Ponty

They all suit different people. Go have a lay on a few - and don't forget to try a waterbed.

I think we'll shift more than we bring in and, for the first time ever, I think we'l be happy about it!

Discouraged, maybe. Prevented, never. Hysterically, always.

There are hundreds of post from Pompey fans on the main board and we Admin don't mind them at all - as long as they're civil. I would have assumed your Admin over there would feel the same, after all we wouldn't want to start a p*ssing war between SWF and POL, would we? Whatever happened to harmony? *Not the hairspray.

Why not? I'm embracing change lately. "Royal Mail Strike" it is.

If we're just talking unexplained phenomena, well of course there are, I love a good old unexplained phenomenon. I just don't think they're lost souls who can't find their way to Heaven.

Guys, guys - look at us. Squabbling, bickering, like children. What's happening to us? We never used to be like this.

I've got a 125 in the garage if that helps. Two actually, although the missus owns one of them.

Mate, what you have there is not a "lack of evidence", it's zero substantiated evidence at all. I wouldn't go as far as to say that people who choose to believe in something completely intangible and unverifiable are ignorant but I would say that they're backing a losing horse. Actually, they're backing no horse at all. You believe in ghosts, I believe in science. It's that simple. As you're a pilot, I have to wonder what you believe keeps a plane in the air - is it a host of angels under the wings or is it the changes in air pressure due to the shape of the wing cutting through the air at a given speed? If you believe the former then I can understand the belief in ghosts. If it's the latter (which I assume it is), something that's been discovered, verified and is completely predictable thanks to "science", then I wonder how you can believe in something which that same science says cannot exist. I'm teasing you a bit there, AFAIAC it's everyone's right to believe whatever the hell they like, but I choose science - all the way.

Anyway, if "short-lived" is contentious I'll go back to my original choice of adjective, "terrible".

It's called, "Thinking ahead".

Really? We're going to debate the longevity of Embrace? Ok. They debuted an ok album, considering the era they were working in, but they were quite quickly exposed as a studio band. Live performances and live studio sessions were not well received so they began to drift out of the public consciousness. Fortunately for the band Danny had a good friend in Chris Martin, who penned Gravity for them, as well as giving direction and assistance on enough material to produce another album. This was well received but, yet again, they were shown up when a live performance from Leeds was broadcast on Radio 1. It was unbearably bad - vocally. After that Danny did some producing then went off the Ibiza to forge a career as a DJ. What he's doing now, I've no idea, but in my mind their success as Embrace was pretty short-lived. Even the Arctic Monkeys have done more and they've only been around for 5 minutes.

Cheers.

Oh come on, Will, ffs. Learn to relax and let go of the hook. Just for once.

No offence, but you're wrong. I can't see the need for a comma after any of the instances of the word, "Grammar", in my post, and there's definitely no need for a full stop after, "Right" (except the one that's there).

Absoblumminglutely. It's what makes the world go around.

They're not still going though, are they? Last I heard Danny was DJing in Ibiza.

Point them out for me, please.

My feelings are pretty clear on this but I'd like to take issue with being called ignorant for NOT believing in ghosts. That's a bit rich.

Who, me?

I like spelling and grammar to be correct, in my posts and in other people's. This is because I went to school and made the effort to learn the correct use of apostrophes and commas, how to spell and where to differentiate between their, there and they're. I now want to protect spelling and grammar qualities otherwise it devalues the efforts I made to get it right. So yes, it's selfish. Of course I can understand posts where the spelling and grammar are terrible but because I made, and make, the effort to get it right, I don't see why anyone else should be able to be lazy about it. *Note: Not proof read.

Ok, erm... A generic and formulaic song by a rather bland, short-lived band?

Minted lamb?

In the interests of unity, I'll change it to Hypo's suggestion - it seems more apt anyhow.

Ok, I may have over-simplified the UP case, but that's only because I don't think it's fair to sprawl all of the details out on the forum. His opinion was different to ours and he left because he felt strongly enough about it. As I said, it was a shame but he wanted to go. Nobody can doubt that his differences of opinion with 19C were the root cause of his angst. As for the thread title - ah come on, no one thinks you sympathise with the Skates, do they now? I remember when the title was changed (and who changed it) and at the time it was clear that the takeover completing was far more disasterous for the Skates than it would have been had it fallen through. In effect, they were in more trouble because of it - and that's strangely how it's turned out. Don't you think?