On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 11:50:49 +0000, Terry Casey wrote:

In article , news0006 @eager.cx
says...

On Wed, 17 Jan 2018 17:39:35 +0000, Terry Casey wrote:

TfL fares are capped in various ways and Oyster, or a credit/debit
card used in lieu, always gives the most beneficial fare.

The credit/debit card can, in certain circumstances, not give you such
a good deal.

If you have a railcard, you can get it linked to the Oyster card. Then
you get railcard discounts. You can't do that with a credit/debitv
card.

But if you have a Railcard you would know that because you would have
read the conditions of issue - wouldn't you?

The Railcard people don't tell you.

--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 12:03:18 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:

Terry Casey wrote:

TfL fares are capped in various ways and Oyster, or a credit/debit card
used in lieu, always gives the most beneficial fare.

I heard in some cases the weekly caps on contactless cards v.s. the
daily caps on oyster cards can make contactless cheaper for some regular
users. But I rarely use TfL, so maybe that disparity has been fixed
now?

AFAIK they are daily caps on both.

--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On 1/18/2018 3:13 PM, DerbyBorn wrote:
"J1MBO ..." wrote in news:jx08C.433351$pP1.409150
@fx21.am4:

On 1/18/2018 9:41 AM, J1MBO ... wrote:
On 1/16/2018 2:02 PM, DerbyBorn wrote:
I have read of the odd car theft where a device is used to access the
code
from a keyfob in the house to unlock and steal a car.

I am about to get a car with such a feature.

Is keeping the fob in a metal container in the house any use? Or is it
all
a bit like tin foil hats?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbhHcxscu4Q

therefore I would worry more about how much it will cost you even if it
isn't stolen ......


We can easily have our heads in the sand and be "technology denyers". The
bloke in the video would be happier with contact points and a carbureter.
Many changes are done for reasons of cost and producability. Today's cars
are fantastic - but you need to accept a different approach to servicing
and life.


he is a great mechanic and doesn't like modern unnecessary complications
for the sake of it and I agree with everything he says in his videos
......I see you haven't kept up with modern spelling...tee hee

and I suppose you would be happy with no dip sticks ...?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGE6roEThig

Dave Plowman wrote:

I really can't see why we can't have identity cards.

Feature creep.

Not meaning they'd have to be carried at all times, of course.

How long after they issued them, do you think it might take before it
would be a requirement to carry it at all times?

"J1MBO ..." wrote in news:6j38C.432767$9X4.425395
@fx02.am4:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGE6roEThig

I know several younger people who really won't think to check the dipstick
- or tyre pressures or much else. The expectation is that the car keeps
going.
Not my way - I am from the top up the dashpot era - but the average
motorist is changing.

On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 07:14:36 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

On Thursday, 18 January 2018 14:41:47 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
I know what the co-op is as I've just been there.

There are many different versions of co-op. It doesn't mean just your
local shop called that.

Yes I know and to me going to lunch the co-op is the shop 5 mins from here.

The Co-op

I dont;

don't

care what it means to others,

We know, but for most normal people, sticking to the conventions is
how people effectively and efficiently communicate.

but if I say meet me in the co-op I might have to be a little more precise.

Or any instance when communicating with people for any reason, if good
communication (rather than just say trolling) was important.

For me 2+2 isn't automatically 4

snip crazy troll waffle

We know.

"You can trust dave to take two and two and come up with insert any
number here except 4"

That is wholly and entirely *your problem* mate.

All the best from the real world.

Cheers, T i m

On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 06:36:48 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

On Thursday, 18 January 2018 12:58:00 UTC, T i m wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 04:22:15 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

snip

it;s also sunny at the moment and a relatively clear sky so I'll take my co-op card and CC but NOT my umbrella like I do on some other days when I think it might rain.

although you'll have to ask Tim what co-op= is

You really are weird aren't you dave.

You take two and two and come up with 54 (notice, that's not a maths
question and it never was).

