Bit long but interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcj...ature=youtu.be

"harry" wrote in message
...
Bit long but interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcj...ature=youtu.be

the gender pay gap (the average salary paid to women against the average
salary paid to men)

is caused because some women leave employment or take a long career beak to
look after a family

The only solution to that is to encourage an equal number of men to leave
employment/take a long career break to look after the family

nothing else works (or is a fair solution)

tim

On Wednesday, 17 January 2018 17:48:39 UTC, tim... wrote:
"harry" wrote in message
...
Bit long but interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcj...ature=youtu.be

the gender pay gap (the average salary paid to women against the average
salary paid to men)

is caused because some women leave employment or take a long career beak to
look after a family

The only solution to that is to encourage an equal number of men to leave
employment/take a long career break to look after the family

nothing else works (or is a fair solution)

tim

You never watched the video did you?

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 17 January 2018 17:48:39 UTC, tim... wrote:
"harry" wrote in message
...
Bit long but interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcj...ature=youtu.be

the gender pay gap (the average salary paid to women against the average
salary paid to men)

is caused because some women leave employment or take a long career beak
to
look after a family

The only solution to that is to encourage an equal number of men to leave
employment/take a long career break to look after the family

nothing else works (or is a fair solution)

tim

You never watched the video did you?

when I found out it was 30 minute long no

It takes 2 minutes to make the argument that I made. what did he do with
the rest?

tim

The lady plumbers and decorators I've used charge the same as the blokes do.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"harry" wrote in message
...
Bit long but interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcj...ature=youtu.be

On Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:24:23 UTC, tim... wrote:
"harry" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 17 January 2018 17:48:39 UTC, tim... wrote:
"harry" wrote in message
...
Bit long but interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcj...ature=youtu.be

the gender pay gap (the average salary paid to women against the average
salary paid to men)

is caused because some women leave employment or take a long career beak
to
look after a family

The only solution to that is to encourage an equal number of men to leave
employment/take a long career break to look after the family

nothing else works (or is a fair solution)

tim

You never watched the video did you?

when I found out it was 30 minute long no

Me too.


It takes 2 minutes to make the argument that I made. what did he do with
the rest?

He seemed to waffle an aweful lot without actually saying much.

I'd like to know what he thinks about some of the weird **** they come up with here. I mean they set up special course so that some women get promoted so we have this athena swan group and that looks only at women, then we have our equality committee and the head of that told me that they are fighting for womens rights.

In article ,
Brian Gaff wrote:
The lady plumbers and decorators I've used charge the same as the blokes do.
Brian

When I started work in the '60s for the BBC, everyone doing the same job
which had a BBC grade was paid the same male or female. Although in those
days it wasn't that common to have males and females doing the same job.

The problem is more with those like talent where each contract is
individual.

--
*Money isn't everything, but it sure keeps the kids in touch *

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

On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 03:00:07 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

snip

It takes 2 minutes to make the argument that I made. what did he do with
the rest?

He seemed to waffle an aweful lot without actually saying much.

Just OOI, how does that compare with waffling an awful lot without
saying much that is actually comprehendible?

Was your degree in 'Barking up the wrong tree' and with the ball in
your court, make sure you don't bite off more than you can chew so
make sure it cut's the mustard.


Cheers, T i m

On Thursday, 18 January 2018 11:24:35 UTC, T i m wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 03:00:07 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

snip

It takes 2 minutes to make the argument that I made. what did he do with
the rest?

He seemed to waffle an aweful lot without actually saying much.

Just OOI, how does that compare with waffling an awful lot without
saying much that is actually comprehendible?

comprehendible to who, you or me.

On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 04:00:42 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

On Thursday, 18 January 2018 11:24:35 UTC, T i m wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 03:00:07 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

snip

It takes 2 minutes to make the argument that I made. what did he do with
the rest?

He seemed to waffle an aweful lot without actually saying much.

Just OOI, how does that compare with waffling an awful lot without
saying much that is actually comprehendible?

comprehendible to who, you or me.

Well, one would assume it should be comprehendible by you because you
said it (no guarantees of course) and so by me / anyone?

Cheers, T i m

On Thursday, 18 January 2018 12:26:52 UTC, T i m wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 04:00:42 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

On Thursday, 18 January 2018 11:24:35 UTC, T i m wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 03:00:07 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

snip

It takes 2 minutes to make the argument that I made. what did he do with
the rest?

He seemed to waffle an aweful lot without actually saying much.

Just OOI, how does that compare with waffling an awful lot without
saying much that is actually comprehendible?

comprehendible to who, you or me.

