|
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 15:18:28 -0800, Aurora wrote:
On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 13:16:03 -0600, wrote: In article , (Graeme Wall) wrote: On 07/12/2013 11:31, Someone Somewhere wrote: On 07/12/2013 10:59, Graeme Wall wrote: On 07/12/2013 10:46, d wrote: Well there is that. But the jubilee, bakerloo, victoria & W&C are just there and back lines They aren't completely. Not all trains go all the way every trip and the H&C has to dovetail into the Met, District and Circle lines. Last time I checked the W&C and the H&C were different beasties. So they are but then pausing at intermediate stops doesn't happen on the W&C. A pity really. It could do with a station at Blackfriars. A station at Blackfriars, and a short extension to Liverpool Street, would make the Waterloo and City into a very useful line. It isn't going to happen, the line isn't deep enough and there's consequently too much in the way. The line also leaks like a sieve. You're possibly more likely to have abandonment consequent to new work providing a better parallel replacement (but certainly not this week). In its present form it is something of an orphan. |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
On 04/12/2013 22:34, Richard J. wrote:
Recliner wrote on 04 December 2013 20:27:55 ... John Levine wrote: They won't have less than one member of staff on a train, so no savings there. Hmmn. What does the Paris Metro know that TfL doesn't? How to build tunnels with walkways? I think only line 14 in Paris has walkways, but generally all Paris Métro tunnels are double-track, except for a few short lenths of single-track tunnel. This means that it's easy to gain access to a failed train by ladders/steps from the adjacent track, or by driving a train on that track, stopping opposite the failed train, and using boards to bridge the gap between the trains. The Lille Metro also has walkways. I was on a train there that broke down, and somebody came along after about 5 minutes, having gained access to the train between the walkways. |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
On 06/12/2013 08:49, Giovanni Drogo wrote:
On Thu, 5 Dec 2013, wrote: Mentioning Milan isn't it one of the very few places where at least one line was electrified on a four rail system like London?don't know if it still is or has been changed. Correct. M1 (1964) is still like that. There should be a part of M1 with overhead wire (I really do not usually look up) because originally M2 trains were hosted in the same depot used by M1 (between Precotto and Villa SG), so they had to run Precotto to Pasteur and then through a connecting tunnel to Caiazzo on M2 (now M2 has its own depot). M2 (1969) did not use the four rail system, because a part of it runs in open air, and I believe it is forbidden for safety reasons. Bucharest Metro trains are also fitted with a pantograph, though they only use them in depots. |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
On Sun, 08 Dec 2013 16:27:19 -0800
Aurora wrote: On Sun, 08 Dec 2013 19:49:00 GMT, d wrote: Looks like a connection to the central line is just waiting to happen. They even use the same trains! Making the WandC a branch of the Central would reduce the number of trains available on the Central Line west of Bank. A connection might make sence in order to allow WandC trains to reach a depot. But, it is probably too expensive a solution. Well, I was being a bit tongue in cheek. But I suspect if the line had been run by the underground since its inception rather than BR until the 90s then probably a single line connection would have been built by now to transfer stock instead of having the faff of craning them in and out when any heavy overhauls are required. -- Spud |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
On Mon, 9 Dec 2013 08:08:19 +0000
Roland Perry wrote: aiui the trains are no longer interoperable, even if once upon a time they were delivered from the same production line. What are the major differences now (other than the interior decor)? -- Spud |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
On 09/12/2013 10:18, d wrote:
On Sun, 08 Dec 2013 16:27:19 -0800 Aurora wrote: On Sun, 08 Dec 2013 19:49:00 GMT, d wrote: Looks like a connection to the central line is just waiting to happen. They even use the same trains! Making the WandC a branch of the Central would reduce the number of trains available on the Central Line west of Bank. A connection might make sence in order to allow WandC trains to reach a depot. But, it is probably too expensive a solution. Well, I was being a bit tongue in cheek. But I suspect if the line had been run by the underground since its inception rather than BR until the 90s then Well it was operated by the LSWR & later the Southern Railway from it's inception in 1898 until BR took it over in 1948. Its only purpose was to allow commuters from the LSWR lines easy access to the city, a function it still performs. The connection at Bank to the DLR is probably more use to its regular users than access to Liverpool St. probably a single line connection would have been built by now to transfer stock instead of having the faff of craning them in and out when any heavy overhauls are required. There were LPTB proposals in the 1930s to extend it to Liverpool St and on to Shoreditch to connect to the East London Line. Though no detailed work appears to have been done, it seems that it would have involved new tunnels to Liverpool St paralleling the Central Line. It was also proposed to add an interchange station with the District Line at Blackfriars. A post war suggestion was to extend the shortly to be electrified LTS line via the W&C to Waterloo (Route G). -- Graeme Wall This account not read, substitute trains for rail. Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