So what sort of question were you forming if 2+2 isn't a maths question how did you come up with 4 ?

What's this, a glimmer of actually wanting to understand why you stand
alone as the troll here by not understanding the *phrase / saying*
(not sum)?

I'll post you this link in the (vain) hope you will learn something,
particularly how to communicate with the ROTW.

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/di...d-two-together

Cheers, T i m

On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 07:04:28 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

On Thursday, 18 January 2018 14:38:29 UTC, T i m wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 06:13:59 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

snip

Didnlt even babage came out with a sytem off holes and how a machine could be use to count the holes and where they appeared.

First you say you can't count the number of people who don't vote.


I never said that, what I saodmwas you canlt count who they vote for if they don;t vote, there;s a differnce.

Nope. You also said you can't count who didn't vote. You really aught
to think before you type and then you wouldn't have to keep digging
yourself out of these huge holes.

I never, ever, said you *could* count who someone who didn't vote or
who spoiled their paper would have voted FOR, had they voted. All I
have ever said is that you know what they DIDN'T vote for, especially
when there was only one outcome that would change the status quo (like
the EU referendum and not like the local or general elections).

and
then you say they had a machine that could count the absence of
something (paper or card) in the 1800's!

No I didn't say they had a machine but they knew how to make one, just like we know how to make one today, very basic stuff a hole with a light shinnning through it.

Whoosh ('count the absence of something (paper or card)'. Really, I
don't think I could have made it any clearer).

Unlike actually measuring the *fact* that only ~1/3rd of the
electorate voted *to change the status quo*, for example.

Cheers, T i m

In article ,
J1MBO ... wrote:
he is a great mechanic and doesn't like modern unnecessary complications
for the sake of it and I agree with everything he says in his videos
.....I see you haven't kept up with modern spelling...tee hee

and I suppose you would be happy with no dip sticks ...?

You use a dipstick to check how much fuel you have left? No? Why for oil,
then?

--
*A closed mouth gathers no feet.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:37:24 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

snip

I really can't see why we can't have identity cards.

Me neither.

Not meaning they'd
have to be carried at all times, of course. But would be very useful for
this sort of thing. And any thing else where identity proof is needed.

Yup. As long as it *was* accepted for all such needs.

For
those who don't have a driving licence.

Old, paper, no photo. ;-(

Passport.

Nope.

Travel card.

Nope.

Works
identity card

Not any more.

etc. Ie, very, very few.

Cheers, T i m

On Thursday, 18 January 2018 16:19:06 UTC, T i m wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 07:14:36 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

On Thursday, 18 January 2018 14:41:47 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
I know what the co-op is as I've just been there.

There are many different versions of co-op. It doesn't mean just your
local shop called that.

Yes I know and to me going to lunch the co-op is the shop 5 mins from here.

The Co-op

I dont;

don't

care what it means to others,

We know, but for most normal people, sticking to the conventions is
how people effectively and efficiently communicate.

yes I agree and that goes for voting too.
Not voting for X or Y by not voting .....



but if I say meet me in the co-op I might have to be a little more precise.

Or any instance when communicating with people for any reason, if good
communication (rather than just say trolling) was important.

For me 2+2 isn't automatically 4

snip crazy troll waffle

We know.

So google it.
for some 2+2 doesn't mean 4 it is how a car is designed for 1 driver and 3 passengers.

I kn ow you don't believe that 2+2 can only mean one thing, but that is NOT what I believe.
A we know that for you 4x4 is 16

On 18/01/2018 15:56, Andy Burns wrote:
Dave Plowman wrote:

I really can't see why we can't have identity cards.

Feature creep.

Not meaning they'd have to be carried at all times, of course.

How long after they issued them, do you think it might take before it
would be a requirement to carry it at all times?


What would be the problem with that?
Having to carry ID isn't a problem, who has the right to see it is.
If you can't provide ID the police can arrest you until you do provide
ID if they need/want to.

