threegee

For the record in Foxy's picture: the shop just this side of the Northumberland Arms is James Millne (Jimmy Millne's) at 110 Front Street East. This was where Radio and later TV was supplied from. It was known as "The Cycle Shop" because it still sold cycle spares, and just about everything else hardware-wise. It also still saw a steady string of miners buying "carbide" (calcium carbide) for their helmet gas lamps about the time this was taken. This was scooped out of large oil drums and sold by the pound in heavy duty paper bags. Maybe the carbide was also used in early cycle lamps, but by this time they were all battery operated by the common 3 Volt Cycle Lamp Batteries. I also remember a sign saying "Needless to say you'll need needles." yup, not the sewing variety but your actual gramophone needles! Going out of fashion as the electric "pick-up" and amplifiers rendered them relics of the past, but still in some demand in those days of 78's (78 RPM Records). Other things on show, and in demand, would be sets of darts, and harmonicas (Horner?). I remember local darts players weighing darts in their hands and doing practice throws. You wanted high-tech - there were shelves of radio valves with type numbers going back to the year dot! Perhaps the only place you could get those in Bedlington. A "fashion expert" tells me this picture is 1958 or 1959, and that's about what I'd have guessed, if I'd not guessed a tiny bit earlier. So.. here we are already well into the 405 line TV era, with BBC TV (Channel 5) long established, and Tyne Tees TV (Channel 8) just starting, or getting ready to start.

aaawww..... I was going to do that! Better stick to what I'm really good at then... perl one, plain one.. Remember that those who show they can really deliver content get rapidly promoted to elite "Contributor" membership. That gives them unlimited storage space for their photos, and a whole chapter in the history of the World (as we know it, Jim). There's probably a gong, or a knighthood, in there somewhere too! If you think you deserve Contributor status then PM me with a link to what you have already done with your existing storage space.

Actually, we do still have one that's not a lot different to that! And... I'm not joking!

So short I almost missed it! Regular members will be in no doubt that we are now running on the new machine!

"..having my 'warning status' recorded and published on the Internet." It is not published, it's only visible to you! Log out then return to a publicly viewable forum you've posted in and you will see that it is no longer visible. Just about everything recorded about you is editable by you in your profile at any time you choose, so you decide what you tell moderators and other members about yourself. No commercial enterprise will ever have access to your private data. We don't put a monetary value on your membership like US megacorps do - because we have no desire to make money out of you. We also provide a facility for you to easily delete all site cookies - that are only there for your convenience and smooth running, not to track your behaviour like others do. If there is a problem I'm at a loss to see how this could be!

Not through the warning system you are talking about though - so I won't eat my words! The warning points system is part of many many many thousands of boards on the Internet now. Google on "IPB warning system" if you want to see what others say. If you do want it disabled then hold a poll! Malcolm is right - the "views" depend on your membership status, and it's not always easy to work out exactly what other membership groups see. The warning status of other members is only seen by the moderator groups though.

Didn't say that at all. Said I had been moderated. We have had some deliberately disruptive behaviour, and they have been used, but it was a fair while ago.

You have to be logged in. AFAIK everyone has 0 warning points, and I only remember one occasion that any were issued. Ah, yes, George Orwell. "Display name" for Eric Blair. The left-wing guy who thought that Stalin's Russia was the future, a nice place to be, and "worked", but lived on an tiny island so he could avoid social contact himself! As this place is fully democratic why not start a campaign to have the warning system turned off? Just remember that it is an integral part of a system that is deployed on hundreds of thousands of websites, and has stood the test of time. It may seldom be used but it's a sanction your moderators may well need when disruptive elements surface, as has happened in the past. One remarkable thing about this board is how very very little moderator intervention is required. I'd contrast this with the BBC boards which seem to be heavily moderated. Of course we've been at it much longer than they have, but mainly have a much tighter community with a common heritage. Something the social engineering politicos could learn something from I think.

Other members can not see this - just you! Which - of course - is why you can't see it on other people's posts. Moderators can see it though for everyone; they need to because they need to know how other moderators have acted in the past.

Probably a bit of both! Everyone has a naughty step score. Someone even warned me, or heavily edited one of my posts, a few years back - if I could remember who it was I'd...

Moderators can dish them out, but it's very rare here as the people in Bedlington are just so polite and nice to each other.

Ah yes, but I've just noticed the Olympus SP-720UZ and the SP-810UZ. They are both about the same price but the 720 looks the better bet as it does full HD video and I think is a later release. The lens on the 810 looks great but I think even with the stabilisation goodies you are going to be hard pressed to use a 36x at maximum zoom. Is the 3D a gimmick I wonder? Good page here detailing super zooms!

