Minty

There are apparently 7 'errors' in there... next job is to find them all!

Either that or connect it up to a spare SATA connector (assuming that is what it is) in a Desktop machine and copy stuff off of it that way.

You're welcome.

Not really. The total score is not what matters, it's the equivalence of the penalties that matter. i.e. If first place has 38 points in Dressage and second has 39, that's no different to scoring 0 and 1 penalty points respectively in this round. Britain win silver in the team event!

Sort that out then. T'other end of town on Wharf Hill, off Chesil Street.

You do realise that the 'scores' you're looking at at actually penalty points? So, the less the better.

Did not know that. Scratch that one then, until I've been and had a look, but doesn't sound promising. Just go to Hyde Tavern and King Alfred then. (And Black Boy, obviously.)

You talk as though the Gold medals are already ours unless we do something silly or 'bottle it'... a crass misrepresentation of the quality of the field, and the nature of sport itself. Silver will be an excellent result, behind the reigning Olympic champions.

Spot the (ex) Saints players... Made me laugh anyway. [video=youtube_share;F39vAn3veHE]

And more specifically, to know they are from James Delingpole, a 'journalist' who openly admits he has never read any peer-reviewed science papers, and who, frankly, if he posted on here, would probably be considered a WUM.

Offensive in that most people disagree with it(including me)? That's not really 'offensive' IMO. Liking the use of 'innit' too... you noticed my post on the Muppet Show thread obviously. ;-)

Another vote for the Black Boy. Hyde Tavern and White Swan are nice and close to each other on Hyde Street, and the King Alfred is just a few minutes from them, so makes for a nice crawl without too far to go. All of the above wipe the floor with just about any pub in Southampton IMO.

It is indeed contested, and that's not a bad thing as it forces people to constantly review their findings and not rest easy. But when you look at the balance of papers, books, peer-reviewed science and expert commentary, there is a clear consensus. It is healthy to read sources from all angles, and not remain closed off to any possibilities. Words like 'agenda' and 'lobby' only serve to portray this as a political issue when it should be viewed entirely independent of politics. Sadly, this is where Hamilton Saint's post comes in and the self-interest of some sectors puts pressure on the politicians, which in turn dominates the discussion and *creates* an agenda, rather than allowing the response to be guided solely by the science.

It was reactionary, I agree, but it was still an opinion... However causing offence whilst disagreeing with an opinion is entirely reliant on two things: 1 - the way in which the person takes the comments, and 2 (obviously) the way in which the reply is worded. I would've said something like: 'I'm sorry, but I really cannot see how you can come to that opinion based on just a short period of football. All goalkeepers have made mistakes in their career, some more than others, and especially at the younger end of their career. It would be impossible to recruit a keeper who had not, and would never, make a mistake, and in this particular instance, I would suggest a miskick was far less of a mistake than letting the ball through hands or legs directly leading to a goal. Judging any player on just 45 minutes is pretty silly IMO.' If that causes offence, then I would suggest that person shouldn't come on to a forum if they can't even handle a reasonable reply. Calling someone a pillock is quite obviously going to cause offence to some people.

I don't know, I just wondered why you felt certain sports should and shouldn't be included, and why. I can see merit in the argument that only non-professional sports should be included... the amateur status is after all what the Olympics was founded on, so I do actually agree with you about some of the sports you mentioned... I just wondered what criteria YOU would apply?

This I don't get... it's not a commercial project that staff have failed to deliver, it's sport. Stuff happens. It's all about the team or the individual producing the goods at a key moment in time... often only one chance to get it right. That's the beauty of it in my book. It all comes down to one moment. If we succeed, that's fantastic, if not, the competitors no doubt look at what happened and why, but the public and the media need to refrain from looking at it like some kind of divine right was denied and that the individuals involved have somehow failed.

Using a minor grammatical error to deflect from the (valid) criticism about claiming to be right, dune? Bit of a poor tactic that one. You just can't debate different opinions on anything can you?

You have to be a WUM. Surely?

To be fair, I believe it's one of those things that seems to be a little ambiguous... technically, the DfT ruels state no containers over 100ml, even if empty, but in practice it seems people are taking them through. Been awhile since I was actively up-to-date on it all, so perhaps there is some flexibility now.

The container itself must be less than 100ml too, not just the liquid contained within it, so that rules out even an empty drinks bottle, even though it's a sound idea IMO! If you've got any through before then you've been lucky. And airside prices have always been higher than landside... you're a captive audience and so outlets take advantage, but my aforementioned post about the cost of retail space also contributes to this.

Just thought I'd pop over here to see what I might have missed, after the comment on the Cameroon CB thread, and as it turns out not a lot. All I would say is that as much as I too disagree with PaulGilchrist_76 over Gazzaniga, quite why he needs to be subjected to direct abuse is beyond me. Play the ball, not the man. If you don't agree with what someone says, fine, tell them so and tell them why, but resorting to personal comments is sad and unnecessary IMO.

I know this has been done to death previously, but I for one don't have time to trawl through that ridiculously long thread to keep up to date with what articles are out there, so am quite happy to see it posted separately. So I don't think your sarcastic 'well done' is really called for. I did suggest a closed sticky post be kept up to date with all links to articles such as this, like we used to have in previous seasons, but evidently that hasn't happened this year which is a shame. Anyway, back to the player... an interesting one, and we know that we are looking for a CB so who knows.

I doubt Southampton will start charging for drop-off / pick-up for a variety of reasons, especially as TCM states, there are plenty of places where people would just create their own pick-up/drop-off point. Having worked for BAA for a number of years I can perhaps offer a bit more of an insight into this than most. Ultimately all the facilities have to be paid for somehow and increasingly, airports are coming under pressure from airlines to reduce charges, and different airports and groups are finding different ways to pass that on or absorb it elsewhere. Airports make more money from 'Retail' (including car parking) than they do from anything aviation related. Hence the massive expansion of retail areas in most airports in the country. On a wider scale, the public end up paying for everything eventually, be it through airline charges, increased retail prices in the shops, direct charges, like parking, or even just drop-off/pick-up etc. But airports also know that to make money in retail sectors, they need airlines and passengers to be passing through, so they tend to be more willing to negotiate on costs with the airlines and pass that on through car parking etc, because they know that most leisure passengers won't even think about the car parking or public transport costs initially when looking for a flight, and it just becomes something to be calculated after the flight is booked. And for business flyers, it is less important because it usually covered on expenses. So, funnily enough, a conversation about car parking charges comes back once again to the budget airlines... their push for lower costs, to enable them to advertise cheaper flights, just drives up prices elsewhere. You should see what it costs per square foot for retail space in airports compared even to some major shopping centres.

Who decides what has a place and what doesn't? What are the qualifying criteria?

I would contact the airline and ask for assistance ASAP. Never needed or used it myself but always better to sort this sort of thing out in advance if possible, and not wait until you're at the airport.