Remove this ad

#281 [url]

Sep 23 16 7:38 PM

nfm24 wrote:
Retrospective Clairvoyancy (apart from sounding like a Pink Floyd album) is what passes for football history in a lot of places, and is exactly the sort of thing I'm trying to counteract with actual research.
Good thing I only used my powers on that one insignificant thing then.

That paper thing doesn't surprise me too much (seen it as a student) except for having the limits on staff as well, surely they're going to assume you're responsible enough to make as many prints as you want in order to do the job they're paying you for? The single-sided paper reminds me of the story I mentioned way back in this thread about getting let go from a council temp job a few weeks early because there was an office-wide backlog therefore there was, and I quote, "not enough staff available to train me".

Said training would have involved someone giving me a login to their special programme and taking about 5 minutes to instruct me on how to do some data entry on there, after which I probably would have been able to make a decent contribution in clearing said backlog, but middle-management public service employees know best of course...

And even in the wake of Brexit I'm refusing to believe anyone can be gullible enough to not see through Mr. Dodger's story, you're just taking the biscuit there (I'll stop smiley: indifferent).

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad

#282 [url]

Sep 23 16 9:56 PM

I had just assumed I would have unlimited printing (as I have done before in similar positions). It appears that I don't, which is a bigger blow to my vast ego than I initially thought it would be. I argued along the same lines you said, that it was a fundamental necessity of my job. But by this point I just wanted to have the files printed by any method and would have happily paid myself, if there was actually a way to do that (e.g. pay as you go). Then again this is the same institution that has not seen fit to provide me with a computer in advance, for a job that is highly computational. At least they gave me a chair I suppose.

My favourite comment in response to the biscuit hack was the wonderfully profound (paraphrased) : If he didn't just eat biscuits all day and did more work, he'd be better off all round anyway.

Quote    Reply   

#283 [url]

Sep 23 16 10:36 PM

"Method acting", and particularly the idea that is somehow a superior form of acting, when actually it is just a lack of ability to act. If you feel you need this over the top level of pre-preparation just to be able to do your basic job, then you are either under-qualified or you just aren't any good.

Quote    Reply   

#284 [url]

Sep 24 16 12:15 AM

The whole "Bake Off" affair.   I have no interest in seeing who is the best baker out of some contrived pre-selected group of oddballs, much in the same way I have no interest in seeing who is the best bus driver out of a contrived "random" group of 12 amateur bus drivers.  I do enjoy cakes, but the best way to enjoy these is not by watching them on a screen.

The only interesting thing about "Bake Off" for me is to observe how ordinary people process the apparently mundane and arbitrary events on a  television programme through the Playdough machine of their own internal prejudices, particularly when some of the contestants might even have the temerity to be foreign and/or Muslim (!).

Now, some people like it. That's fine. If you like it because that's what you like, then that's fine, just say that. But don't try to make it out to be more objectively important, in order to justify the fact you like it. Don't pretend that it is somehow more culturally significant than any other banal voyeuristic formulaic judge-fest.  It is addictively cynical format design, nothing more.  If you like it, then that is the reason why - either that or you just like cakes and would watch anything with cakes in them regardless, in which case your opinion is worthless, obviously.

Anyway, some ideas for a replacement reality format for the BBC to fill the prime-time sh*t-shovelling void in the TV schedule.

Theme: snooker
Format: 12 amateur snooker players (mostly housewives wearing aprons) are judged on their ability to push balls around a green table with sticks.
Title: The Great British Break Off
Judges: Ronnie O'Sullivan, who believes he is too good for the show and  it is beneath him to participate (quite correctly), and Steve Davis (who isn't as boring as he was supposed to be, albeit still very boring).
Comic Presenters: Jim Davidson, who hilariously ridicules anything the Chinese contestants say or do, and John Virgo, who is awful in a series of spangly waistcoats.

Theme: martial arts
Format: 12 wannabe prize fighters (mostly housewives wearing aprons) try unsuccessfully to avoid starting fights with each other, for an hour every Thursday in a marquee on a country estate.
Title: The Great British Back Off
Judges: Tony Jaa, who communicates only through a serious of sudden elbows to the head, and Steven Seagal who is incoherent by comparison.
Comic Presenters: Sylvester Stallone, wearing a series of jaunty berets, and Jean-Claude Van Damme, who plays twin brothers throughout, leading to hilarious misunderstandings.