On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 08:53:06 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

snip
I kn ow you don't believe that 2+2 can only mean one thing, but that is NOT what I believe.

"And a classic example of dave adding 2+2 and coming up with 54"

It's not just the 2+2 bit you keep trying to quote, *it's the whole
phrase*. (and in many cases people only use the first half these days,
eg,

" dave couldn't put two and two together ...."

Couldn't be any clearer. Couldn't be any more factual. Couldn't be any
more applicable to you.

Cheers, T i m

In message , Huge
writes

Dave Plowman wrote:

I really can't see why we can't have identity cards.

That's because you're a lefty.

Me too and my wife says I am on the purple side of blue:-)

--
Tim Lamb

"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
Not quite sure why you'd need to carry around loads of cash or cards at
all?

Safer than leaving them in the car...

And at home?


Leaving cards & cash at home for burglar bill??

--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
Huge wrote:
The nice thing about contactless cards
is not having to take them out of your wallet/bag, and this negates
that advantage.

Really? You can insert a card and enter the PIN just as quickly as swiping
it?


He'll have to check with his butler....
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

DerbyBorn Wrote in message:
"J1MBO ..." wrote in news:6j38C.432767$9X4.425395
@fx02.am4:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGE6roEThig

I know several younger people who really won't think to check the dipstick
- or tyre pressures or much else. The expectation is that the car keeps
going.

Nah, the blinky funny shaped lighty uppy things light up behind
the smartphone running sat nav propped in front of the
instrument panel...
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On 18/01/2018 14:37, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Huge wrote:
On 2018-01-18, Andy Burns wrote:
whisky-dave wrote:

Strange they don't use barcodes at polling stations

You don't need to take the postcard or any form of ID to the polling
station.

At least not for the moment. The Government are thinking of introducing
an ID requirement.

I really can't see why we can't have identity cards. Not meaning they'd
have to be carried at all times, of course. But would be very useful for
this sort of thing. And any thing else where identity proof is needed. For
those who don't have a driving licence. Passport. Travel card. Works
identity card etc. Ie, very, very few.

How are you going to get the photo verified if you don't have a tame vicar?

--
Max Demian

whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote

I only have 4 cards no CC, a DD card, some seem
to need mutiple cards I don't feel that need so far.

I find it convenient to have more than one,

Me too but not on every occasion.

I dont fart around with what cards I take every time I go out,
just put the wallet in my pocket and carry on regardless.

because I have had multiple occasions on which either the
bank has decided that it has seen a suspicious transaction
on the card and has suspended the card and hasnt tried
very hard to tell me its been suspended, or the entire
bank's system has done down for a few hours etc.

I;'ve never experienced that,

I have. Corse now I do everything on the mobile, its
very unlikely that they wont be able to contact me, but
I do very occasionally manage to go out without it and
even if they do tell me when I am out, the last thing I
need is to have to go home to get another card to use.

the only card that hasn]'t always worked for me is an oystercard,
but flexing it over the reader made it work again.

I've just had one of my loyalty cards stop working, but
even the manual entry of the card number by the checkout
monkey didnt get it to work. Havent gotten around to
working out what the problem with that one is tho.

I used it like this for a few days and then got a new one.

I used for use a fee free credit card as an ultimate backup,

not sure I need such a thing.

Handy when the card you normally use
stops working for whatever reason.

only used it when there was no alternative, but now use
it as the main card I use now that it is possible to have it
completely automatically paid off in full every month
from the account I currently keep the bulk of my cash
in because it pays the highest interest rate on my cash.

if I say cash I'm refering to notes and coins in my pocket
rather than a digital sum held in a computer system.

Sure. I have notes in my wallet too, for the garage sales.
While I can pay to any mobile number its not worth the
hassle to convince those who have never been paid that
way that its just as good as cash when things are busy
with a queue of people paying for what they want.

In article ,
T i m wrote:
For
those who don't have a driving licence.

Old, paper, no photo. ;-(

So was mine. Give it a few years. ;-)

--
*It's o.k. to laugh during sexŒ.Œ.just don't point!