|
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
In message , at 10:19:12 on Mon, 9 Dec
2013, d remarked: aiui the trains are no longer interoperable, even if once upon a time they were delivered from the same production line. What are the major differences now (other than the interior decor)? aiui, Central has a degree of automatic operation, and a higher 4th rail. -- Roland Perry |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
Spud wrote
Well, I was being a bit tongue in cheek. But I suspect if the line had been run by the underground since its inception rather than BR until the 90s then probably a single line connection would have been built by now to transfer stock instead of having the faff of craning them in and out when any heavy overhauls are required. Until the 1990s, when the site was required for building Waterloo International, access to the W&C was via a hoist in Waterloo Yard. W&C stock could be brought to the surface using the hoist, and AIUI worked under its own power to Wimbledon Depot for overhaul. The W&C originally had its own power station, and coal trucks used the hoist to provide power. In 1948 the lift descended while some trucks were being shunted on to it, and 4 coal trucks and a loco landed at the bottom of the shaft. Peter |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
On Mon, 9 Dec 2013 13:29:41 -0000
"Peter Masson" wrote: Until the 1990s, when the site was required for building Waterloo International, access to the W&C was via a hoist in Waterloo Yard. W&C stock could be brought to the surface using the hoist, and AIUI worked under its own power to Wimbledon Depot for overhaul. The W&C originally had its own power station, and coal trucks used the hoist to provide power. In 1948 the lift descended while some trucks were being shunted on to it, and 4 coal trucks and a loco landed at the bottom of the shaft. Did they have a coal fired boiler underground?? If not why would they send coal trucks and a loco down there? -- Spud |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
|
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
On 10/12/2013 15:04, wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:02:57 +0000, Graeme Wall wrote: On 10/12/2013 09:28, d wrote: access to the W&C was via a hoist in Waterloo Yard. W&C stock could be brought to the surface using the hoist, and AIUI worked under its own power to Wimbledon Depot for overhaul. The W&C originally had its own power station, and coal trucks used the hoist to provide power. In 1948 the lift descended while some trucks were being shunted on to it, and 4 coal trucks and a loco landed at the bottom of the shaft. Did they have a coal fired boiler underground?? Yes If not why would they send coal trucks and a loco down there? The loco wasn't supposed to go down. The steam ones weren't. Reverting to the original, wasn't it an M7 that did the diving act? -- Graeme Wall This account not read, substitute trains for rail. Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
On 10/12/2013 16:23, wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 15:14:05 +0000, Graeme Wall wrote: On 10/12/2013 15:04, wrote: On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:02:57 +0000, Graeme Wall wrote: On 10/12/2013 09:28, d wrote: access to the W&C was via a hoist in Waterloo Yard. W&C stock could be brought to the surface using the hoist, and AIUI worked under its own power to Wimbledon Depot for overhaul. The W&C originally had its own power station, and coal trucks used the hoist to provide power. In 1948 the lift descended while some trucks were being shunted on to it, and 4 coal trucks and a loco landed at the bottom of the shaft. Did they have a coal fired boiler underground?? Yes If not why would they send coal trucks and a loco down there? The loco wasn't supposed to go down. The steam ones weren't. Reverting to the original, wasn't it an M7 that did the diving act? I believe it was , cutting up on site was the most practical means of removing it. I wonder how the crew got on? being trapped in a lift pit with steam and smoke everywhere doesn't sound a nice place to be. Especially having been bounced around the cab on the way down! -- Graeme Wall This account not read, substitute trains for rail. Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
|