Theme: science
Format: 12 amateur theoretical physicists (mostly housewives wearing aprons) are judged on attempts to resolve a series of ill-posed and unsolved problems in quantum mechanics, relativity and string theory.
Title: The Great British Quark Off
Judges: Stephen Hawking, who just sits there leering, and God, who may or may not exist, leading to a hilarious series of misunderstandings.
Comic Presenters: Dara O'Briain (ubiquitous on anything sciencey, for some reason) and Harry Hill, who just does his usual nonsense but wears a white coat.

Theme: Actual sh*t shovelling
Format: 12 amateur zookeepers and sewerage workers (mostly housewives wearing aprons) are judged on a series of dung-relocation activities featuring a variety of different animal droppings.  Week 1: Komodo dragons.
Title: The Great British Bog Off
Judges: Paul Hollywood, who as usual judges all efforts based on taste and texture, and David Attenborough, who every week says "I can't believe they convinced me to do this sh1t" leading to hilarious misunderstandings all round.
Comic Presenters : Vic and Bob.  Highlights include laxative-laced animal feed and booby-trapped perforated black bin bags.

Quote    Reply   

#285 [url]

Sep 24 16 9:19 AM

nfm24 wrote:
mattsanger92 wrote:
Also, I win the Clairvoyancy Award (or retrospective equivalent)

Retrospective Clairvoyancy (apart from sounding like a Pink Floyd album) is what passes for football history in a lot of places, and is exactly the sort of thing I'm trying to counteract with actual research.

I recently chanced upon a bizarre example of "retrospective clairvoyancy"... In this interview, the former Rayo Vallecano player Sergio Ballesteros, referring to the season 2000/01, declares: "It was a precious season. The first time in which Rayo competed in Europe. We won the Intertoto Cup and we reached the UEFA Cup quarter-finals".
But Rayo Vallecano never participated in the Intertoto Cup in their whole history!

Quote    Reply   

#286 [url]

Sep 27 16 5:29 PM

So while the man himself is busy engaging in the revolutionary tactic of diplomacy by washing machine, a revelation has occured regarding Arsehole Premier League mid-tabler Boris Johnson's involvement in Brexit.

Only accusations of course but it would confirm what anyone who did a few minutes' research knew from the start, in that he wasn't properly committed to it (his gleeful face of victory right there) and was just looking for a cheap way to boost his own career, although the whole "persuaded to join leave" and "depression" part suggests the beginning of a modern conspiracy...

Also annoying because on top of the dishonesty in the campaign, you take the 'star power' of Boris out of the equation and the 'face' of leave (other than Mr. Farage) is the guy on the left of the picture, somehow I doubt they get over the line in that situation...

Quote    Reply   

#287 [url]

Sep 27 16 8:04 PM

mattsanger92 wrote:
he wasn't properly committed to it and was just looking for a cheap way to boost his own career

Boris to replace Big Sam (aka Big Mouth)?

Quote    Reply   

#290 [url]

Oct 13 16 9:45 PM

It will indeed be quite a poke in the eye for Brexit voters if they are forced by Brexit-tastic price rises to change their shopping habits and shop only at the local cornershops owned exclusively by immigrants.

Let's move all the xenophobes to Gibraltar, it's the only British place left.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad

#292 [url]

Oct 14 16 5:00 PM

nfm24 wrote:
It will indeed be quite a poke in the eye for Brexit voters if they are forced by Brexit-tastic price rises to change their shopping habits and shop only at the local cornershops owned exclusively by immigrants.
You'd think something like marmitegate (featuring one of the most purely British brands in existence) would be a wake-up call, but no, led by the secretary of Brexit namesake MP of the secretary of Brexit they double down on delusion and have started a boycott of the Unilever company's products for their unpatriotic ways smiley: laugh. Part of their price hike could well be down to corporate greed, but it probably has more to do with a certain currency tanking right now. But of course the brave protesters focus on the fact that the company is half-Dutch and therefore trying to sabotage Brexit...

So I think even if they did move to Gibraltar a lot of those types would be moaning, too many Perezes and Chipolinas for starters, not to mention the place was 96% in favour of remain, but if all else fails they'd just blame the poor monkeys for whatever's going wrong in their lives.

I say an appropriate punishment for Brexit voters if it goes badly is to make each of them eat a spoon's worth of straight marmite. For misleading so many people, Boris, Nigel, & friends each get to down a pint glass of the stuff (it was going to be in a litre bottle for added irony but a glass ensures smoother marmite delivery).

Quote    Reply   

#293 [url]

Oct 14 16 6:03 PM

For some reason I am reminded of when President Dubya suggested that the problem with the French was that they had no word for "entrepreneur".

