Completely OT- Legal tender

I would just change the charge to one of dangerous driving then.

Those are recommendations as to the minimum size to be used, which does not preclude the use of a larger size. It is also a code of practice and would, therefore, not affect the legality of the speed limit if it were not followed. The only relevance would be that, if the signs were smaller than recommended, it might be possible to mount a defence on the basis that they were not adequately visible.

Colin Bignell

Yes, Clive.

They have some value and therefore could be sold to anyone who doesn't want to pay the proper price. I'm surprised you should think it doesn't happen. They're almost certainly soaking them off during working hours and getting paid for it.

At a previous (public sector variety) job there were some capilliary thermostats (=A330-=A345? each) in a store. On getting one out, I found the copper capilliary tubes had been cut off all of them, presumably for their scrap value (2p-5p?). It happens. You couldn't make it up.

We speak of little else in the public bar at my local. Have you actually assumed that I don't? Do you think anyone is actually impressed that you do?

And I like to have a realistic mental image of the environment. It doesn't particularly worry me, I just don't particularly like some bits of it.

I think local authorities should be providing a service in smoothing the paths for their residents and businesses, and not spending the council tax in trying to penalise them. It happens because councils are directed by councillors; they live in reserves called conservation areas. You/we don't know half of it.

Walk backwards and wear a .45.

I reckon that's bollocks.

No, I didn't assume you didn't - I thought you might, or that you would have the nous to go and look it up. See, I don't assume people are stupid. Since apparently you don't know and don't know how to find out, I'll tell you : it's never ascribe to malice what can be explained by incompetence.

Can you work out why this is relevant to your stamps problem?

clive

I had not noticed the PP's suggestion that terminal signs had to be larger than repeaters, which is of course incorrect. Your points are all valid. My point was simply that the authorities publish their own guide to good practice, and then sometimes ignore it. I think in places this could verge on entrapment. The only excuses for using signs smaller than those recommended, would be a physical inability to place such a sign or if it obscured other information.

And who needs to use all the stamps? Even I, who sends two or three letters a day, couldn't.

Well said.

Mary

No. But I've parked legally in several decades of driving in UK.

Mary

I deliberately didn't snip this, because I couldn't.

The definition of a better job is much more difficult than you imagine.

I had a very technical job, but I volunteered to take a final salary pension at the age of 53. Did I take it? Too true I did.

After 3 years of being more busy that when I had a job, I went through a period of life when I got bored, so I took on a shelf stackers job at my local buy and spew.

This enabled me to lose the weight that I had put on during my retirement and gave me some extra cash to spend on the good things in life. The first purchase was a digital video camera for my wife to bring back something from her visit to Australia. I forget what other things I wasted my money after that, but the important thing was I was a lot fitter and leaner.

I have since left that job and I would like one that puts me outside for a couple of days. If it wasn't for my health, I would jump at the chance to meet the public, even if it meant that I had to put on a uniform and issue parking tickets.

A job is what you want to make it. It can be a dead end one that just gets you out of bed in the morning, or it can take up as many hours of the day that it can, like I did.

Not all jobs are mundane, all have benefits that are not obvious.

Dave

You can't do that after the ticket has been issued. The ticket has to reach you within the designated time limit. After that they are helpless unless they have a witness.

Dsve

I can confirm this. A few years ago, one of my nieces worked for the company that issued parking tickets for Manchester. The company was urging the wardens to issue even more tickets by bending the rules.

My niece took a stand on this and was suspended. However, this back fired on the company as the whole issue was broadcast by Granada TV. If I remember right, the company lost the right to issue tickets in Manchester, though I could be wrong here.

Dave

I agree with you, but that wasn't really my point. Certainly one should try to go for something rather than nothing for the reasons you suggest. However, I don't think that traffic warden needs to be on the list.

Small businesses. There was a scam some years ago in which 'unused' stamps were being sold loose and in bulk. People bought them. The postmark had been washed out somehow but the invisible UV markings showed up on the Royal Mail machines. I think it was this which prompted the change to self-adhesive, shiny stamps.