Well, one would assume it should be comprehendible by you because you
said it (no guarantees of course) and so by me / anyone?

Cheers, T i m

That's why you must make things clear. I thought it was quite clear that he was plugging his book, I;ve no idea what you thought he was doing, that's for uo to decide.

On Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:24:23 UTC, tim... wrote:
"harry" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 17 January 2018 17:48:39 UTC, tim... wrote:
"harry" wrote in message
...
Bit long but interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcj...ature=youtu.be

the gender pay gap (the average salary paid to women against the average
salary paid to men)

is caused because some women leave employment or take a long career beak
to
look after a family

The only solution to that is to encourage an equal number of men to leave
employment/take a long career break to look after the family

nothing else works (or is a fair solution)

tim

You never watched the video did you?

when I found out it was 30 minute long no

It takes 2 minutes to make the argument that I made. what did he do with
the rest?

tim

Well until you watch it you'll never know.
Your type always has a short attention span.

comprehendible

Long words are more impressive when they're correctly spelled.

--
No lollipop

On 18/01/2018 14:23, harry wrote:
On Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:24:23 UTC, tim... wrote:
"harry" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 17 January 2018 17:48:39 UTC, tim... wrote:
"harry" wrote in message
...
Bit long but interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcj...ature=youtu.be

the gender pay gap (the average salary paid to women against the average
salary paid to men)

is caused because some women leave employment or take a long career beak
to
look after a family

The only solution to that is to encourage an equal number of men to leave
employment/take a long career break to look after the family

nothing else works (or is a fair solution)

tim

You never watched the video did you?

when I found out it was 30 minute long no

It takes 2 minutes to make the argument that I made. what did he do with
the rest?

tim

Well until you watch it you'll never know.
Your type always has a short attention span.


Well it is worth watching for one minute starting at 22:00. If only to
see Kathy Newman lost for words.

--
Chris B (News)

On Wed, 17 Jan 2018 17:47:30 +0000, tim... wrote:

"harry" wrote in message
...
Bit long but interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcj...ature=youtu.be

the gender pay gap (the average salary paid to women against the average
salary paid to men)

is caused because some women leave employment or take a long career beak
to look after a family

The only solution to that is to encourage an equal number of men to
leave employment/take a long career break to look after the family

nothing else works (or is a fair solution)

There are some occupations where the gender pay gap is the other way
round such as in Professional Tennis where the women don't have to play
as many matches to receive their prize payouts as the men have to do in
their tournaments.

--
Johnny B Good

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:24:23 UTC, tim... wrote:
"harry" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 17 January 2018 17:48:39 UTC, tim... wrote:
"harry" wrote in message
...
Bit long but interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcj...ature=youtu.be

the gender pay gap (the average salary paid to women against the
average
salary paid to men)

is caused because some women leave employment or take a long career
beak
to
look after a family

The only solution to that is to encourage an equal number of men to
leave
employment/take a long career break to look after the family

nothing else works (or is a fair solution)

tim

You never watched the video did you?

when I found out it was 30 minute long no

It takes 2 minutes to make the argument that I made. what did he do with
the rest?

tim

Well until you watch it you'll never know.
Your type always has a short attention span.

I'm perfectly capable of concentrating on a program for 30 minutes

it's that I have 200 episodes of things that I do want to watch already in
the queue

tim

On Thursday, 18 January 2018 12:26:52 UTC, T i m wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 04:00:42 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

On Thursday, 18 January 2018 11:24:35 UTC, T i m wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 03:00:07 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

snip

It takes 2 minutes to make the argument that I made. what did he do with
the rest?


If women did the same job as men for less money, why are any men at all in employment?

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 18 January 2018 12:26:52 UTC, T i m wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 04:00:42 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

On Thursday, 18 January 2018 11:24:35 UTC, T i m wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 03:00:07 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

snip

It takes 2 minutes to make the argument that I made. what did he
do with
the rest?


If women did the same job as men for less money,

you will note that I did not make that claim at all in my post

why are any men at all in employment?

because they don't (get less pay for the same job)

tim

On Thursday, 18 January 2018 18:30:35 UTC, Johnny B Good wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jan 2018 17:47:30 +0000, tim... wrote:

"harry" wrote in message
...
Bit long but interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcj...ature=youtu.be

the gender pay gap (the average salary paid to women against the average
salary paid to men)

is caused because some women leave employment or take a long career beak
to look after a family

The only solution to that is to encourage an equal number of men to
leave employment/take a long career break to look after the family

nothing else works (or is a fair solution)

There are some occupations where the gender pay gap is the other way
round such as in

In the sex industry women get paid more.

