threegee

Don't think it was supposed to be a comedy! The classic - I can watch time and time again - is Fawlty Towers. It's not even that I particularly like John Cleese. In fact for the most part it seems he's not even acting or playing for laughs. Maybe that's why it's soo good? Was it a mistake to only make twelve episiodes? Difficult to judge without seeing what a second series would have been like. But probably less of a mistake than doing the format to death - like many shows go on to do.

Has it dawned on 39 Victoria Street that this would probably end Labour Party domination of one of their last bastions of mindless obedience? Would this be a bad thing for Bedlington?

What about the Pink Cadilac and the Pink Panther? And is that an Airplane!?

Surely it was Coneheads and not Conehead?

From the top I can see the B52s, but can a Led Zeppelin fly like that?

Not being able to correct mistakes both penalises, and discourages, genuine posters. Language replace is something that sounds great but is of no practical use on a board like this. Some posts don't deserve moderating and should simply be deleted. The warning system is there to use, and ultimately it will disable people who can't behave. I think you will find that you can stop individual members who abuse the posting edit feature. Will investigate.

God - by definition - started time AND creation (of the Universe) itself. Without God there could have been no creation, and before creation there was no time! 13.7 billion years ago by all accounts. http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20060318/fob1.asp The really interesting question is what is the 96% of the Universe (Dark Energy and Dark Matter) we know nothing about.

Only if they have an affinity with Silicon(e) Valley.

As someone recently said to me: Just about the first thing anyone does when starting to use the Internet is to enter the name of where they live and see what comes up. Given that (and local word of mouth) I don't think any promotion is necessary. That's not to say it won't be appreciated, or serve to remind people. But, at core, it's another case of what a senior local politician said (quoted in an earlier post). Essentially, that a large percentage of the people who live in Bedlington only use it as a dormitory. They don't vote in local elections and don't give a damn about the local community, or about community issues! I leave it as an exercise for the reader to guess at the direction he was pointing (from the WDC Offices) when making that remark.

I don't believe that for one second! England has a law against doing just about anything - including standing still for too long! Tell the Cooncil to dust off their decibel meter and get some new batteries! There's a statutory requirement that they at least investigate. If they still won't cooperate then go straight to Bedlington Magistrates Court and tell them that WDC are not doing their job, and that because of this you want to take action under Section 82 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Ask them for help filling the forms in. Given a little help this should be good for a local rag headline, which could well mean that WDC might then discover the problem for themselves, and/or other complainants surface!

You mean like.. they could be converting them into an estate agent, or a building society, or a solicitor's office?

Yup, Bedlington r-e-a-l-l-y could do with another pub! We've got just sooo many Leisure Centers, Swimming Pools, prosperous small shops, etc. etc. that I'd simply scream if another one of those opened next week. More building societies and estate agents. More solicitor's offices. This is where the future lies! P.S. Thank you for closing down Northern Rock. The most positive move in years. I reconsidered closing my account but on careful consideration determined to leave £1 in it - just so you'll have the pleasure and expense of administering it for the next 20 years. And, your building has been re-occupied by something much more positive for the community - like... Oh!

"Marking, cutting and bruising" would always have got parents into trouble. We don't need a new set of laws, or a new government agency staffed by a new layer of jobs-worths. Nor do we need endless reports and surveys funded by the taxpayer (to produce the conclusion that the funder is expecting), and which no one will read anyway. What we need is the restoration of social pressures by imaginative means. It's the removal of those social pressures that have caused today's behavioural problems. I come from a generation where not only smacking but corporal punishment was the norm. You'll near universally hear from this generation that it didn't do them any harm at all, and in fact that they often deserved it. The problems started in the 1960's with the "Spock" type theorists who though that they knew better than generations before them. They didn't! Today's problems are to a great extent due to their pet theories - what they wanted to believe, and what sounded "fair", rather than what had always worked. The same is true of the education system. It's a shadow of its former self, and a shambles despite astronomic increases in funding. The problem with all these social meddlers is that by the time their dumb theories are discredited the damage has been done. By then they've taken their wad and disappeared!

