistic so don’t burst my bubble!

Honestly, I think I would probably take advantage of that opportunity (it’s purely hypothetical; it would never happen, at least I hope it wouldn’t) and then end up donating more money to charity, or sponsoring some other type of initiative. Which is pretty much what the tax system is supposed to do, i.e. the redistribution of wealth as organised by government on behalf of society.

My initial reaction to that is “You trust the charities you’re donating to to do a better job than the Govt?” Then I had a bit of a double take and realised that if the Govt, and society, did a proper job in the first place Charities would be unecessary. It’s a bit of a can of worms that whole line of thought, possibly worthy of another thread.

In the meantime I guess you aren’t quite as selfish as you suggest your fellow humans are (now there’s a veiled compliment!) because you’re still contributing to society via the charities, why not keep it all for your sons education/inheritance? Is it not that you do value society, you’d just like more control over what an where you contribute to that society?

More or less yes; what I am saying is that everyone acts firstly in their own self interest and then secondly in the interests of society.

From your example I can see where you’re coming from.

However, I don’t think the two are mutually exclusive, it’s just much harder to view the interests of society as directly impacting on you compared to how your direct actions can be viewed.

Also, is there a limit? I mean what kind of actions would you consider appropriate and inappropriate? If you found a (hypothetical!) way to reduce your tax to 0.1% of your income would you take it? Or would you feel any gult at the money not going to fund society? Maybe everyone has a different point they draw in the sand…

My point is that super rich people who avoid paying taxes they don’t need to represents perfectly normal behaviour that any of us would also adopt given the opportunity.

The problem lies with the tax structuring itself, not with people/companies avoiding them.

That’s a damning indictment on human nature really! Basically you’re saying that we are all essentially selfish when it comes to paying tax.

I’m not sure I agree because despite getting a bit annoyed about the waste that I see tax income spent on, I’m well aware of the good it does re: NHS, eductaion, helping the vulnerable and generally keeping society going. I’d have difficult alligning my moral compass to a lot of what I hear the super rich doing.

That’s not to say there isn’t a big problem/s with the tax structure either though!

Tesco baygs disintegrate after a while. They crumble and fall apart.

True, wasn’t that down to UV light? Doubt you’d get much of that in a landfill site!

Interestingly it was reported in the waste press that Irelands consumption of plastic film products increased post plastic bag ban as people started buying more bin liners to replace carriers used for the same purposes..

Probably a better idea TBH, the plastic used to make bin liners is designed to be broken down in a landfill environment (like black bin bags). The carrier bags shops give you are designed for a different purpose, so if everyone continued to use them as dog poo bags, bin liners etc… then there would bags full of this waste sitting around in landfills not breaking down because they’re were all sealed up nicely in a Tesco bag!

We need more specific criteria TJ, is a five pointed star (of whatever colour) Christian because it represents the star the wise men followed? Or Pagan because fo the pentagram element? The angel on the top of the tree often morphs into a fairy so does that mean another conflict between Christian and Pagan?

Also, wasn’t Santa Saint Nicholas at one point? Was he not a Christian? Or is it the old Green Santa from Bavaria?

That’s the trouble with these modern festivals, too much duality when you start to look into it.

I really find it so sad that grown men will put their dogs before their fellow humans.

Question – Ever wondered why there is a “Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals”, but only a “National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children”?

Answer – It’s because despite it having a royal charter, the NSPCC didn’t want to be confused with the RSPCA! Interesting how the one preceded the other though…

Should dog (or any animal for that matter) ownership be limited to those who have the space and facilities to look after their chosen animal? Not sure of the answers, but worth a little think about…

I guess this would apply to horse owners too – only allowed to exercise them on private land? Cats won’t be allowed to stray from their garden into public spaces. Again, a bit overkill due to intolerant people. [/quote]

It was intended as a kind of ‘thought experiment’, I hadn’t thought of the practicalities of it! Bear with me here slight tangent but perhaps it’ll explain my reasoning. Apparently in parts of Japan space is so limited that people aren’t allowed to buy private vehicles until they own a parking space in which to keep it. I’m assuming this is because they don’t want parked cars cluttering up the public roads. Which is fair enough really, so I was thinking could this be applied to other scenarios, hence my suggestion.

Anyways, yes it is a bit overkill, but overkill is sometimes required if people cannot accept the responsibilities they should when they agree to care for an animal. Ultimately it depends on whether you view the rights of the dog/dog owners as more important than those who dislike them. Tolerance is all well and good, but there is very little of it in the public open spaces that many people use (witness the anger demonstrated on the roads for example), the only way around this is draconian rules and appropriate enforcement.

edited to add – Apologies for the dodgy quoting, it looked fine in the preview and still does. Just on the real site it doesn’t work?! I don’t have the IT skillz to sort it!

Is it home brew beer or wine?

Either way, as has been said make sure everything is really clean and use the best kits you can afford. Also, not sure that using malt extract in a wine kit would produce good results. I Could be wrong though!

No need for the abuse TJ is getting, personally speaking, from this thread he’s coming out better than the animal lovers.

I don’t mind dogs myself, but the Missus does have a (slightly irrational) fear of them. Why should she have her right to use public spaces limited by those who refuse to control their charges? Should dog (or any animal for that matter) ownership be limited to those who have the space and facilities to look after their chosen animal? Not sure of the answers, but worth a little think about…

due to not seeing cars as status symbols.

Nobody does, do they?

You’d be surprised!

Ever noticed how those who wish to defend the motor industry’s more idiosyncratic products always try to employ the “politics of envy” argument?

Lots of Environmental Protection and Conservation legislation came out of Europe too.

Seem to remember Sustrans asking this question in a survey a few years ago. If my memory serves me correctly it was £4 per litre before the majority of people would start to change their behaviour.

It’s a bit like an addiction really, no matter how poor you are you’ll always find money for tobacco if you smoke, if you’ve got a car you’ll always find money for fuel…

Another non-repeat customer here, ordered a few things from them (rear wheel, pannier rack and mudguards). E-mailed to say two of the items weren’t in stock and offered different items, one of which wasn’t compatible. I e-mailed a reply confirming I was okay with one item but asked a question about the other, no reply for a week so I went elsewhere. E-mailed them to cancel my order and suggested they update their website, again no reply and the website remained the same (haven’t checked since then).

I’ll stick them in the Dave Hinde folder I think…

There’s one in Woking too, I suspect it’s because it was one of the Cycle Towns that the Coalition Govt. pulled the funding on, bit late for jumping on that bandwagon.

Is this one of those situations where the ratio of men:women Primary school teachers is a result of it just being something that women are naturally more likely to choose as a career?, but some people are trying to force it to be more balanced so that their equality/diversity looks good?

Possibly. I was also under the impression that males were discouraged from choosing it as a career based on a variety of society-based prejudices. In much the same way that women used to be discouraged from choosing to join the Police for example.

I think there is some mileage in addressing the societal (is that a word?) prejudice, but as always it is a matter of how it is done.

No borders, different currencies, significant differeces in laws.

What about national institutions such as the BBC?

Yeah, fair enough, but these are hardly big things are they? We’re used to differing currencies working with France and Ireland, we already have different laws. The majority of Voters aren’t going to notice these differences that much.

National institutions could be interesting. I suppose the BBC maybe renamed and split into three (although there already are significant regional programming differences and local TV). Although why is the BBC still the BBC and not UKTV? Maybe it won’t change then.

I can’t see many people being that fussed compared to other pressures in their lives.