[DevilsDuck]

What about Scunthorpe?

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk

[SAV1OUR]

4 years for that 'doctor'. Good.

[Bonanzoid]

I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=51.507463,-2.560245

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk

Am I the only one who finds these little suffixes irritating?

[DevilsDuck]

I turn it off occasionally, but each time the app updates it seems to reset it on my phone. I will switch it off again, my sincerest apologies

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk...just for you xxx

[SAV1OUR]

I am here.

*waves!*

[bmstinton93]

My bad...


---
I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=51.470732,-2.593427

[Boboff]

What do ******* and ******* ***** have in
common?

Alright Tim, we get kids visiting here, you need to tone these down. I know you've censored the word, but that doesn't change the nature of the posts. Sorry to be a pain.

They are both types of American General?

[dimtimjim]

They are both types of American General?

Far to sharp for 05:59 Bob, what the smeg....!

I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=51.507463,-2.560245

Am I the only one who finds these little suffixes irritating?

I found Bens annoying.... I drove all the way there and couldn't find him. Git.

[MK Chris]

I think he / she was deliberately not saying which word.

Indeed. For the record, if a poster has typed a word out in full and you have your swear filter switched on, it will just appear as a single asterisk. If you see something like 'p**s', that's the poster self-censoring, and will appear the same regardless of your filter option. So the right use of asterisks or other symbols can render a word visible and pretty obvious to anyone reading, even if they have their filter on (which is the default option).

(I keep my swear filter switched on so I can spot if anyone is trying to circumvent it and why - although it can be a pain when you're trying to write about people from the East End of London or the surname of the singer from Pulp.)

You can actually get round it without censoring or replacing certain letters... or you could, I don't know if phpBB have closed that little loophole by now.

4 years for that 'doctor'. Good.

Harsh, very harsh. One thing I will say is quite aside from whether or not the jury was impartial, I strongly believe - given his statement yesterday and some of what he was saying in court after the guilty verdict - that the judge wasn't impartial in the slightest.

[bmstinton93]

I found Bens annoying.... I drove all the way there and couldn't find him. Git.

[Show us your boaby]

I think he / she was deliberately not saying which word.

Ahem I am a male, and i prefer not to use profanity on forums where young people are members

Need a hand getting down off that high horse there Mr T? As has been mentioned on this topic, there is a swear filter in place for people publicly viewing this site. If a young person has felt compelled to enroll and become an actual member of the site then they are obviously of an age in which to handle the odd profanity here and there. If not, if it does offends them then they can 'enable the sweary filter'.

It's not quite as catchy as 'bring on the wall' but it's as good as you're going to get from me.

[bmstinton93]

Most members here are on Twitter as well where they will no doubt see a lot worse.

[Show us your boaby]

Twitter = Pile of Wank.

[chrysostom]

INCORRECT.

There are many ways which Twitter is superior to other social networking sites, and even in some cases it's better than news sites.

Your clearly inflammatory post is riddled with inaccuracies, which is a feat considering you only used 4 words, and one of them was a adposition.

[bmstinton93]

Its proven its worth with all the tram thing and super injunctions and everything really.

[Show us your boaby]

INCORRECT.

There are many ways which Twitter is superior to other social networking sites, and even in some cases it's better than news sites.

Your clearly inflammatory post is riddled with inaccuracies, which is a feat considering you only used 4 words, ad one of them was a adposition.

[Boboff]

Ah you see thats the way to greet a new member with scorn and derision and proof of your large vocab.

Kick them when they are new so they know there place, and if they react then you can soon carry on picking away.

Twitter = Pile of Wank?

Better, but surely as an opinion it is valid? Even if you don't agree with, it doesn't mean it's "INCORRECT" unless someone has appointed you in charge of opinions?

If I missed that, then I am sorry, but if I didn't why not simply state

" I don't agree with that, I find it extremely usefull, and far superior to other nerworks, it's benefit in bringing real news and opinions direct from the source to the public has shown time and again huge benefits to society in terms of having an alternative view, to the otherwise dubious journalism we are inflicted with, why do you feel this inusufficient to garner the system with praise?"

[chrysostom]

sorry.

TWITTER = GOOD.

fantastic rebuttal.

and technically through that thinking, they were stating their opinion as a mathematical equation - which would imply that it's fact. but i understand i should have been nicer, it's just frustrating when something which in part i make a career from is dismissed with no thought or evidence - in a context which wasn't even debating whether twitter was a useful tool or not. hence my outburst. forgive me, but i'm assuming that we don't have to preposition all posts on the forum with 'in my opinion'.

[bmstinton93]

It turns me on when you get into an argument...

[chrysostom]

i'm in a grump and a bit crabby. boboff is right with his point. were you around during the twoleftfeet racism row? that was a stormer.

[Show us your boaby]

Ah you see thats the way to greet a new member with scorn and derision and proof of your large vocab.

Kick them when they are new so they know there place, and if they react then you can soon carry on picking away.

Twitter = Pile of Wank?

Better, but surely as an opinion it is valid? Even if you don't agree with, it doesn't mean it's "INCORRECT" unless someone has appointed you in charge of opinions?

If I missed that, then I am sorry, but if I didn't why not simply state

" I don't agree with that, I find it extremely usefull, and far superior to other nerworks, it's benefit in bringing real news and opinions direct from the source to the public has shown time and again huge benefits to society in terms of having an alternative view, to the otherwise dubious journalism we are inflicted with, why do you feel this inusufficient to garner the system with praise?"

Nice.

sorry.

TWITTER = GOOD.

fantastic rebuttal.

and technically through that thinking, they were stating their opinion as a mathematical equation - which would imply that it's fact. but i understand i should have been nicer, it's just frustrating when something which in part i make a career from is dismissed with no thought or evidence - in a context which wasn't even debating whether twitter was a useful tool or not. hence my outburst. forgive me, but i'm assuming that we don't have to preposition all posts on the forum with 'in my opinion'.

So where do you stand on the whole Kit Kat > Twix debate?

[bmstinton93]

oooo, he/she is a long time lurker.

[chrysostom]

in my opinion, i favour the kit kat. in particular the kit kat chunky (if that's allowed to be taken into consideration). but each to their own. i understand that the twix has it's merits - but they don't appeal to me in the same way that a kit kat does. i fully respect that my opinion is subjective, and i wouldn't want to infringe on the right of another to show preference to either. or neither.

[bmstinton93]

i'm in a grump and a bit crabby. boboff is right with his point. were you around during the twoleftfeet racism row? that was a stormer.

No, I don't believe I was.

[Nicola_Red]

I *think* twoleftfeet is the one who I had a big run-in with about Rachel...I defended her staunchly, and that was even before I really knew her brother.