I voted: Yes, Parents alone should decide the punishment levels and: Raised voice, stern look. Are those contradictory? Don't think so! What is wrong here is the attempt at trying to prescribe exactly what's acceptable and what's not acceptable. Good parent's themselves always know when they've gone too far, and so does (did!) Society. But a child should almost always be left guessing. Does this seem strange or unfair to you? Well that's the way it has always been done through history ...and you know what? It worked! When you draw lines in the sand children will test them. What they then learn is a game of testing the system rather than regulating their own behaviour. So... here I'm back on the old hobby horse of the evil of government regulating every aspect of our lives, rather than government doing what it should do: enabling innovation, creating an enterprise environment, and providing a safety net. P.S. Isn't this in the wrong forum? It would be a shame if it runs off topic.

Err.. no! I've made a habit of making my dreams reality. This is easily achievable. In fact the government doesn't need to spend a penny on the actual infrastructure or delay another week. All it has to do is specify minor ducting be fitted on every new road. Throw the whole thing open to competition and, instead of years white papers, pointless committee meetings, etc. enterprise will take care of the rest. There's no need to settle on one system. The ducting could accommodate several systems experimentally. Can you imagine where our mobile phone system would be today if it had been left to government to dictate standards, and only one system had been allowed? Technology enabling should be a function of government, not the poking of its nose into our private affairs all the time! But, we have a bunch of useless jokers running the show - paid astronomic salaries simply for bolstering the PM's ego! Not an original thought in any of their heads.

Ah! Reverse moderation? I meant bum-wiping P.S. You've got to put something between the ] and the [ for it to be size 3 and the formatting commands not to display literally.

This sort of thing could be eliminated with dirt cheap technology! It's 2007 - about time we had guidance cables under the main carriageways. Would cost about 1% of the cost of road making, save lives, save fuel and (with an open interface) could be made to do a lot of other things as well. Something any minister of transport worth his/her salt should be promoting. But we've got the usual Blair b** wiping timeservers in charge of the madhouse. BTW does anyone know who the Minister of Transport is this week? There was a time when he was never out of the public eye. Who can forget the glorious days of "Marples Must Go!". Come back Ernest Marples all is forgiven!

I'm far too busy fighting spammers on the "information super-highway"! Just keeping your mailboxes clean maaam!

What about a None of the above option: Innocent Until Proven Guilty! Seems to me you'd be good at setting up Government Plebiscites - the ones they only hold when they are absolutely sure that they'll get the answer they want. P.S. Where are the moderators with all this b** stuff going on!

Problems seem to have cleared now, but I've left the post in the Site Announcements forum just in case it happens again. Maybe if anyone hears any grumbles they can point them at that. Personally, I'd goto the Med!

I can't believe that anyone who has visited this website for several years could utter such crap! I am not the website. I do hold my own views and am entitled to express them, just like everybody else. Now freedom of thought / freedom of speech is a difficult concept for the brain-dead hard left to get their heads around, I know. But, when your ideas are so weak, and so obviously wrong, then I suppose you have to use whatever means of attack are at your disposal. Reasoned argument won't hack it! But, for a definitive answer on political bias you'd have to ask Monsta why his Vote BNP signature was removed. A perfectly legitimate political party I'd have thought. Would a Vote Communist Party of Great Britain slogan have been removed under complaint? I think probably not. Were you the complainant?

A new group called (say) "Moderators" could be created, but it wouldn't add anything. The only thing that's been restricted is multi-moderation (too complicated to explain) and mass deletion. That's only because there's huge potential there for nasty, unrecoverable, mistakes. Yes. I expect my right-of-center views will be subject to the occassional PC dumb-arsed "revision" from you pair of lefties. But, that's the only way things will work. I'm content to get on with growing the site when I have the time, secure in the knowledge that, as you get older - and "under the influence of market forces" - you'll most probably end up a lot more right wing than I am!

I never realised there was a third Osbourne kid. But it's pretty obvious why he/she refused to have anything to do with the show. Should go far!