OK, you are now a member of a very exclusive group called "Contributors". You can upload what you like! Go easy on the system until we get sorted please.

After selling a few toys I have a hankering for a new camera. Something with a decent lens with lots of zoooom. Also something that's not too noisy in low light, and has optical image stab. I already have a little Panasonic DMC-LZ10 bought sub £100 a couple of years back, and an ageing Canon G1 and G2. The Pana is not too bad when you have time to set up the shot but as I say I'm looking for a decent sized light capturing lens with oodles of zoom, and capability to shoot off multiple frames to select from. The LZ10 badly disappointed me at an evening kids party last year and I missed loads of good shots, plus the ones I did get were mostly iffy. I'm am not too bothered about the size of the thing, or too picky about other matters. Also I don't think I can justify spending more than about £200 at present bargain prices. I'm quite attracted by the Fujifilm FinePix S4200 at £130 which looks like it might fit the bill at a bargain price. But there are so many conflicting reviews - seems like some silly people are expecting a good SLR for £130, and others are delighted with the bargain. I can see the lens here will keep me happy and the price, but will the noise levels, time to first pic, and processing time? Or.. should I bust the budget and go for a more modern Pana Lumix like the TZ30 at twice the price? They'll likely be £100 less by Christmas, and that would kind of upset me, as I likely wouldn't have had too much use out of it by then. If the FinePix doesn't quite meet the bill that would be OK at the price, but if the Lumix falls too far short of expectations I will be upset.

http://www.snotr.com/embed/8965

Best way to make these things work is to advertise a day, a time, and a topic or two, well in advance. Use the Announcements section if you like.

So don't let it rest there. Politely ask why you weren't informed - be quietly assertive and non-aggressive, quote facts but don't be combative. If you get the brush-off take it higher, and keep on asking. And... keep saying you WANT to work. Sooner or later someone will listen, or be made to listen.

Assuming that they'd come - which they wouldn't - and that they'd appear on the same platform - unlikely, as they have nothing in common - they'd likely be talking to the grass slope these days. And that, considering the solid vote for "New Labour", is more instructive about the sad state of our town than either of them could ever recount!

Not entirely a level playing field as it's rather easy to maintain customer satisfaction if you are on the sort of ridiculously high margins as Apple or "beauty products" shops are. Or, as the article puts it: The real poll is do people keep coming back for more, and in Tesco's case this must be true as there are plenty of other options for the consumer. And... I don't like them either!

Company version is that driver was told to drop them off at 5am but for his own reasons delivered them at 3am. Seized on by windbag Prescott to make political capital of the half-truth. Kids are still paid their dole and are offered a "real job" at the Olympics. Who would you rather employ Adam: someone who won't do it because they are being "exploited", or someone who welcomes the experience, sees it as a step on the employment ladder, and will get out of bed at 3am to prove their commitment? And... are employers never exploited?

It wasn't a cunning plan. It wasn't driven by economics. It was a doctrinaire political ambition, and a "social experiment" embarked on by people who thought they had "vision", but were in fact of rather low intelligence. Welcome to Bedlington: an early example of what always happens when you put doctrinaire politics and social experiments before hard economics! (added to maintain political balance - did I mention the LD's? )

EuTube, where else?!

Nothing too much wrong with the NUM before it was thoroughly infiltrated by revolutionaries, who's only purpose in life was to overthrow a democratically elected government, and hold the Country to ransom. Nothing very much wrong with the early Labour Party when they had some principles. It was the armchair socialists - who briefly marched behind the banners, spouted nonsense from the platform, then got back into their chauffeur-driven Bentleys and were whisked back to Hampstead until the next election year - that I had any issue with. Bedders has paid dearly for its gullibility and naivety. A proud history, but whatever happened to the "sunlit uplands" emblazoned on some of those fine banners?

Maybe if she got this large hula-hoop and...? No, no, totally stupid idea! The glimpse of that Charles Windsor guy's face @1:40 said it all about poor Cheryl, but he does seem to like Jessie J.

"But we still face some huge challenges" not the least of which is finding a £5 external mic to plug in, and borrowing a cheap tripod. The severe wind noise on the camera mic speaks far louder than any of the interviewees. Spend the Portas cash on windscreens, so people can actually stand on the high street. Full marks for doing something - anything - but when you are posting YouTube video it's not a good idea to put text at the bottom where the progress bar is constantly popping up and obscuring it.