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote: In message , at 10:19:12 on Mon, 9 Dec 2013, d remarked: aiui the trains are no longer interoperable, even if once upon a time they were delivered from the same production line. What are the major differences now (other than the interior decor)? aiui, Central has a degree of automatic operation, and a higher 4th rail. Depends which you think is the fourth rail. The outside (positive) rail is the higher one and that is commonly the third. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
|
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:56:36 -0600 wrote: In article , (Peter Masson) wrote: Spud wrote Well, I was being a bit tongue in cheek. But I suspect if the line had been run by the underground since its inception rather than BR until the 90s then probably a single line connection would have been built by now to transfer stock instead of having the faff of craning them in and out when any heavy overhauls are required. Until the 1990s, when the site was required for building Waterloo International, access to the W&C was via a hoist in Waterloo Yard. W&C stock could be brought to the surface using the hoist, and AIUI worked under its own power to Wimbledon Depot for overhaul. The W&C originally had its own power station, and coal trucks used the hoist to provide power. In 1948 the lift descended while some trucks were being shunted on to it, and 4 coal trucks and a loco landed at the bottom of the shaft. Cars had to have their coupling hoses removed to use the hoist because it was a bit short. Why arn't I surprised. Everything in this country has to be just that bit too small whether its houses, trains or roads. It must be something in the subconcious. Including your school English lessons, too? |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
G Harman wrote
I believe it was , cutting up on site was the most practical means of removing it. I wonder how the crew got on? being trapped in a lift pit with steam and smoke everywhere doesn't sound a nice place to be. The driver and fireman managed to jump out before the loco followed the trucks into the lift shaft - very fortunately, as the loco ended up upside down on top of the wrecked trucks. Peter |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
On 10/12/2013 16:38, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 10/12/2013 16:23, wrote: On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 15:14:05 +0000, Graeme Wall wrote: On 10/12/2013 15:04, wrote: On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:02:57 +0000, Graeme Wall wrote: On 10/12/2013 09:28, d wrote: access to the W&C was via a hoist in Waterloo Yard. W&C stock could be brought to the surface using the hoist, and AIUI worked under its own power to Wimbledon Depot for overhaul. The W&C originally had its own power station, and coal trucks used the hoist to provide power. In 1948 the lift descended while some trucks were being shunted on to it, and 4 coal trucks and a loco landed at the bottom of the shaft. Did they have a coal fired boiler underground?? Yes If not why would they send coal trucks and a loco down there? The loco wasn't supposed to go down. The steam ones weren't. Reverting to the original, wasn't it an M7 that did the diving act? I believe it was , cutting up on site was the most practical means of removing it. I wonder how the crew got on? being trapped in a lift pit with steam and smoke everywhere doesn't sound a nice place to be. Especially having been bounced around the cab on the way down! I believe they were able to jump off in time. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
On 10/12/2013 17:55, Peter Masson wrote:
G Harman wrote I believe it was , cutting up on site was the most practical means of removing it. I wonder how the crew got on? being trapped in a lift pit with steam and smoke everywhere doesn't sound a nice place to be. The driver and fireman managed to jump out before the loco followed the trucks into the lift shaft - very fortunately, as the loco ended up upside down on top of the wrecked trucks. Thanks, a quick google didn't bring up anything about their fate. -- Graeme Wall This account not read, substitute trains for rail. Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 11:33:11 -0600
Recliner wrote: wrote: On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:56:36 -0600 wrote: In article , (Peter Masson) wrote: Spud wrote Well, I was being a bit tongue in cheek. But I suspect if the line had been run by the underground since its inception rather than BR until the 90s then probably a single line connection would have been built by now to transfer stock instead of having the faff of craning them in and out when any heavy overhauls are required. Until the 1990s, when the site was required for building Waterloo International, access to the W&C was via a hoist in Waterloo Yard. W&C stock could be brought to the surface using the hoist, and AIUI worked under its own power to Wimbledon Depot for overhaul. The W&C originally had its own power station, and coal trucks used the hoist to provide power. In 1948 the lift descended while some trucks were being shunted on to it, and 4 coal trucks and a loco landed at the bottom of the shaft. Cars had to have their coupling hoses removed to use the hoist because it was a bit short. Why arn't I surprised. Everything in this country has to be just that bit too small whether its houses, trains or roads. It must be something in the subconcious. Including your school English lessons, too? English lessons were for the idiots who couldn't handle science and maths. But feel free to point out any grammatical errors. -- Spud |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