You mean like ignore what's going on? I like to be aware & beware of what is happening.

I reckon that's bollocks.

You think that, if it pleases you. I reckon not. And the thermostats I mentioned as a more extreme example of similar petty theft? I made that up? No-one would do that?

How very noble of you.

Now you're gone and contradicted yourself by telling me So it seems you thought I was stupid and couldn't possibly be better read than you. You were busting to show that off.

Unfortunately, I did know but would never use the term in civilized company because it's pretensious bollox. Coincidentally, the phrase was used on Arrse (go google) some months ago.

Secondly, it's inappropriate, since I haven't ascribed anything to unthinking incompetence (or stupidity, if you'd got the quote right). I'd ascribed it to petty theft; Heinlein's razor would be more appropriate, if I were given to dropping such pretentious bollocks.

Do you really think something of value would be left in a bin? Read Dave's post; the ones who are unhindered by a working sets of morals have attained management positions. The world is thus.

I sure you're a lovely chap, Clive, and you're really not half as arrogant as your posts make you appear.

Have you worked out the relevance of walking backwards whilst wearing a

Although annoying, the long-term implications for society are less worrying if people so inclined aim for a career in traffic wardening rather than, say, Reichschancellor.

Owain

Um, no. I was trying to explain something. You seemed to be saying you didn't know what it meant, so I thought for the purposes of clarity I'd write it down.

Um, no. It's an entirely sensible thing to say. It very accurately describes what I was saying.

And?

Exactly - that's entirely why it's appropriate, and why I've not dropped it. You're ascribing things to malice, I'm ascribing them to incompetence. (btw, it's not a simple quote - it's been said in many forms over the years). Ie you've got it completely the wrong way round.

See, I describe petty theft as malice.

Once again, it's not pretentious bollocks, it's a good way of conveying an idea. Are you some kind of intellectual reverse snob, glorifying in ignorance? "Heinlein's razor" is simply another name for the same thing - and if you check, you'll see that "Hanlon's" is the more common name. You apparently don't know that much about what you write.

Yes. That's incredibly common. People chuck away many many things of far greater value than stamps.

Not necessarily.

I'm sure you're a lovely chap, and not a paranoid fool as your posts make you appear.

Go on...

clive

You do and in doing so you're wrong. Malice is a desire to do injury or harm. If someone hits you because they dislike you, that's malice, they want to hurt you. If they nick your wallet, it's theft but not malicious. They have no particular desire to hurt you, they just want your stuff.

again, it's not pretentious bollocks, it's a good way of conveying an

No; Heinlein's (a real person) version was " Do not ascribe to villainy......."

I don't think 'they' are out to get me, they're out to get anyone they can. It's not paranoia, it's horrible reality.

I disagree. Stealing the stamps off SAEs is a deliberate act, intended for financial gain. Villany is another way of saying it. Losing them isn't deliberate, it's incompetence. This is exactly the sort of thing Hanlon's razor is about.

Yes, Heinlein was a real person. Yes, his quote was in those terms. What you've missed is that he wasn't the only person to say such a thing - what I wrote was expressing exactly the same sentiment. I did suggest that you check, but you have apparently failed to do so.

Giggle. I don't find the need for such paranoia, but never mind.

You didn't explain your backwards thing btw...

clive

On Jan 18, 8:09 pm, "Clive George" wrote: Yes, Heinlein was a real person. Yes, his quote was in those terms. What

I knew of Hanlon's version which refers to stupidity; heinlein's to villainy. You assumed the stamps were binned through incompetence (Hanlon's), I assumed they were stolen (villainy, so Heinlein). You'll find it explained in Wikipedia.

Giggle. I don't find the need for such paranoia, but never mind.

If I were paranoid, I would think they gave ME a PCN & stole MY stamps because they were being malicious towards ME. I've never thought that, I think they're just low life thieves. There's a lot of it about.

You mean

Hanlon : "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity" Heinlein : "You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity"

I'm saying exactly what Heinlein says : that you're attributing something to villany which simply results from stupidity (aka incompetence).

Can you explain why you think Heinlein said exactly the opposite of what he did say?

clive