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Huge wrote:
On 2018-01-18, DerbyBorn wrote:
"J1MBO ..." wrote in news:6j38C.432767$9X4.425395
@fx02.am4:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGE6roEThig

I know several younger people who really won't think to check the
dipstick

A lot of modern cars don't have a dipstick.

And I'd rather have a low oil level warning on the dash - even if it has a
dipstick too.

--
*Speak softly and carry a cellular phone *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Huge wrote:

Dave Plowman wrote:

I really can't see why we can't have identity cards.

That's because you're a lefty.

Yes. Nothing to hide- unlike so many Tories.

--
*The fact that no one understands you doesn't mean you're an artist

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 20:02:34 +0000, Max Demian wrote:

On 18/01/2018 14:37, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Huge wrote:
On 2018-01-18, Andy Burns wrote:
whisky-dave wrote:

Strange they don't use barcodes at polling stations

You don't need to take the postcard or any form of ID to the polling
station.

At least not for the moment. The Government are thinking of
introducing an ID requirement.

I really can't see why we can't have identity cards. Not meaning
they'd have to be carried at all times, of course. But would be very
useful for this sort of thing. And any thing else where identity proof
is needed. For those who don't have a driving licence. Passport. Travel
card. Works identity card etc. Ie, very, very few.

How are you going to get the photo verified if you don't have a tame
vicar?

I know a Canon! And I went to dinner with an Archbishop of Canterbury
once...


--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

In article ,
jim k wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
Not quite sure why you'd need to carry around loads of cash or
cards at all?

Safer than leaving them in the car...

And at home?


Leaving cards & cash at home for burglar bill

I'd take my chances over losing a wallet or being pick pocketed.

--
*The hardness of the butter is proportional to the softness of the bread *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
Not quite sure why you'd need to carry around loads of cash or
cards at all?

Safer than leaving them in the car...

And at home?


Leaving cards & cash at home for burglar bill

I'd take my chances over losing a wallet or being pick pocketed.


Ah yes the joys of londinium
;-)

How often did you lose wallets or get pickpocketed whilst you
still carried them?

What do you use to pay to fill the porch?
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On 18/01/2018 23:08, Huge wrote:
On 2018-01-18, Max Demian wrote:
On 18/01/2018 14:37, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Huge wrote:
On 2018-01-18, Andy Burns wrote:
whisky-dave wrote:

Strange they don't use barcodes at polling stations

You don't need to take the postcard or any form of ID to the polling
station.

At least not for the moment. The Government are thinking of introducing
an ID requirement.

I really can't see why we can't have identity cards. Not meaning they'd
have to be carried at all times, of course. But would be very useful for
this sort of thing. And any thing else where identity proof is needed. For
those who don't have a driving licence. Passport. Travel card. Works
identity card etc. Ie, very, very few.

How are you going to get the photo verified if you don't have a tame vicar?

Another one of the 17,262,326 ways that ID cards are a stupid idea.

I have lived in two countries with ID cards - Japan and Belgium. They
work perfectly well although you have to carry them they are seldom
needed unless you are doing something that requires checking ID or get
yourself arrested. In the latter case failing to carry ID is added to
the list of charges if you do not produce the card when arrested.

It is a lot easier than having to take fingerprints of suspects on the
spot (my Japanese ID card had my fingerprint on it - and you should see
the Americans squeal about having their fingerprints taken for the ID
card). It is done with invisible UV ink to avoid giving offence.

What about the list A list B crap that UK banks use as "proof of ID"?

It is trivial to forge a utility bill and most are now online only so
come as a poxy JPG in a PDF - you can fake one in minutes. The only
people who are inconvenienced by banks wanting proof of ID are genuine
customers. Money launderers know exactly where to go to get adequately
forged documents to meet their needs and banks are happy to accept them.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

Tim Streater wrote:

Even staff at council offices ought to be able to look at you, look
at the photo, and agree these are the same person. They're only going
to make you such a card if you're on the electoral register
And if they require ID before they'll *put* you on the electoral register?

