No, I don't think you are.
Profit
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by P. G. Tipps View PostAh, ahinton, I see you have also now succumbed to the famous 'Grewism' to which you hitherto scornfully referred, but on this particular occasion you have decided that 'we' should not actually include 'you', and all admirably like-minded souls, but that the 'we', in this instance, should now stand instead for "them"?
I think I'm slowly beginning to understand ..
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by ahinton View PostYes - very slowly indeed, as you demonstrate here by your evident omission to notice the inverted commas around the first person plural in what I wrote and which therefore should alone have demonstrated beyond question that I have "succumbed" to no such Grewism and indeed I continue on occasion to refer to such Grewisms scornfully - only you seem in reality to be "slowly beginning to understand" less and less here, as you likewise sadly demonstrate.
Now, whilst we are famously loathe to be unnecessarily pedantic, we cannot but help note the use of double inverted commas when quoting ourselves or others directly.
We would urge ourselves and others to retain the traditional British practice of employing single inverted commas for this purpose and not cravenly 'succumb' to tawdry Americanisms, ahinton ...
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by P. G. Tipps View PostWhen we say 'you' do we, in fact, mean "me", ahinton ... ?
Originally posted by P. G. Tipps View PostNow, whilst we are famously loathe to be unnecessarily pedantic
Originally posted by P. G. Tipps View Postwe cannot but help note the use of double inverted commas when quoting ourselves or others directly.
Originally posted by P. G. Tipps View PostWe would urge ourselves and others
Originally posted by P. G. Tipps View Postto retain the traditional British practice
Originally posted by P. G. Tipps View Postof employing single inverted commas for this purpose and not cravenly 'succumb' to tawdry Americanisms, ahinton ...Last edited by ahinton; 01-04-16, 09:14.
Comment
-
-
Not been following this thread (life's too short) but on various cursory looks there seems to be so much twisting and turning about what various participants 'meant' or 'might have meant' or are 'assumed to mean' that it's little wonder it appears to get nowhere at all
The French expression about a 'dialogue between the deaf and the hard of hearing' comes to mind...."...the isle is full of noises,
Sounds and sweet airs, that give delight and hurt not.
Sometimes a thousand twangling instruments
Will hum about mine ears, and sometime voices..."
Comment
-
-
Richard Tarleton
Didn't it start on the retirement thread with you speculating about cheap haircuts for OAPs, Cali ?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Richard Tarleton View PostDidn't it start on the retirement thread ?
Originally posted by Richard Tarleton View Postyou speculating about cheap haircuts for OAPs, Cali ?
Originally posted by Flosshilde View PostIndeed it did, and I think he should be suitably contrite.
Talk about 'chaos theory' ..."...the isle is full of noises,
Sounds and sweet airs, that give delight and hurt not.
Sometimes a thousand twangling instruments
Will hum about mine ears, and sometime voices..."
Comment
-
-
This thread has taken meandering turns of late, including a diversion re apostophes. Hardly any serious response to my post 114 - which was intended seriously.
Re vested interests and governance, these are really quite serious matters. Do not assume that vested interest is only for profit. Indeed, while making decisions it is in fact important that the views of those with vested interests are taken into account. Those who have no vested interests at all will hardly be affected.
Examples: A developer wants to build a factory and houses on some land - and presumably make a profit. (vested interest)
The nearby residents don't want a factory because of noise and disruption - (also vested interest)
The business owner who wants the factory believes it will improve the operation of his business (vested again).
So, it's not vested interests per se which are the problem, but balancing different ones against each other, if possible.
Transparency and fair handedness are also important for the governance and decision making procedures.
If there are no or hardly any vested interests, then there is no motivation for progress, or little motivation to oppose or support any proposed developments.
Comment
-
Comment