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 18 January 2018 18:30:35 UTC, Johnny B Good wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jan 2018 17:47:30 +0000, tim... wrote:

"harry" wrote in message
...
Bit long but interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcj...ature=youtu.be

the gender pay gap (the average salary paid to women against the
average
salary paid to men)

is caused because some women leave employment or take a long career
beak
to look after a family

The only solution to that is to encourage an equal number of men to
leave employment/take a long career break to look after the family

nothing else works (or is a fair solution)

There are some occupations where the gender pay gap is the other way
round such as in

In the sex industry women get paid more.

do they?

there may be many more of them, but ITYF that the men in the "industry" get
paid better (on average)

tim

On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:07:20 +0000, lid (Orvat
Pehzoyl) wrote:


comprehendible

Long words are more impressive when they're correctly spelled.

English not your native language 'Orvat'?

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/comprehendible

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/di...comprehendible

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/comprehendible

Ironic, given the word. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
There are some occupations where the gender pay gap is the other way
round such as in

In the sex industry women get paid more.

You know this just how? Equally familiar with tarts and rent boys?

--
*Taxation WITH representation ain't much fun, either.

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

On Friday, 19 January 2018 12:18:45 UTC, tim... wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 18 January 2018 18:30:35 UTC, Johnny B Good wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jan 2018 17:47:30 +0000, tim... wrote:

"harry" wrote in message
...
Bit long but interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcj...ature=youtu.be

the gender pay gap (the average salary paid to women against the
average
salary paid to men)

is caused because some women leave employment or take a long career
beak
to look after a family

The only solution to that is to encourage an equal number of men to
leave employment/take a long career break to look after the family

nothing else works (or is a fair solution)

There are some occupations where the gender pay gap is the other way
round such as in

In the sex industry women get paid more.

do they?

Yes.



there may be many more of them, but ITYF that the men in the "industry" get
paid better (on average)

No they don't, unless you have a weird way of working out averages, which wouldn't suprise me.

I suppose if yuo say hugh hefner earns the most from the sex industry you could be correct, but who gets paid the most from page 3 type.
When I was at my camera club we never paid for male models only female models.






tim

In article , tim...
writes


"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 18 January 2018 18:30:35 UTC, Johnny B Good wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jan 2018 17:47:30 +0000, tim... wrote:

"harry" wrote in message
...
Bit long but interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcj...ature=youtu.be

the gender pay gap (the average salary paid to women against the
average
salary paid to men)

is caused because some women leave employment or take a long
career beak
to look after a family

The only solution to that is to encourage an equal number of men to
leave employment/take a long career break to look after the family

nothing else works (or is a fair solution)

There are some occupations where the gender pay gap is the other way
round such as in

In the sex industry women get paid more.

do they?

there may be many more of them, but ITYF that the men in the "industry"
get paid better (on average)

tim


I wouldn't know.
--
bert

On 19/01/18 16:19, whisky-dave wrote:
Lots of women have complained over the years about page 3 and the
equivalants saying they potray women as sex objects, so where do
they get that idea ?

http://vps.templar.co.uk/slideshow.p...x%20Object.jpg

--
€œSome people like to travel by train because it combines the slowness of
a car with the cramped public exposure of €¨an airplane.€�

Dennis Miller

On 19/01/2018 11:00, whisky-dave wrote:
8

There are some occupations where the gender pay gap is the other way
round such as in

In the sex industry women get paid more.


Don't base what you can charge on your limited knowledge.
Its down to supply and demand and few demand you.

On Fri, 19 Jan 2018 03:00:38 -0800, whisky-dave wrote:

On Thursday, 18 January 2018 18:30:35 UTC, Johnny B Good wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jan 2018 17:47:30 +0000, tim... wrote:

"harry" wrote in message
...
Bit long but interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcj...ature=youtu.be

the gender pay gap (the average salary paid to women against the
average salary paid to men)

is caused because some women leave employment or take a long career
beak to look after a family

The only solution to that is to encourage an equal number of men to
leave employment/take a long career break to look after the family

nothing else works (or is a fair solution)

There are some occupations where the gender pay gap is the other way
round such as in

In the sex industry women get paid more.

And as wet nurses. Men rarely do that...

--
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

T i m wrote:

On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:07:20 +0000, lid (Orvat
Pehzoyl) wrote:


comprehendible

Long words are more impressive when they're correctly spelled.