On Thursday, 18 January 2018 16:27:56 UTC, T i m wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 06:36:48 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

On Thursday, 18 January 2018 12:58:00 UTC, T i m wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 04:22:15 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

snip

it;s also sunny at the moment and a relatively clear sky so I'll take my co-op card and CC but NOT my umbrella like I do on some other days when I think it might rain.

although you'll have to ask Tim what co-op= is

You really are weird aren't you dave.

You take two and two and come up with 54 (notice, that's not a maths
question and it never was).

So what sort of question were you forming if 2+2 isn't a maths question how did you come up with 4 ?

What's this, a glimmer of actually wanting to understand why you stand
alone as the troll here by not understanding the *phrase / saying*
(not sum)?



I'll post you this link in the (vain) hope you will learn something,
particularly how to communicate with the ROTW.

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/di...d-two-together


Exactly at last you';ve got it well done.
2+2 means
phrase
If you put two and two together, you work out the truth about something for yourself, by using the information that is available to you.
IT DOES NOT REFER TO THE NUMBER 4

to make an inference from available evidence, esp an obvious inference
IT DOES NOT REFER TO THE NUMBER 4

to reach an obvious conclusion by considering several facts together
IT DOES NOT REFER TO THE NUMBER 4

They must have heard about the plane crash and put two and two together. The Sun (2015)
IT DOES NOT REFER TO THE NUMBER 4


They might get suspicious and put two and two together. Times, Sunday Times (2013)
IT DOES NOT REFER TO THE NUMBER 4

My girlfriend had phoned her looking for me and she had put two and two together. The Sun (2014)
IT DOES NOT REFER TO THE NUMBER 4


It really is that simple 2+2 is NOT a mathermatical expression or formule
It is meaqnt to convey something that shouyld be obvious to someone that can think for themselves.
In each of the cases abiove the result IS NOT 4.

On Thursday, 18 January 2018 16:41:33 UTC, T i m wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 07:04:28 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

On Thursday, 18 January 2018 14:38:29 UTC, T i m wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 06:13:59 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

snip

Didnlt even babage came out with a sytem off holes and how a machine could be use to count the holes and where they appeared.

First you say you can't count the number of people who don't vote.


I never said that, what I saodmwas you canlt count who they vote for if they don;t vote, there;s a differnce.

Nope. You also said you can't count who didn't vote.

Also said well noted but yuo can;t even you don;lt know who you voted for and I've no idea whether the penis drawer wanted to vote leave or remain and neither do you.
If someone leaves the form blank do you class that as a vote.
If someone marks a cross in both boxes is that a vote.
if someone wipes their arse on the paper is that a vote.


You really aught
to think before you type and then you wouldn't have to keep digging
yourself out of these huge holes.

2+2

That golf ball is gettign really close.

I never, ever, said you *could* count who someone who didn't vote or
who spoiled their paper would have voted FOR, had they voted.

So did they vote or not ?

All I
have ever said is that you know what they DIDN'T vote for,

No ones really interested in who we didnlt vote for the idea is to count the number of votes and see who gets the most.

especially
when there was only one outcome that would change the status quo (like
the EU referendum and not like the local or general elections).

meaningless and Irrelivant, especailly when you claim that a NOTA is meant to mean something. Just suppose the vote counted was 10% remain 10% leave and 40% put NOTA .
Would that have changed the status quo ?





and
then you say they had a machine that could count the absence of
something (paper or card) in the 1800's!

No I didn't say they had a machine but they knew how to make one, just like we know how to make one today, very basic stuff a hole with a light shinnning through it.

Whoosh ('count the absence of something (paper or card)'. Really, I
don't think I could have made it any clearer).

It's NOTA or a penisdrawing a vote YES or No ?



Unlike actually measuring the *fact* that only ~1/3rd of the
electorate voted *to change the status quo*, for example.

