|
It sometimes worries me how long it takes me to get jokes.
Eh? and he's spelt 'Presto' wrong.
It became clear on third reading. 
Regards,
Rob Philpott.
|
|
|
|
|
You're improving then.
speramus in juniperus
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: It sometimes worries me how long it takes me to get jokes.
He appropriately did not use the joke icon.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Nagy Vilmos wrote: garlic, basil and pine nuts.
garlic and basil nuts ? What are those ? 
Microsoft ... the only place where VARIANT_TRUE != true
|
|
|
|
|
Bad Argonia! I will not add an Oxford comma just to delineate pine nuts from the rest of the list.
speramus in juniperus
|
|
|
|
|
You certainly should!
I am fully in favour of the Oxford comma: it's use for clarification cannot be bettered, improved, or excelled.
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
The door is over there! on the left hand side of the room.
Please don't call, we will call you! 
Every day, thousands of innocent plants are killed by vegetarians.
Help end the violence EAT BACON
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just had an email from MailMarshal, our corporate e-mail security solution, because it has blocked The Daily Build - 11 Feb 2014 from Code Project;
Quote: Because it believes the message or an attachment to this message contains Script or Code. This detection is based on scanning the content for Scripting and code commands.
|
|
|
|
|
I bet that little MailMarshal doesn't recognize assembly. You should try :P
Microsoft ... the only place where VARIANT_TRUE != true
|
|
|
|
|
I think it has some bad rules. There is no script in the emails, simply because most email clients do not support JavaScript. The closest thing to a script tag in the body is the title "To script or not to script...".
Matthew
|
|
|
|
|
|
The floods were described as "a political crisis" a few days ago. Which is what they are now, it has moved on from flooding and the impact on people's lives and is now all about the political fallout. Decisions will be made that play best in the media, not because they are the best thing to do.
There was an article on the BBC site a few days ago where they went to interview people in Cornwall about what a disaster the storms have been, and almost everyone was upbeat about it. Yes it's a pain, but it was exciting, thrilling, the raw power of nature was incredible to behold. They were enjoying walks, treasure hunting as the damaged coasts throw up things that have been hidden for hundreds or thousands of years.
And I heard a woman from the Thames Valley on the radio this morning, basically said "It's what happens here, we'll deal with it".
As for the Someset Levels. They're below sea level, reclaimed land, and they flood relatively often, and they flood far worse than they currently are. And for all the land that is covered, for all the noise the papers are making, there are only about 40 homes flooded. Most of it is farmland, which is designed to flood, it protects the homes.
But it happens, you deal with it, you move on.
|
|
|
|
|
But being calm and reasonable isn't what the media is about, it doesn't sell newspapers.
People in Cornwall find this[^] funny.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, much of it is the media makijng a big story out of it and looking for the scandal.
But what is being uncovered in COrnwall by the storms? I know they are famous wreckers, as are the Devonians and happilly strip a wrecked boat of anything usefull, but I didnt think the storms had caused any wrecks yet>
|
|
|
|
|
A few old wrecks have surfaced, but mostly it is rocks and cliffs being pulled apart so there are loads of new fossils and stuff like that lying around the place.
|
|
|
|
|
Remember that ship that ran on the beach in Dorset a few years back? Some guy pulled a BMW moitorbike off it. 
|
|
|
|
|
I thought all this rain/flooding was the fault of the Environments Agency, well that's what the TV tells me anyway...
Regards,
Rob Philpott.
|
|
|
|
|
Yep, and then enough pressure builds up and those ministers in charge start saying sorry and that they should have done this and they should have done that, completely changing what they were saying a day or two earlier, obviously had a bollocking from head office about what the official line should be.
Then just as they start saying they should have dredged the rivers an anonymous employee who actually knows what he is talking about said no, we deliberately didn't do that for these reasons, it is all working as it should. Makes then look like prats, or it would if the media actually ran the story with any prominence rather than just continuing to shout and blame.
|
|
|
|
|
chriselst wrote: Then just as they start saying they should have dredged the rivers an anonymous
employee who actually knows what he is talking about said no, we deliberately
didn't do that for these reasons, it is all working as it should. Makes then
look like prats, or it would if the media actually ran the story with any
prominence rather than just continuing to shout and blame.
I think that's what they bleated about, the Environment agency decided to stop dredging and sell the pumps as leave the levels to flood - now they claim they hadn't the money (despite finding 4x the amount needed to build a bird sanctuary)
it a case of making a decision without consultation and now trying to avoid any responsibility for occurred as a result what
sounds like nearly every project manager I have ever met
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start
Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
|
|
|
|
|
The farmers claim that if the rivers had been dredged then the land wouldn't flood.
Which may be true, but that water would still have had to go somewhere, and would most likely have caused more serious (in terms of cost and number of people affected) damage further down the rivers, mostly at larger settlements.
|
|
|
|
|
chriselst wrote: The farmers claim that if the rivers had been dredged then the land wouldn't flood.
I always thought the enriching mud the flooded rivers dump on the land helps the farmers. Odd.
|
|
|
|
|
It's mostly grassland used for pasture, not arable.
Can't milk a cow if it's tits are under water and they're not too keen on swimming.
|
|
|
|
|
actual I haven't heard this, all the ones I saw were claiming that the dredging would have help clear the water so it doesn't sit, its this non clearing of the flood that means every drop that falls makes it worse, it also reducing the area of the flood restricting it to the land that traditionally flooded
you don't stop these floods with wall type defences (as the water is coming off the hills/land) what you need is way to get this water to the sea in the shortest possible time and in the biggest volume possible - either that or you accept that the land floods, which maybe a acceptable alternative but surely they should inform the people living there that this decision has been made (oh and provide insurance as the insurance companies certainly will not)
to make such a decision and then wash your hands of the resultant mess is the actual disgrace here
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start
Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
|
|
|
|
|
Bergholt Stuttley Johnson wrote: (oh and provide insurance as the insurance companies certainly will not)
There was an agreement between the government and insurance companies to guarantee affordable insurance to properties at risk of flooding that was due to end last year, the agreement has been extended to next year whilst they argue about the details of a new scheme.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