|
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 21:15:21 +0000
August West wrote: The entity calling itself d wrote: On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 11:33:11 -0600 Recliner wrote: wrote: Cars had to have their coupling hoses removed to use the hoist because it was a bit short. Why arn't I surprised. Everything in this country has to be just that bit ^^^^^ too small whether its houses, trains or roads. It must be something in the ^^^ subconcious. ^^^^^^^^^^^ Those arn't grammatical errors, they're spelling mistakes. Apparently you don't know the difference between spelling and grammer. Perhaps you should take remedial English lessons yourself? -- Spud |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
Peter Masson wrote
G Harman wrote I believe it was , cutting up on site was the most practical means of removing it. I wonder how the crew got on? being trapped in a lift pit with steam and smoke everywhere doesn't sound a nice place to be. The driver and fireman managed to jump out before the loco followed the trucks into the lift shaft - very fortunately, as the loco ended up upside down on top of the wrecked trucks. The end of the Star report reads: Said Engine-driver Wheeler as he went off duty after the crash: "I had just stopped the engine after backing the trucks on to the lift. It seemed no time at all before we started to slide back. I gave a yell and jumped for it." Fireman Sutton, also going off duty, said: "It was the first time I had done this particular job. I was on the engine platform when I felt it moving back. I guessed something was wrong at once and jumped off as the engine skidded back." The Evening News has: The driver and fireman, seeing the trucks start slipping, leapt off the footplate just before the engine fell. and the Evening Standard has Fireman A. W. Sutton and Driver A. Wheeler jumped clear before the engine followed the trucks. All three papers have a picture of the engine lying wheels up at the bottom of the shaft (which doesn't look so deep when it's full of locomotive); the Evening Standard also got a picture of the top of the shaft. Either the Evening News got to the scene before the others or someone in their art department drew in some clouds of steam... (all courtesy of an envelope of apparently random cuttings left by my father) |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 21:15:21 +0000 August West wrote: The entity calling itself d wrote: On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 11:33:11 -0600 Recliner wrote: wrote: Cars had to have their coupling hoses removed to use the hoist because it was a bit short. Why arn't I surprised. Everything in this country has to be just that bit ^^^^^ too small whether its houses, trains or roads. It must be something in the ^^^ subconcious. ^^^^^^^^^^^ Those arn't grammatical errors, they're spelling mistakes. Apparently you don't know the difference between spelling and grammer. Perhaps you should take remedial English lessons yourself? Apostrophe errors are grammar, not spelling. |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
On Wed, 11 Dec 2013 12:45:20 -0600
Recliner wrote: wrote: On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 21:15:21 +0000 August West wrote: The entity calling itself d wrote: On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 11:33:11 -0600 Recliner wrote: wrote: Cars had to have their coupling hoses removed to use the hoist because it was a bit short. Why arn't I surprised. Everything in this country has to be just that bit ^^^^^ too small whether its houses, trains or roads. It must be something in the ^^^ subconcious. ^^^^^^^^^^^ Those arn't grammatical errors, they're spelling mistakes. Apparently you don't know the difference between spelling and grammer. Perhaps you should take remedial English lessons yourself? Apostrophe errors are grammar, not spelling. Nope. Missing it out in a contraction is a spelling mistake, not grammar since the grammar doesn't change without it as there is no version of "it's" without an apostrophe. Even there was , you still goofed on 2 out of 3. Back to school for the pair of you. -- Spud |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
On 2013-12-11, d