So.
there was no box on the paper about changing the status quo.



Cheers, T i m

In article ,
jim k wrote:
I'd take my chances over losing a wallet or being pick pocketed.


Ah yes the joys of londinium

How often did you lose wallets or get pickpocketed whilst you
still carried them?

I never have carried a wallet every day. I only take it when I know it
will be needed. And I've never lost one - unlike pals who always carry one.

Never quite understood the need to carry all your credit cards etc at all
times.

--
*Why do they put Braille on the drive-through bank machines?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Martin Brown wrote:
I have lived in two countries with ID cards - Japan and Belgium. They
work perfectly well although you have to carry them they are seldom
needed unless you are doing something that requires checking ID or get
yourself arrested. In the latter case failing to carry ID is added to
the list of charges if you do not produce the card when arrested.

I'm really not sure why people are so against identity cards. But are
happy enough to have to use other means when needed (or do without the
service that needs proof of identity - unlikely). As has been stated, not
everyone had a driving licence etc.

--
*'Progress' and 'Change' are not synonyms.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Thursday, 18 January 2018 17:20:39 UTC, T i m wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 08:53:06 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

snip
I kn ow you don't believe that 2+2 can only mean one thing, but that is NOT what I believe.

"And a classic example of dave adding 2+2 and coming up with 54"

It's not just the 2+2 bit you keep trying to quote, *it's the whole
phrase*. (and in many cases people only use the first half these days,
eg,

" dave couldn't put two and two together ...."

Couldn't be any clearer. Couldn't be any more factual. Couldn't be any
more applicable to you.

Cheers, T i m

Yep couldn't be any clear that you don't think 4.

That's why the question of how many quarters do you need to make a whole
the answer is NOT "put two and two together ...."

On Friday, 19 January 2018 00:28:29 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Huge wrote:
On 2018-01-18, DerbyBorn wrote:
"J1MBO ..." wrote in news:6j38C.432767$9X4.425395
@fx02.am4:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGE6roEThig

I know several younger people who really won't think to check the
dipstick

A lot of modern cars don't have a dipstick.

And I'd rather have a low oil level warning on the dash - even if it has a
dipstick too.

you refering to Wodney ? (OFAH)

In message , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Martin Brown wrote:
I have lived in two countries with ID cards - Japan and Belgium. They
work perfectly well although you have to carry them they are seldom
needed unless you are doing something that requires checking ID or get
yourself arrested. In the latter case failing to carry ID is added to
the list of charges if you do not produce the card when arrested.

I'm really not sure why people are so against identity cards. But are
happy enough to have to use other means when needed (or do without the
service that needs proof of identity - unlikely). As has been stated, not
everyone had a driving licence etc.

Orwell, 1984?

Post WW2 reaction to identity carrying required by occupation forces?


--
Tim Lamb

In article ,
Tim Lamb wrote:
I'm really not sure why people are so against identity cards. But are
happy enough to have to use other means when needed (or do without the
service that needs proof of identity - unlikely). As has been stated,
not everyone had a driving licence etc.

Orwell, 1984?

Post WW2 reaction to identity carrying required by occupation forces?

We seem to be happy enough to have about the highest density of CCTV
cameras anywhere.

So big brother really is watching you.

--
*Real women don't have hot flashes, they have power surges.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Friday, 19 January 2018 13:29:32 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Lamb wrote:
I'm really not sure why people are so against identity cards. But are
happy enough to have to use other means when needed (or do without the
service that needs proof of identity - unlikely). As has been stated,
not everyone had a driving licence etc.

Orwell, 1984?

Post WW2 reaction to identity carrying required by occupation forces?

We seem to be happy enough to have about the highest density of CCTV
cameras anywhere.

So big brother really is watching you.

No big brother is a TV program, and in orwells 1984 computers didnlt exist and neither did the media, wasnt it huxley that got closser to reality

On Fri, 19 Jan 2018 02:23:50 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

snip bizarre ramblings

I never, ever, said you *could* count who someone who didn't vote or
who spoiled their paper would have voted FOR, had they voted.