English not your native language 'Orvat'?

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/comprehendible

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/di...comprehendible

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/comprehendible

Ironic, given the word. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

I wonder if comprehendible is in the same state of development as
'irregardless'? In other words, it is so widely used by relatively new,
or ex-colonial, English speakers who do not know the word
'comprehensible' that it is in at least the New World dictionaries, but
it still sounds wrong to more widely read English speakers.



--

Roger Hayter

Roger Hayter wrote:

T i m wrote:

On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:07:20 +0000, lid (Orvat
Pehzoyl) wrote:


comprehendible

Long words are more impressive when they're correctly spelled.


English not your native language 'Orvat'?


On the contrary, it is my mother tongue, 'T i m'.


https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/comprehendible

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/di...comprehendible

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/comprehendible

Ironic, given the word. ;-)

Cheers, T i m


The frequency of use of 'comprehenDible' as compared with
'comprehenSible' is instructive, 'T i m'.

By the way, please excuse me for imitating your use of
scare quotes around my current persona's name; I dislike
descent to puerile ad hominem abuse, I will try to do
better next time.


I wonder if comprehendible is in the same state of development as
'irregardless'? In other words, it is so widely used by relatively
new, or ex-colonial, English speakers who do not know the word
'comprehensible' that it is in at least the New World dictionaries,
but it still sounds wrong to more widely read English speakers.


Thank you, Roger, I couldn't have put it better myself.

--
Lollipop? What lollipop?

On 20/01/18 09:33, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Roger Hayter
wrote:

I wonder if comprehendible is in the same state of development as
'irregardless'?Â* In other words, it is so widely used by relatively new,
or ex-colonial, English speakers who do not know the word
'comprehensible' that it is in at least the New World dictionaries, but
it still sounds wrong to more widely read English speakers.

'irregardless' is not a word.

What is it then?


--
The biggest threat to humanity comes from socialism, which has utterly
diverted our attention away from what really matters to our existential
survival, to indulging in navel gazing and faux moral investigations
into what the world ought to be, whilst we fail utterly to deal with
what it actually is.

Tim Streater wrote:

In article , Roger Hayter
wrote:

I wonder if comprehendible is in the same state of development as
'irregardless'? In other words, it is so widely used by relatively new,
or ex-colonial, English speakers who do not know the word
'comprehensible' that it is in at least the New World dictionaries, but
it still sounds wrong to more widely read English speakers.

'irregardless' is not a word.

Neither is 'comprehendible'; but both are in recent editions of
American dictionaries. 'Inspirational' is not a word either, but has
become nearly universal even in the UK.



--

Roger Hayter

On Fri, 19 Jan 2018 23:21:12 +0000, lid (Orvat
Pehzoyl) wrote:

Roger Hayter wrote:

T i m wrote:

On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:07:20 +0000, lid (Orvat
Pehzoyl) wrote:


comprehendible

Long words are more impressive when they're correctly spelled.


English not your native language 'Orvat'?


On the contrary, it is my mother tongue, 'T i m'.

I wonder why you made the silly mistake then?

I wonder why you felt the need to comment on that alone?

I wonder what your motives were?

I wonder what alias you will use next time (I know you have a few).

snip

Cheers, T i m

On Saturday, 20 January 2018 10:42:00 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:

In article , Roger Hayter
wrote:

I wonder if comprehendible is in the same state of development as
'irregardless'? In other words, it is so widely used by relatively new,
or ex-colonial, English speakers who do not know the word
'comprehensible' that it is in at least the New World dictionaries, but
it still sounds wrong to more widely read English speakers.

'irregardless' is not a word.

Neither is 'comprehendible'; but both are in recent editions of
American dictionaries. 'Inspirational' is not a word either, but has
become nearly universal even in the UK.

which makes it a word

On 20/01/2018 11:08, Tim Streater wrote:
8


We shouldn't be giving currency to these non-words, even if lazy ****s
likeÂ* T i mÂ* think they are able to produce references for them.


You shouldn't be posting here then as computers, usenet, etc. don't exist.

I wonder how you are going to describe say TV using words from say 1600
as you don't want any new words?

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 20/01/2018 11:08, Tim Streater wrote:
8


We shouldn't be giving currency to these non-words, even if lazy ****s
like T i m think they are able to produce references for them.


You shouldn't be posting here then as computers, usenet, etc. don't exist.

