Jump to content
 

Proceedings of the Castle Aching Parish Council, 1905


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold

In today's Swimming Against The Tide Of History news:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/david-frost-emily-thornberry-brexit-government-british-b955813.html    

If it was any Government except this one, I might be worried it was actually going to happen.

To be on the safe side, I've worked out that modelling in Imperial H0 will require me to use a scale of 0.138 ins to the foot. Please can anyone tell me how many 1/32s of a inch this will be?  

Edited by Ian Simpson
  • Funny 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alastairq said:

Knowing one's limits is a good thing really


Couldn't argue with that, but far too many capable people in restricting environments underestimate their own potential, or see glimpses of it but are effectively taught by their peers that pursuing it is a bad, rather than a good thing.

 

If you want to read about what that means in reality, delve into the various studies of why white working-class children tend to underperform compared with children from other backgrounds at school - it’s one of the several factors at play.

 

As for challenging ‘professional elitism’: when I know more about medical science than a doctor; or, more about plumbing than a plumber; or, more about the law than a lawyer; or, more about HGV driving than an HGV driver, I’ll feel comfortable to challenge their professional opinions. Until then, I shall listen respectfully to them, as I hope they would if they sought my advice on a matter related to my profession.

 

My instinct is very strongly that my chances of accidentally picking a charlatan doctor/lawyer/plumber/HGV driver, and getting rubbish advice as a result, are a tiny fraction of the chances that I will get rubbish advice if I ask the HGV driver about my lumbago, or the lawyer how best to connect-up my central-heating system.

 

If you feel happiest dismissing the advice of people who’ve studied, trained and practised in their respective field, in favour of advice from people who have done none of that, fine. Just don’t expect everyone else to think it’s a good idea.

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 5
  • Round of applause 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
12 minutes ago, Ian Simpson said:

In today's Swimming Against The Tide Of History news:

 

It just shows how little understanding they have of how trade actually works. They're living in a fantasy world, which is unfortunate for the rest of us.

 

13 minutes ago, Ian Simpson said:

To be on the safe side, I've worked out that modelling in Imperial H0 will require me to use a scale of 0.138 ins to the foot. Please can anyone tell me how many 1/32s of a inch this will be?  

 

To get anywhere near a rational fraction, use 141/1024. I like to remember that my modelling is at a scale of 33/64 in to the metre.

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, alastairq said:

Professional elitism has to be challenged, in my view.

 I've always fancied flying an aeroplane but those pesky professional elitists who call themselves "pilots" maintain a strict closed shop. They always give some lame excuse about knowing what they're doing and having extensive training and experience - all a load of guff to keep the ordinary folks from having a go. And as for those so-called "doctors" doing surgery  - I mean, I've got a proper medical scalpel and 'O' level biology, how hard can it be ?!

  • Like 1
  • Funny 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Ian Simpson said:

In today's Swimming Against The Tide Of History news:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/david-frost-emily-thornberry-brexit-government-british-b955813.html    

If it was any Government except this one, I might be worried it was actually going to happen.

 

Breaking news as Hornby scrap their entire OO range and retool for production in  S scale in Margate,  whilst from next Thursday, all new products from Dapol will be in gauge 1 (that's 3/8" , not forrin 10mm).

  • Funny 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, CKPR said:

Breaking news as Hornby scrap their entire OO range and retool for production in  S scale in Margat

 

Nahhhhhh...  The best you'd expect from Hornby is an approximation to scale track using EM standards, with Code 75 set track and all radiuses (R1 to R4) catered for. All rolling stock adjusted to suit...

 

It'll be 1892 in reverse...

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ian Simpson said:

In today's Swimming Against The Tide Of History news:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/david-frost-emily-thornberry-brexit-government-british-b955813.html    

If it was any Government except this one, I might be worried it was actually going to happen.

To be on the safe side, I've worked out that modelling in Imperial H0 will require me to use a scale of 0.138 ins to the foot. Please can anyone tell me how many 1/32s of a inch this will be?  

 

I like the term "gloom mongers", I'd not heard that before, our nearest translation would  be "whinging bastard" I reckon.

 

Maybe an  old-established   Gloom Mongers business could be snuck into Castle Aching, preferably between say  the Fish Mongers and the Iron Mongers. 

  • Like 1
  • Funny 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CKPR said:

  And as for those so-called "doctors" doing surgery  - I mean, I've got a proper medical scalpel and 'O' level biology, how hard can it be ?!

There's a reason why the Medical and related professions are regulated - and it's not to create a closed shop!

 

Jim (BDS Glas., GDC registration No 42324, but, being retired, no longer registered.)

  • Like 3
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, monkeysarefun said:

 

I like the term "gloom mongers", I'd not heard that before, our nearest translation would  be "whinging bastard" I reckon.

 

Maybe an  old-established   Gloom Mongers business could be snuck into Castle Aching, preferably between say  the Fish Mongers and the Iron Mongers. 

 

Oh how perfect.  Actually, I now have to work Gloom Monger as a literal trade into the world of the novel I'm writing!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would expect that there are  long-established traditional Gloom Mongers in both Castle Aching and Ankh Morpork. Probably branches of the same business - Archibold Thruttock (deceased) & Son (also deceased). The Castle Aching branch of the business is run by the widowed daughter, Prunella Thruttock (not looking good).  