So did they vote or not ?

Go on, see if you can work it out for yourself.

All I
have ever said is that you know what they DIDN'T vote for,

No ones really interested in who we didnlt vote for

Some are. They are often called 'floating voters' and so good targets
for persuasion.

the idea is to count the number of votes and see who gets the most.

Well done.

1/3 of the electorate voted leave (fact).
2/3 of the electorate didn't vote leave (fact).

So we leave (maybe).


especially
when there was only one outcome that would change the status quo (like
the EU referendum and not like the local or general elections).

meaningless and Irrelivant,

To you I'm guessing.

especailly when you claim that a NOTA is meant to mean something.

It generally does, yes. If someone simply CBA to vote they just don't
bother. If they wish to retain the right to vote but can't make an
informed decision then an 'NOTA' is an accepted and understood way of
doing that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/None_of_the_above

Just suppose the vote counted was 10% remain 10% leave and 40% put NOTA .
Would that have changed the status quo ?

What do you think? Do you actually have a point yet?

snip bs

Unlike actually measuring the *fact* that only ~1/3rd of the
electorate voted *to change the status quo*, for example.

So.
there was no box on the paper about changing the status quo.

Yes there was, it was called 'Leave' and only 1/3rd of the electorate
ticked it.

Cheers, T i m

On 19/01/2018 14:06, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2018 02:23:50 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

snip bizarre ramblings

I never, ever, said you *could* count who someone who didn't vote or
who spoiled their paper would have voted FOR, had they voted.

So did they vote or not ?

Go on, see if you can work it out for yourself.

All I
have ever said is that you know what they DIDN'T vote for,

No ones really interested in who we didnlt vote for

Some are. They are often called 'floating voters' and so good targets
for persuasion.

the idea is to count the number of votes and see who gets the most.

Well done.

1/3 of the electorate voted leave (fact).
2/3 of the electorate didn't vote leave (fact).

This old chestnut!

16,141,241 of the electorate voted Remain (fact)
30,358,760 of the electorate didn't vote Remain (fact).

for every 100 voters for Remain, 108 voted for Leave

So we leave (maybe).

That is the country's wish, I would hope so.


especially
when there was only one outcome that would change the status quo (like
the EU referendum and not like the local or general elections).

meaningless and Irrelivant,

To you I'm guessing.

especailly when you claim that a NOTA is meant to mean something.

It generally does, yes. If someone simply CBA to vote they just don't
bother. If they wish to retain the right to vote but can't make an
informed decision then an 'NOTA' is an accepted and understood way of
doing that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/None_of_the_above

Just suppose the vote counted was 10% remain 10% leave and 40% put NOTA .
Would that have changed the status quo ?

What do you think? Do you actually have a point yet?

snip bs

Unlike actually measuring the *fact* that only ~1/3rd of the
electorate voted *to change the status quo*, for example.

Well 65% didn't oppose change is perhaps a more accurate picture

So.
there was no box on the paper about changing the status quo.

Yes there was, it was called 'Leave' and only 1/3rd of the electorate
ticked it.

Quite, and they were in a minority of the electorate.

T i m wrote:

1/3 of the electorate voted leave (fact).
2/3 of the electorate didn't vote leave (fact).

It doesn't matter how many times you state that,
it'll never be the same as 2/3 of the electorate voting to stay,

Since you weren't interested enough to cast your vote you can't really
talk.

On 19/01/2018 14:45, Andy Burns wrote:
T i m wrote:

1/3 of the electorate voted leave (fact).
2/3 of the electorate didn't vote leave (fact).

It doesn't matter how many times you state that,
it'll never be the same as 2/3 of the electorate voting to stay,

Since you weren't interested enough to cast your vote you can't really
talk.

What is sad is that some make claims as being facts, but the only fact
that matters is we're leaving.

We have some very sore losers.