Nigel rises again- Is this the second coming?

If that means me – Renegotiate then a referendum.

“forum experts can pontificate…”

Like the business of quotes, it ‘ain’t rocket science !’

D. Tel. Unreliable ? Unreliable ?? The Oracle at Delphi should be so reliable.

Well, let us all hear what the fount of all wisdom would do ?

Mr Howlett of Derbyshire wrote the letter. I wonder if he is a constitutional lawyer……The point surely is that we can do what we like unilaterally – like the Scots could go it alone, unilaterally. But if the party wishing to secede does not wish to burn their boats by tearing up decades of mutual agreements, then the best method is to do it foremally and constitutionally. Isn’t it? I don’t think the “pub landlord” is proposing secession, is he?

I love the way the best constitutional brains in the country discuss and can’t agree on the intricacies of a bale-out, yet forum experts can pontificate and make pronouncements based on some opinion piece they read in a frequently unreliable newspaper.

I don’t know why we bother with a civil service at all.

Moggy

Meanwhile back on the subject.

Interesting comment in the D. Tel (26th Nov.) Interesting, in the light of an opinion expressed here a few days ago. Apparently we do not need to invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty if our stroll to vacate the EU becomes a stampede.

We simply repeal the EU Communities Act 1972. In doing so we re-assert the primacy of national law over EU law and at the same time remove EU legislation from our Statute.

We then – as I have many times asserted – announce our unilateral and unconditional withdrawal which, under international law would not only be legal but, has many precedents.

“restore proper values ?”

That’s never going to happen.

By the way: Never use a preposition to end a sentence with or, to put it another way; never end a sentence with a preposition.

Does your computer have a spell check facility? Do you know how to use it ? I can offer a free tutorial ?

You forgot to preface your post with ‘RE 104’. Try harder.

It is quaint that you imagine computers have a built in spell check ‘facility’. To answer your question, I am using IE7 here, which does not have a spell check ‘facility’. Both Firefox and Chrome do, but have not been validated for the machine I am using. I suppose I could draft all my posts in MS Word to check for spelling errors, but you are not worth nearly that much effort on my part.

You mean like Dr The Honourable Tristram Hunt…..Labour education spokesman…..

Well at least Nige, being a public school ‘toff’ (as we have to call them these days), might have some insight into what education should be like.

Moggy

“restore proper values ?”

That’s never going to happen.

By the way: Never use a preposition to end a sentence with or, to put it another way; never end a sentence with a preposition.

Does your computer have a spell check facility? Do you know how to use it ? I can offer a free tutorial ?

Calm down Moggy ! It was habit – that’s all.

I’ve never heard of that title: “Any dictionary published in the last thirty years”. Who is the publisher ? I think you invented that.

The correct definition of syntax: “The way in which words are arranged to form phrases and sentences to convey precise meaning”.

There you have it, simple. No connection with computer programming other than in the minds of the semi illiterates who try to blind us with (computer) science.

I find it somewhat ironic that you, a user of an internet forum, decry the discipline of computer science as being the work of ‘semi illiterates’ yet happily note that excessive quoting causes problems for the website ‘in ways that I do not know’. I can only assume you lack the intellectual curiousity to actually find out why.

The funny thing here is that your post isn’t even offensive at this stage. You’ve asserted, wrongly, that the word ‘syntax’ has a single definition. This is blatantly incorrect. You’ve also suggested that computer programmers are ‘semi illiterate’ (is that the same as semi literate, and where do the two overlap?), yet I wager you couldn’t produce any scripting in Java, C++, Python or even produce basic SQL queries. Ironically, your ability to do anything on a computer is only possible thanks to the same semi ilitterates you seem to take issue with. You are probably already foaming at the mouth at my use of the word ‘scripting’ in the previous sentence.

No doubt your beloved Nigel will be removing all computers from the school and workplace and replacing them with slide rules and the abacus in a bid to restore ‘proper values’ or something.

Re 102 <- Why is this needed John? You are replying to the post above yours. I am pretty sure we can all make the connection.

At least, I now know that I don’t need an understanding of ‘rocket science’ ! Phew !!

Yes, that’s nicely done

Of course I realise this morning that in my post above I used a quote from John Green.

On reflection, I could simply have written

“John, on the subject of excessive quoting” which would probably have been quicker than snipping the quote as I did.

Moggy

Moggy, you mean snipping like this leaving just the salient points?

Now that would make Johnny-boy foam at the mouth……[/I] bow down before me, say and do nothing to displease me, do not question my wisdom since you are not worthy, and NEVER make a spelling mistake in any communication with me and expect me to take you seriously[/I]… Pompous, self important windbag.

I agree this does make following threads easier without having to look up post numbers.

Snafu, keep fighting the good fight (and cheering us up mate ;- )….often I’m dying to write a reply but it’s not always possible because of work but invariably you’ve written a far better reply than I could have managed (and funny at the same time)….live long and prosper!

There have been numerous complaints and warnings from the Mods about the EXCESSIVE use of quotes. In ways that I do not know, it appears to cause problems for the website. Perhaps one of the Mods would oblige.

It is not rocket science.

We try to discourage people who simply press the ‘Reply With Quote’ button as their reflex action.

The default should always be ‘Reply’

The reason is simply to make the discussion thread flow more smoothly.

Most here have sufficient mental capacity to follow the argument through anyway.

There is certainly never a case for quoting a short posting if your answer follows it immediately. That’s just repetition.

If the post you are answering directly above is a long one, it is ok to quote the point you are answering, having deleted the rest. Better though is to structure your answer to include the question.

Quoting the post number is simple, but can lead to confusion if ever we delete a post as it then changes the numbering structure and that number then refers to a different post.

So:

1) Use the ‘reply’ button
2) Use creative solutions to avoid quoting large chunks of material
3) If you use a quote, snip as much of it as you possibly can
4) Never ‘quote’ images if it can possibly be avoided
5) But when referring back to a previous page, then short quotes make sense.

I hope this helps

Moggy
Moderator

This friendly joshing banter is what I always look forward to in GD!:(

Indeed.

Black 180hp RV6, aerobatics approved.

Moggy

Sanity returns!!:D

Re 88

There have been numerous complaints and warnings from the Mods about the EXCESSIVE use of quotes. In ways that I do not know, it appears to cause problems for the website. Perhaps one of the Mods would oblige.

That’s a bit of a mouthful. I’ve never heard of that title: “Any dictionary published in the last thirty years”. Who is the publisher ? I think you invented that.

The correct definition of syntax: “The way in which words are arranged to form phrases and sentences to convey precise meaning”.

There you have it, simple. No connection with computer programming other than in the minds of the semi illiterates who try to blind us with (computer) science.

Are you airborne again

Indeed.

Black 180hp RV6, aerobatics approved.

Moggy

The Work Programme is a ticking boxes exercise…

Maybe, but at £5billion it is a pretty expensive box-ticking exercise…

…and there is a huge difference between cutting costs in the public sector (which usually leads to job cuts) and deliberately keeping people unemployed to ‘save money’…..as you suggested.

Also, don’t assume that I am ignorant of unemployment or the unemployed; I’ve had a fair experience of both.