Making the news today....

[scotspine1]

12 hours ago, sime42 said:

Good word by the way; Panopticon. Reading your output always increases my vocabulary.

 

old idea being applied by big tech/government 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon

 

 

[sime42]

 

 

Flood prevention: Swansea University study reveals role of wetlands

WWW.BBC.CO.UK

---

Vegetation can save up to £27m in avoided damage per estuary during a large storm, researchers say.  

 

Quite important. K

 

 

 

 

 

 

Very important I'd say.

 

 

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

16 hours ago, Doug Tait said:

I get the feeling KJmbe is reading the 90pages right now.

I read 1 page - it’s a lot like AT....  Endless repetition and argument over meaningless points of detail where folks become obsessed and ultra focussed on minutiae rather than taking a more strategic overview.

 

😂

 

 

[eggsarascal]

23 hours ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

Partial fix for ya there 🍳🍳z

Put the figures up Kev, let's have a look.

[Doug Tait]

3 hours ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

I read 1 page - it’s a lot like AT....  Endless repetition and argument over meaningless points of detail where folks become obsessed and ultra focussed on minutiae rather than taking a more strategic overview.

 

😂

 

 

I read about half of them and still none the wiser! Out of interest, would you say bellend or good egg?

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

54 minutes ago, Doug Tait said:

I read about half of them and still none the wiser! Out of interest, would you say bellend or good egg?

I'm more towards the less complimentary end of the scale tbh.

 

I know many here, myself included, put their dogs on a higher level of emotional attachment than might be applied to certain humans, but, and whilst I admire that man's personal commitment to a cause that he is prepared to risk his life for, 1 man / 1 charity is never going to solve the problem of animal abuse in such regions and it is illogical and unreasonable to expect others to share his determination just because it is a cause he has tied his colours to.

 

I saw grown men cry in both Iraq & Afghanistan after informally 'adopting' local stray dogs and then, having tried all the available avenues to repatriate them at the end of their tours, finally realise it might have been kinder to both themselves and the animals if they hadn't formed such an emotional attachment.

 

In this case, I'd view it as - do what you want chummy, but when you doing what you want involves expecting others to be as passionate about it as you are, and then being surprised and angry when they are not, and demanding their time, attention and resources to solve problems pretty much of your own voluntary making - it doesn't come across as particularly sensible.

 

Granted, it was a charter flight and it was funded by charitable donations and that animals were not taking up human seats - BUT - if reports are to be believed, there were some 5000 emails that went unopened from actual humans that wanted attention and the FCO was too busy to deal with them.

 

It's all very well saying the flight was chartered and paid for and that no seats were taken by animals, but - as is apparent from his tirade - he was expecting and demanding administrative resource which might have been better deployed elsewhere.

 

Fair play for having and following a personal passion.  Such things rarely, truly, stand alone and without the need for external support.  Throwing your toys out of the cot is not such a good look.

 

 

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

2 hours ago, eggsarascal said:

Put the figures up Kev, let's have a look.

FO - find your own figures!  You know how it works 👊🏻

[Doug Tait]

4 minutes ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

I'm more towards the less complimentary end of the scale tbh.

 

I know many here, myself included, put their dogs on a higher level of emotional attachment than might be applied to certain humans, but, and whilst I admire that man's personal commitment to a cause that he is prepared to risk his life for, 1 man / 1 charity is never going to solve the problem of animal abuse in such regions and it is illogical and unreasonable to expect others to share his determination just because it is a cause he has tied his colours to.

 

I saw grown men cry in both Iraq & Afghanistan after informally 'adopting' local stray dogs and then, having tried all the available avenues to repatriate them at the end of their tours, finally realise it might have been kinder to both themselves and the animals if they hadn't formed such an emotional attachment.

 

In this case, I'd view it as - do what you want chummy, but when you doing what you want involves expecting others to be as passionate about it as you are, and then being surprised and angry when they are not, and demanding their time, attention and resources to solve problems pretty much of your own voluntary making - it doesn't come across as particularly sensible.

 

Granted, it was a charter flight and it was funded by charitable donations and that animals were not taking up human seats - BUT - if reports are to be believed, there were some 5000 emails that went unopened from actual humans that wanted attention and the FCO was too busy to deal with them.

 

It's all very well saying the flight was chartered and paid for and that no seats were taken by animals, but - as is apparent from his tirade - he was expecting and demanding administrative resource which might have been better deployed elsewhere.

 

Fair play for having and following a personal passion.  Such things rarely, truly, stand alone and without the need for external support.  Throwing your toys out of the cot is not such a good look.

 

 

Thanks, interesting post. It does seem I'm in the minority (of one!) on this. Never mind, I've often been hard of thinking when it comes to dogs.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

20 minutes ago, Doug Tait said:

Thanks, interesting post. It does seem I'm in the minority (of one!) on this. Never mind, I've often been hard of thinking when it comes to dogs.

A lot of us are - but that’s a personal choice and doesn’t require / demand anyone else to help. 
 

It’s expecting others to bail you out and to share your personal passion (and there is no avoiding - it was at a ‘cost’ (in resource  terms) to other elements) where it kind of falls over. 
 

Admire his personal passion (and could quite easily see myself behaving in exactly the same way) not so much his expectation that others should be as invested in it as he is. 

Edited August 30, 2021 by kevinjohnsonmbe

[roboted]

1 hour ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

I'm more towards the less complimentary end of the scale tbh.

 

I know many here, myself included, put their dogs on a higher level of emotional attachment than might be applied to certain humans, but, and whilst I admire that man's personal commitment to a cause that he is prepared to risk his life for, 1 man / 1 charity is never going to solve the problem of animal abuse in such regions and it is illogical and unreasonable to expect others to share his determination just because it is a cause he has tied his colours to.

 

I saw grown men cry in both Iraq & Afghanistan after informally 'adopting' local stray dogs and then, having tried all the available avenues to repatriate them at the end of their tours, finally realise it might have been kinder to both themselves and the animals if they hadn't formed such an emotional attachment.

 

In this case, I'd view it as - do what you want chummy, but when you doing what you want involves expecting others to be as passionate about it as you are, and then being surprised and angry when they are not, and demanding their time, attention and resources to solve problems pretty much of your own voluntary making - it doesn't come across as particularly sensible.

 

Granted, it was a charter flight and it was funded by charitable donations and that animals were not taking up human seats - BUT - if reports are to be believed, there were some 5000 emails that went unopened from actual humans that wanted attention and the FCO was too busy to deal with them.

 

It's all very well saying the flight was chartered and paid for and that no seats were taken by animals, but - as is apparent from his tirade - he was expecting and demanding administrative resource which might have been better deployed elsewhere.

 

Fair play for having and following a personal passion.  Such things rarely, truly, stand alone and without the need for external support.  Throwing your toys out of the cot is not such a good look.

 

 

An excellent analysis Mr Johnson.