I remember when I first started my interest in computing I was told by
school teachers that the word "program" didn't exist (in UK English)

Now, if you you told someone that, they would look at you like you had
claimed to have just arrived from Mars.

tim

On Sat, 20 Jan 2018 11:08:31 +0000, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article , Roger Hayter
wrote:

Tim Streater wrote:

In article , Roger Hayter
wrote:

I wonder if comprehendible is in the same state of development as
'irregardless'? In other words, it is so widely used by relatively new,
or ex-colonial, English speakers who do not know the word
'comprehensible' that it is in at least the New World dictionaries, but
it still sounds wrong to more widely read English speakers.

'irregardless' is not a word.

Neither is 'comprehendible'; but both are in recent editions of
American dictionaries. 'Inspirational' is not a word either, but has
become nearly universal even in the UK.

We shouldn't be giving currency to these non-words, even if lazy
snip expletive
like T i m think they are able

'Think'?

to produce references for them.

Because I did! I hope that annoys and offends you even more (and I
think it does). ;-)

The best thing about using modern words is that it winds the left
brained dinosaurs and self appointed spelling / grammar cops up (in a
d-i-y group ffs)!

Cheers, T i m

dennis@home wrote:

On 20/01/2018 11:08, Tim Streater wrote:
8


We shouldn't be giving currency to these non-words, even if lazy ****s
like T i m think they are able to produce references for them.


You shouldn't be posting here then as computers, usenet, etc. don't exist.

I wonder how you are going to describe say TV using words from say 1600
as you don't want any new words?

I think we don't need any silly, lazy and ignorant new words where there
are perfectly good ones already. I agree it is a losing battle; but
if it amuses me to fight a rearguard action of gratuitous rudeness and
sarcasm against them then I shall continue to do so.

PS television was adequately described using words promiscuously stolen
from various ancient civilisations. Not back formations from a very
limited vocabulary of English words, which did not include the
well-known forms which had been used in educated speech and literature
for hundreds of years.



--

Roger Hayter

On Sat, 20 Jan 2018 10:41:58 +0000, (Roger Hayter)
wrote:

Tim Streater wrote:

In article , Roger Hayter
wrote:

I wonder if comprehendible is in the same state of development as
'irregardless'? In other words, it is so widely used by relatively new,
or ex-colonial, English speakers who do not know the word
'comprehensible' that it is in at least the New World dictionaries, but
it still sounds wrong to more widely read English speakers.

'irregardless' is not a word.

Neither is 'comprehendible'; but both are in recent editions of
American dictionaries.

And more importantly, in my Forte Agents spell checker. ;-)

So, because of my word blindness, I typically type a word that comes
into my head as being the best to represent my meaning and often it's
spelled so incorrectly, the spelchecker doesn't have a clue as to what
I was even aiming for. There was no such issue with 'comprehendible',
I knew I'd seen it before, I knew it fitted what was trying to convey
(to those reading for content, not to critique the spelling or grammar
etc), and Agent didn't baulk at it ... shrug ;-)

Cheers, T i m

tim... wrote:

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 20/01/2018 11:08, Tim Streater wrote:
8


We shouldn't be giving currency to these non-words, even if lazy ****s
like T i m think they are able to produce references for them.


You shouldn't be posting here then as computers, usenet, etc. don't exist.

I remember when I first started my interest in computing I was told by
school teachers that the word "program" didn't exist (in UK English)

Now, if you you told someone that, they would look at you like you had
claimed to have just arrived from Mars.


So? If you didn't know the latest plot line in Eastenders they would
also look at you as though you were an alien being. Your point is?

--

Roger Hayter

T i m wrote:

On Sat, 20 Jan 2018 11:08:31 +0000, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article , Roger Hayter
wrote:

Tim Streater wrote:

In article , Roger Hayter
wrote:

I wonder if comprehendible is in the same state of development as
'irregardless'? In other words, it is so widely used by relatively new,
or ex-colonial, English speakers who do not know the word
'comprehensible' that it is in at least the New World dictionaries, but
it still sounds wrong to more widely read English speakers.

'irregardless' is not a word.

Neither is 'comprehendible'; but both are in recent editions of
American dictionaries. 'Inspirational' is not a word either, but has
become nearly universal even in the UK.

We shouldn't be giving currency to these non-words, even if lazy
snip expletive
like T i m think they are able

'Think'?

to produce references for them.

Because I did! I hope that annoys and offends you even more (and I
think it does). ;-)

The best thing about using modern words is that it winds the left
brained dinosaurs and self appointed spelling / grammar cops up (in a
d-i-y group ffs)!

Cheers, T i m

Try re-reading Brave New World and 1984 and you might see what we are
getting at.

--

Roger Hayter