Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,808 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

384 profile views
  1. Thanks for that. For some reason for both of them I had to click twice on the "READ NOW" button for it to show up in "my magazines".....so if it doesn't work first time...persevere.
  2. Replying to an ancient post I know, but... I don't know if this was unsual either, but the one time I got the last train back from Thurso in the 37 days it did the same thing. It was quite a journey - one of the coaches had no lighting on and the guard was happy for us to sit in it enojying the views of the stars without reflections from the window, and check our tickets with the light from his Bardic(?) lamp.
  3. Absolutely. It was a balancing act I never thought anybody could pull off and we had many good years. I liked Capaldi as a Doctor. Didn't think much of the scripts in the first series, after that I thought it improved. It is doing very little for me now, unfortunately.
  4. It's the usual problem with any kind of forum/news group. Some people haven't read from the start, and the same things keep coming up. People will continue to post bargains on Amazon that then disappear either because they bought one, or someone else did. This is sort of why FAQs were invented, because people kept asking the same questions on mailing lists. I don't know what the answer is here. It sounds a bit rude to say something like "This is how the Amazon algorithm works and has already been discussed. Please don't discuss further as this isn't the place for it" but I'm not sure what else would work. And I do appreciate that I've just done another "non bargain" post, thus adding to the traffic here. Maybe we need a parallel discussion thread for the discussions that get triggered here but some would rather didn't get in the way of the actual bargains?
  5. (Risking a not directly bargain related post here....) It has been suggested (here, I think) that if an item isn't selling, the algorithm keeps dropping the price until someone buys one, then the price bounces straight up again. That would be consistent with what happened here - one purchase and it was back up to £40. You can see the behaviour of a gradual drop followed by a sharp increase on the camelcamelcamel web site which tracks Amazon prices, though currently Amazon have asked them to stop monitoring their European sites.
  6. A lot of scientists seem to believe that a vaccine is a realistic proposition, given time. What is your evidence that it won't be? I didn't think that it was expected to keep mutating in such a way as to negate a vaccine. (And if the bulk of the population can get immunity by catching it as you suggest, doesn't that imply that a vaccine might work after all?) As for "beating it" - so far in China they seem to have done very well. Time will tell whether they can go back to normal life without it flaring up again, but I think it's too early to say that they can't. Most cases - they say - are now imported ones. Yes this is highly contagious, but if what pockets of infection remaining after the lockdown can be caught quickly enough, maybe the whole population doesn't have to get it.
  7. I'm sure I'm not the only one here who appreciates it and finds it quite refreshing that you've come on here and told us that, rather than just letting us all speculate in ignorance. Thanks.
  8. I thought about this a bit more during my legally permitted hour of outdoor exercise in the sun. (Very nice too) Nothing is perfectly safe. Look up how many lives we'd save and serious injuries we'd prevent if we stopped all road transport in the UK. But few of us would be prepared to put up with the consequences. The government's goal here is not to prevent anyone (including themselves) from getting COVID-19. The aim is to keep the rate of increase low enough that the NHS can cope, and ultimately (somehow) to reduce the number of infections to a very low level. The key here is the number of other people that one infected person infects - the latest number I've seen is that it's about 3. This needs to come down, and until it's below 1 (or there is a vaccine) this disease isn't going to go away. If the measures taken (close schools and most shops, we all stay home when we can and keep apart when we can't etc.) keep that number low enough, then the added risk from what commerce still takes places is actually small. (If it's below 1, doing things to reduce it further have limited impact). Now on an individual basis, those who are still going out to work are at a greater risk than those who don't, and as someone who can happily work from home I'm not going to say that anyone else should go out and risk themselves so I can order some more track pins. BUT - from an overall point of view, if the modelling is correct and policy is being based on it, then the impact of keeping permitted businesses open on the spread of the coronavirus in the UK will presumably be small. And you can be pretty sure that the government is monitoring as best they can, and if numbers rise much faster than expected the next step will almost certainly to be to shut down non-essential businesses. (And if that doensn't work, then we are in trouble. But we know from China that it can be done).
  9. That sounds like a pretty exact description of the current situation in the UK actually.
  10. It seems the Post Office is happy to continue to carry non-essential items. Their staff, perhaps less so: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/mar/25/uk-postal-workers-plea-for-limit-to-non-essential-deliveries-royal-mail-coronavirus
  11. I don't disagree. As I keep saying, I'm not saying that Hattons and the like should continue to trade. But you seem to be almost arguing that as lots of people have lots their jobs because their businesses have had to shut down, it's only fair if more businesses also shut and put people out of a job. I'm not sure that helps. I would have thought that the more of the economy that can continue safely, the better all round. It's not a question of mail-order businesses being more important than physical shops, it's about the risk of contagion being much greater in a shop.
  12. Keeping mail order going in general (not just for model railways) will actually keep quite a large number of people in employment, I would have thought.
  13. Um. Did you actually read what I wrote? I explicitly said I wasn't giving an opinion on whether deliveries should continue or not. I was just pointing out that it was misleading to say that if deliveries did continue it would just be so people don't have to wait for new rolling stock.
  14. Because given the comment about China and other countries, I (mis?)took this as a general comment on building new freight-only lines anywhere.
  15. That covers both ends, but not the risk to everyone involved in actually getting the mail from A to B. Maybe that can be sufficiently minimised. I think some delivery drivers haven't quite got the message yet. I had one yesterday attempt to hand me a parcel. I would have preferred him to put it on the doorstep and retreat.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.