Jump to content

Pennine MC

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Pennine MC last won the day on February 5 2012

Pennine MC had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,464 Excellent

Profile Information

  • Location
    Avoiding dystopia

Recent Profile Visitors

6,028 profile views
  1. Good suggestion, but it doesnt really work like that. Trying to persuade folk to discuss something in a new thread once they've already started in an existing one is a bit like herding cats.
  2. Not quite everything, surely. Some of public sector pay comes from private sector taxes, but some of it comes from the taxes it pays itself, as part of the impenetrable vortex highlighted earlier. As long as we're all paying the same basic rate, I'm not sure I can get too bent out of shape over it. I think my perspective would be that it's the subtle difference between the letter of the law, and the spirit of it. Wherever you have rules, you will have people motivated to stretch said rules - that, unfortunately, is human nature, and forums themselves provide ample evidence of it.
  3. Neil, I think Beeman's post is a perfect example of why I responded to you as I did earlier in the thread :-)
  4. Well, some do (and presumably you expected that when you signed up to such a high profile occupation). But many of us keep our pontifications to ourselves (and I speak as someone who generally has great respect for the police - except on the odd occasions when they do something to undermine it). So why does it follow that we should all have our personal business laid bare?
  5. Really. I'd like to know how you think the great uninformed British public would be able to make such judgments, without knowing any of the circumstances.
  6. Old chestnut I'm afraid, Stewart. It's not about being stroked and cosseted, it's the simple courtesy of someone acknowledging that they place a value on the time and effort given up on their behalf. And as Doug says, it's also good for a respondent to know that his response has been targeted in the right direction or at an appropriate level. Threads like this ultimately stand or fall on one distinction IMO - some people just dont seem to understand conventional concepts of manners. I dont mind if other folk are not as fussed as I am about that, but I draw the line at suggestions that manners simply aren't necessary. In 'outside' life, I wouldnt dream of leaving a shop checkout, a bar or the desk of a colleague who'd helped me without saying 'thanks' in some form. Maybe society is changing, maybe I'm just a dinosaur, but if I am, I'd like to think I'm in good company.
  7. Indeed we have Dave, but where do you see the solution? a) Should those who are satisfied with a given model just accept that others might want to discuss any areas of concern, and not seek to treat the latter as pariahs, or; b ) should those who seek to improve standards give up on that aim, and just accept that their aspirations in the hobby will be shaped by others with lower expectations? In my experience, it's almost always the first group who take exception to the second, not the other way round. There's a basic lack of tolerance here, and most of it is only flowing one way.
  8. Not always appropriate though. Sometimes it's a case of 'point X is wrong, it's not easily fixable, but now you know it's there, you can make up your own mind whether it matters to you'. A caveat Bernard, if I might - constructive criticism and free, informed choice. As Jim sagely pointed out, just saying something is great isnt actually very informative.
  9. And some, oddly enough, will do both; no real need to post divisive comments, IMHO.
  10. Given that he's kindly taken the time to place the definitive info elsewhere on the Web (link below), I dont think he's obliged to cruise around forums just in case somebody wants to ask him a question: http://www.railblue.com/rail_blue_history_2.htm Sometimes it's better to go to the source of the information, rather than expect it to come to you
  11. Aesthetically displeasing, presumably. A model (any model) may well be 100% correct to prototype, but still unattractive to an individual. YMMV of course.
  12. One or two might fall into that highlighted description, but it's doing the others a bit of a dis-service to say the least. It also disregards something very relevant (IMHO), the value of goodwill - performance issues can be equally or more offputting to contributors, the 'givers' if you like, not just to those who mainly 'take'. That choice of words isnt meant to be derogatory or divisive btw, merely a straightforward way of making the point.
  13. Still puzzled why folk are focussing on this '2FS' thing TBH; is it really so unthinkable for either side to agree that '2mm scale' would have been a perfectly acceptable compromise (and one that wasnt incorrect, whereas N gauge, despite what anyone says, patently is).
  14. Looking back Nick, these points pretty much reflect my experience and as you say, it's not greatly motivating. Whilst it's a basic tenet of research that single sources of information shouldn't automatically be seen as definitive, the current situation goes too far to the opposite extreme - multiple sources displaying questionable veracity. Either way, it seems that easily obtained information isnt always correct information, but maybe that's just reflective of wider attitudes and 'dumbing down'.
  15. Fair point Dave, but (naturally enough) it works the other way when it's more fact than opinion. The facts get lost or buried, or (worse) superseded by incorrect or incomplete replies.
  • 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.