  • Like 1
  • Funny 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

The ahistorical provenance of gloom mongers is well established. By the mid 18th centuries gloom mongers were well known as a niche specialisation of ships chandlers who dealt in the production of dead lights for scuttles. Their well known ability to keep out the light often led them to diversify into window shutters for the land lubber community. Using a gloom mongers apparently helped with low grade tax avoidance as gloom mongers products were not covered by the window tax. It was only in the early 20th century with the publication of the Daily Mail that the term became associated with Newsagents.

DrDuncan

 

Edited by drduncan
  • Like 3
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
  • Funny 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that I want to divert from Gloom Mongering, as I love the way this is going, but, given the news that Australia, the US and the UK have entered into a defence working group to share new military technologies as barely veiled check on Chinese ambitions, sweetened, from the US perspective, by taking a submarine contract away from the 'Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys' and giving it to the US, I thought this an interesting scene:

 

 

  • Funny 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, Edwardian said:

Oh how perfect.  Actually, I now have to work Gloom Monger as a literal trade into the world of the novel I'm writing!

I suppose they would be a species of seer except more depressing than the usual variety.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Annie said:

I suppose they would be a species of seer except more depressing than the usual variety.

So, the opposite of a Soothsayer, in that they are not exactly providing any soothing comments?

 

Jim

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Round of applause 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

If you feel happiest dismissing the advice of people who’ve studied, trained and practised in their respective field, in favour of advice from people who have done none of that, fine.

 Oh dear!

Where did that dismissal idea come from?

 

Professional elitism, or the challenging thereof, isn't about being dismissive at all.

 

{But I suppose, if one can afford it, there's always the option of a second opinion?}

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Expertise* and the, I suspect deliberately pejorative term, 'professional elitism' may be two different things that have here been conflated in the service of an argument that is exceedingly poor inasmuch as it assumes there is a virtue in indiscriminate scepticism regarding the expertise of others in the apparent absence of any basis, knowledge or rational criteria for evaluating the quality of that expertise.

 

Fortunately for me, there are many people out there who do not believe that the expertise of lawyers is necessary.  Whether they live to revise or regret their challenge to professional elitism I could not say, but they certainly live to give me a lot more money than they'd tried to save for me to rectify the total horlicks they have made of their life and business.   

 

 

* Kevin sagely gave the example of expertise in HGV driving; a hard won set of skills not easily dismissed as 'elitist'.

  • Like 8
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
13 minutes ago, alastairq said:

Professional elitism, or the challenging thereof, isn't about being dismissive at all.

I think the test is whether we have solid grounds for challenging professional elitism.

(a) If we can back our position up with some sort of evidence, then challenging authority is a good thing.  Assuming the professional elite do know the subject better than we do, we may need to change our own position when they reply to us; but at least we can have a reasonable discussion.

 (b) If it's simply because we don't like what we're being told, or we're simply repeating some unevidenced conspiracy that caught our attention on social media, we're probably just being stupid. I imagine the professional elites meet enough stupid people as it is, without us adding to their burden.   

To be clear, this isn't directed at anyone on this thread. But it is aimed at all the keyboard warriors beyond RMWeb who manage to do conspiracy without any plausible theory.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
9 hours ago, alastairq said:

'Trust me, I'm a doctor?''  ??

Unless they have studied well beyond the usual requirements for membership of their appropriate Royal College, then they are well-trained medical practitioners, but not necessarily scientists.

However, when it comes to someone like Professor Chris Whitty, I will take his advice over and above virtually anyone else on the planet, and especially “expert” politicians.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Ian Simpson said:

In today's Swimming Against The Tide Of History news:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/david-frost-emily-thornberry-brexit-government-british-b955813.html    

If it was any Government except this one, I might be worried it was actually going to happen.

To be on the safe side, I've worked out that modelling in Imperial H0 will require me to use a scale of 0.138 ins to the foot. Please can anyone tell me how many 1/32s of a inch this will be?  

Ian 

Obviously the proper British scale is OO, which should be modelled at 0.15748032" to the foot. The correct gauge for OO is 0.65", for EM it is 0.71653543" and for S4 it is 0.74133858". 

I trust that everyone will now observe these standards immediately. 

By command.

  • Funny 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
6 minutes ago, burgundy said:

Ian 

Obviously the proper British scale is OO, which should be modelled at 0.15748032" to the foot. The correct gauge for OO is 0.65", for EM it is 0.71653543" and for S4 it is 0.74133858". 

I trust that everyone will now observe these standards immediately. 

By command.

 

It makes no difference what units you use, so long as the dimensions are correct. 

 

S scale is exactly 15.625 15⅝ mm to the metre.  [Amended in the light of @CKPR's post below.]

Edited by Compound2632
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, burgundy said:

Ian 

Obviously the proper British scale is OO, which should be modelled at 0.15748032" to the foot. The correct gauge for OO is 0.65", for EM it is 0.71653543" and for S4 it is 0.74133858". 

I trust that everyone will now observe these standards immediately. 

By command.

Decimal points, eh ? Aren't they forrin ? It's fractions from now onwards.

 

 

Edited by CKPR
  • Like 3
  • Funny 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...