ThenThreeMore @ andthenthreemore @startrek.website

Posts

2

Comments

507

Joined

2 yr. ago

Better than spending it giving tax breaks to the rich or subsidising companies that are destroying the planet.

Yeah cause leaving companies and the super rich to self regulate has worked so well.

It wouldn't make it easier to arrange meetings because you'd have no clue if you were arranging the meeting for when people would be at work, have finished for the day, or fast asleep at night.

Pays for Bruce Banner to have therapy and anger management to work through his PTSD and anger issues.

¯(ツ)/¯ it's not in the public sphere but your private collection, so you do you chap.

In my opinion privately owned art of a high enough cultural value should either not be allowed to be privately owned, or if it is then it should have to be on permanent loan to free admission public galleries. But that's not the case.

Meanwhile:

GCU The Gravitas Meme is so Last Year: I'm gonna sort out that extension event, then we should probably send a couple of Special Circumstances operatives to guide them in the right direction. In the past picosecond I've absorbed and analysed their global information net so know exactly what actions we need to take to give them the correct nudge.

Not this shit again

Oh and it's called 6th form cos you're in year 6 of secondary school. Which is also called year 12!

I think it's a hold over from some time in the past where the year numbers started over again at secondary school, as I understand you'd do your O levels in 5 form, then A levels in 6th.

Is "6th Form" not used as an alternative to College anymore (it was archaic when I went to 6th Form 20 years ago so wouldn't be surprised if it has bitten the dust)

I got a Stanley classic trigger a few years ago because the job I was in was so frantic I'd never get to drink a hot drink hot otherwise. It's been doing we great since.

I can't understand collecting the damn things though!

Improve the insulation in your home (loft, cavity wall etc etc)

Require new homes to be built with higher standards of insulation and heat pumps for heating.

Require new homes to be built with solar panels.

Divest any investments (pensions, savings etc) away from funds that contain oil and other polluting companies.

But you wouldn't text another iPhone. You'd WhatsApp the person.

Prodigy is in about the right time period too.

Don't. Life's too short.

If you're enjoying it but it's a hard read take a break and try again. If you're just not enjoying it sack it.

That's the trap the restaurant uses to get out of giving 10% off.

One of my cats does the same. My assumption is he was taken from the mother cat too young so never learned how to do things properly.

For the smell maybe try grain free food.

Still partially in use the UK. We've got a really messed up system where metric is used for some things and imperial for others.

We tend to cook in metric but weigh ourselves in imperial (but stone and pounds not just stone)

Distance is metric for DIY and metric for driving.

Liquids are metric for most things and imperial for milk and beer.

Then reinstated quietly after the election (if Tories win)

No it doesn't seem to be in there. According to the highway code

Many of the rules in the Code are legal requirements, and if you disobey these rules you are committing a criminal offence. You may be fined, given penalty points on your licence or be disqualified from driving. In the most serious cases you may be sent to prison. Such rules are identified by the use of the words ‘MUST/MUST NOT’. In addition, the rule includes an abbreviated reference to the legislation which creates the offence. See an explanation of the abbreviations.

Although failure to comply with the other rules of the Code will not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, The Highway Code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under the Traffic Acts (see The road user and the law) to establish liability. This includes rules which use advisory wording such as ‘should/should not’ or ‘do/do not’.

No where does it say if an area is named specially as a must not, and another area is named as a should not in the same rule then the should not must be treated as a must not.

Or is there some case law maybe that you're referring to?

Do you have something to back that up? It seems very odd that London would be named specially as must not then a second clause for the remainder of the country that sounds different. Surely it should either be "you must not park on the pavement" or if there's some archaic reason that London needs specific wording "you must not park on the pavement in London, and you must not park on the pavement elsewhere "