For the second time this year, I am stockpiling Hobnobs.  I think I might just do this by default from now on, as the world seems unable to take care of itself sufficiently to avoid disturbing my biscuit habits - thus I must take matters into my own hands.

Last Edited By: nfm24 Oct 14 16 6:07 PM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   

#294 [url]

Oct 31 16 9:26 PM

Interesting development:

Notwithstanding my comments earlier about crowbaring diversity in for the sake of it rather than basing such things on genuine merit, I do find it interesting that it is applied to sport when there are so many other (publically funded) areas where it is not in evidence.  Oh well. Have to start somewhere I guess.

But if they are going to apply quotas, why not do so within the sports themselves.  Why only the boardroom?  Say 7 of 20 Premier League teams must have female coaches.  Half of referees female, and 5/11 players.  And half of fans.  And stewards.  And tea-ladies gender-neutral beverage colleagues. And TV pundits. And TV audience. Because that way must be better.

Quote    Reply   

#295 [url]

Nov 4 16 8:09 PM

Yeah, not a fan of positive discrimination... I completely understand the reasons behind it but it usually gets taken too far. Would be a completely unnessecary practice if more people just used common sense.

More on football coverage - BBC pundit Trevor Sinclair was talking about Eastleigh narrowing the pitch for their FA Cup game with Swindon Town... partly for the age-old reason of unsettling the more illustrious visitors, but Sinclair says it's also because of Swindon's philosophy of passing football, but admitting in the same sentence that his basis for this observation is seeing them when Glenn Hoddle was in charge... smiley: indifferent

And finally, the latest development in the saga that is Brexit (excluding the increasingly unhinged reactions to the disgraceful decision to hand parliament the sovereignty that Brexiters so desperately wanted them to have), a quote from Boris Johnson: "We will make a Titanic success of Brexit."

Quote    Reply   

#297 [url]

Nov 8 16 9:56 PM

People who stand on your foot and seem to believe that it was in no way their fault.

People who say things like "embrace your own individuality" and other similar vacant drivel.

The idea that massively uncontrolled obsessional behaviour is in some contexts considered purely positive (e.g. a good "work ethic") whereas it is just indicative of a deficient personality, and no better than any other area of obsession (e.g. eating disorders, collecting stamps, researching old football scores...)

Quote    Reply   

#299 [url]

Nov 9 16 7:58 PM

nfm24 wrote:
People who say things like "embrace your own individuality" and other similar vacant drivel.
What, so you're saying you don't embrace your own individuality? Go and share that comment with 5 friends or else you're just one of the sheeple...

And the I shouldn't need to explain the reason for the video above, but it is some kind of phyrric victory that the UK no longer holds the record for most logic-defying decision of 2016. Not for the lack of trying though, as a nice olive branch from the EU has been attacked by some Brexit campaigner trying to stir up some jingoistic outrage, it is that time of the year after all.

Of the EU's proposal to offer opt-in citizenship for people not from member countries in Europe (no idea how that would actually work but it's the thought that counts, if it means I get those tarriff-free phone charges again I'm in), Jayne Ayde of 'Get Britain Out' says with irony firmly displaced:
"This is an outrage. The EU is now attempting to divide the Great British public at the exact moment we need unity. 17.4 million people voted to Leave the EU on 23 June and as a result the UK as a whole will get Brexit... Discriminating against people based on their political views shows there are no depths the EU will not sink to."

A new interesting theory of mine that's been developing over the last few weeks is that the number of brilliant sports stories of the year (many football ones, the natural Olympics/Paralympics spike, in American sports the Broncos, Cavaliers, and Cubs, while Australia apparently had a couple of their leagues produce surprise champions, and of course the rise of the shoey) seems to be juxtaposed by everything non-sport having some not-so-brilliant stories (certain votes, certain wars, certain imaginary wars, and not that I'm overly fussed but a high quantity of dead celebrities seem to be something that people put into this category).

So of course the underlying question here is - if you had the chance to go back to January 1st and let the year have a do-over, with no guarantee of the same outcomes in sport or wider life, would you take it? Or in short - would you risk Leicester City's title for no Brexit?

Quote    Reply   

#300 [url]

Nov 9 16 8:55 PM

mattsanger92 wrote:
if you had the chance to go back to January 1st and let the year have a do-over

I would suggest going back further, to the point when the first bit or primordial organic sludge evolved a reproductive capacity, and stomp out this nonsense once and for all.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help