wrote: On Wed, 11 Dec 2013 12:45:20 -0600 Recliner wrote: wrote: On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 21:15:21 +0000 August West wrote: The entity calling itself d wrote: On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 11:33:11 -0600 Recliner wrote: wrote: Cars had to have their coupling hoses removed to use the hoist because it was a bit short. Why arn't I surprised. Everything in this country has to be just that ^^^^^ bit too small whether its houses, trains or roads. It must be something ^^^ in the subconcious. ^^^^^^^^^^^ Those arn't grammatical errors, they're spelling mistakes. Apparently you don't know the difference between spelling and grammer. Perhaps you should take remedial English lessons yourself? Apostrophe errors are grammar, not spelling. Nope. Missing it out in a contraction is a spelling mistake, not grammar since the grammar doesn't change without it as there is no version of "it's" without an apostrophe. Even there was , you still goofed on 2 out of 3. Back to school for the pair of you. A nice illustration of the depth of your ignorance. "it's" with an apostrophe is always and without exception a shortened "it is". "its" without an apostrophe is a possessive pronoun, like his and her, as in "the dog retreated to its kennel". Apostrophes are used for contractions like "it's" and "you're" and "can't". Apostrophes are also used for the possessive form of nouns like "the cat's whiskers" and "the dog's breakfast" and "the dogs' breakfasts" (and moves depending whether the owning noun is singular or plural and whether the plural does or does not end in "s"). Apostrophes are not correct in non-possessive plurals, though using them there is now a very common mistake. Also, Even there was , ^ ^ are not spelling mistakes, Whether they are grammar errors or not might be debatable, but they are definitely errors. Eric -- ms fnd in a lbry |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
wrote:
there is no version of "it's" without an apostrophe. Oh dear, your English lessons really were truncated. As a matter of interest, is English actually your first language? |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
On Wed, 11 Dec 2013 14:18:41 -0600
Recliner wrote: wrote: there is no version of "it's" without an apostrophe. Oh dear, your English lessons really were truncated. As a matter of interest, is English actually your first language? *shrug* There were more interesting and useful things to spend time learning in school than some **** poor plays by a dead 16th century playwrite. I gave up english as soon as I could. And if there are an errors in the above I don't give a flying **** not that you can tell the difference between spelling and grammar anyway. -- Spud |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2013 14:18:41 -0600 Recliner wrote: wrote: there is no version of "it's" without an apostrophe. Oh dear, your English lessons really were truncated. As a matter of interest, is English actually your first language? *shrug* There were more interesting and useful things to spend time learning in school than some **** poor plays by a dead 16th century playwrite. I gave up english as soon as I could. And if there are an errors in the above I don't give a flying **** not that you can tell the difference between spelling and grammar anyway. Perhaps your career didn't involve written communication with others? Maybe something like busking, assuming you sing better than you write? If not, your lack of written credibility would surely have impeded it. And your frequent complaints about the competence of everybody around you are a little ironic, given your own lack of competence in making those complaints. Many of the people who post here have an engineering background, but are still capable of writing grammatical prose. You don't need have to have studied English literature in order to be able to use basic English grammar. |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
|
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 03:45:22 -0600
Recliner wrote: Many of the people who post here have an engineering background, but are still capable of writing grammatical prose. You don't need have to have studied English literature in order to be able to use basic English grammar. Most people on here can do better than the repost of last resort which is to point out typos. Thats the refuge for people like you who are desperate to post something to get noticed but don't actually have anything to say. -- Spud |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 09:46:33 +0000
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 09:29:19 on Thu, 12 Dec 2013, remarked: There were more interesting and useful things to spend time learning in school than some **** poor plays by a dead 16th century playwrite. That's English Literature, a completely different subject. Its called studying the english language and its all rolled into one at mosts schools. -- Spud |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
wrote:
On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 03:45:22 -0600 Recliner wrote: Many of the people who post here have an engineering background, but are still capable of writing grammatical prose. You don't need have to have studied English literature in order to be able to use basic English grammar. Most people on here can do better than the repost of last resort which is to point out typos. Thats the refuge for people like you who are desperate to post something to get noticed but don't actually have anything to say. We all make typos, but your mistakes are consistent and widespread. They're a sign of ignorance, not clumsy fingers. They're so persistent that they get in the way of reading your posts. It's like noisy static on top of a radio broadcast. I don't even know what a "repost of last resort" means. But I do know that I'd never have considered a CV or application form that was written as badly as every one of your posts. |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 10:27:20 GMT, d wrote:
On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 09:46:33 +0000 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 09:29:19 on Thu, 12 Dec 2013, remarked: There were more interesting and useful things to spend time learning in school than some **** poor plays by a dead 16th century playwrite. That's English Literature, a completely different subject. Its called studying the english language and its all rolled into one at mosts schools. Three errors in just one sentence (not including failing to capitalise English) -- that's good, even by your standards! That's also ignoring the basic error that English language and literature remain separate GCSE subjects. see https://www.gov.uk/government/public...re-new-content BTW, I don't know what a "playwrite" is, but if you were referring to Shakespeare, I doubt that anyone would regard his plays as the best way to learn modern English spelling and grammar. I share your aversion to his plays, but that's got nothing to do with being able to communicate adequately in the modern world. Would *you* want a fast computer with no I/O functioning devices? You're the analogue equivalent. |
Quote:
not make his posts unintelligible. I have never had any difficulty understanding him, either now or in his previous Boltar incarnation. If Internet fora were confined to those who have mastered syntax, spelling and grammar, there would be little point to them. |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 04:37:29 -0600
Recliner wrote: wrote: On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 03:45:22 -0600 Recliner wrote: Many of the people who post here have an engineering background, but are still capable of writing grammatical prose. You don't need have to have studied English literature in order to be able to use basic English grammar. Most people on here can do better than the repost of last resort which is to point out typos. Thats the refuge for people like you who are desperate to post something to get noticed but don't actually have anything to say. We all make typos, but your mistakes are consistent and widespread. They're a sign of ignorance, not clumsy fingers. They're so persistent that they Oh very good. 10/10 for effort, but you're still commenting about typos regardless of what spin you put on it. Like I said , its the last resort tangential topic for people who have nothing to add and that certainly sums up you pretty much all of the time. get in the way of reading your posts. It's like noisy static on top of a radio broadcast. I don't even know what a "repost of last resort" means. Oh I'm sorry - riposte. My spelling mistake - and I'll admit I'm not good at spelling - but your inability to engage brain and figure it out is rather telling. But I do know that I'd never have considered a CV or application form that was written as badly as every one of your posts. I'm surprised you need CVs for toilet cleaners. |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 11:41:21 +0000
Recliner wrote: On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 10:27:20 GMT, d wrote: aversion to his plays, but that's got nothing to do with being able to communicate adequately in the modern world. Would *you* want a fast computer with no I/O functioning devices? You're the analogue equivalent. You remind me of plenty of snotty arts types who carry a superior air about their person because they know lots of multi syllabic big words and can quote famous authors or fire off snappy soundbites thought up by someone else, yet as soon as any topic of a mathematical or scientific bent is broached - ie something that requires them to actually THINK rather than just remember like a witless parrot - they just sit there open mouthed unable to comprehend, like the dribbling imbeciles they are. -- Spud |
Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:29:19 on Thu, 12 Dec 2013, remarked: There were more interesting and useful things to spend time learning in school than some **** poor plays by a dead 16th century playwrite. That's English Literature, a completely different subject. In my day (late 90s), Shakespeare was compulsory in both English Language and Literature. Helpfully that meant with a well chosen title, you could submit the same essay as coursework for both subjects. Peter Smyth |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 07:56 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk