Forum Home
Press F1
Thread ID: 40511	2003-12-10 00:03:00	OT: Thanks B B	Murray P (44)	Press F1

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
198984	2003-12-10 00:03:00	Thanks Bruce. A timely padlock. I'd just hit the post button and.... "Sorry, this thread is closed. Your reply cannot be posted." saved from ignominy by a few seconds. You weren't reading over my shoulder were you? One of my more inflammatory missives to date but sans BAD language. I did copy but will not paste :D Cheers Murray P	Murray P (44)
198985	2003-12-10 00:23:00	Again thanks Bruce. As the instigator of that thread I watched in alarm as started to go sour but was unsure on how to kill it. Apologies to those offended.	Scouse (83)
198986	2003-12-10 02:28:00	Actually I too missed out on a salient post. Perhaps this is my chance. Anyway agreed with Billy. I was watching the television 6:00 news with my 10, 8, and 6 year old children when the report of this tragic event was aired. Fortunately the two older ones seemed not to notice but the 6 year old was deeply puzzled. I explained it was about a sick man and she didn't need to worry about it happening. I despair. Should some news be with-held to later in the evening?	Winston001 (3612)
198987	2003-12-10 03:25:00	By doing that you open up a can of (censorship) worms, but there is a rule about what can be broadcast before 2030 - perhaps a complaint to the BSA?????	Chris Randal (521)
198988	2003-12-10 03:38:00	once again a thread that shows the need for moderators.... where are we with that plane to rope in godfather and others ?	robsonde (120)
198989	2003-12-10 03:59:00	Got to work out some technicalities.	Biggles (121)
198990	2003-12-10 04:17:00	> Got to work out some technicalities. Hmm. Could just imagine IDG emailing an order to their friendly supplier for a truck load of batteries for a certain Kodak CX4230 digital camera :D Cheers Murray ;P	Murray P (44)
198991	2003-12-10 05:03:00	I don't believe that thread needed a moderator at all, least of all by someone who is a regular poster on Press f1. who may have their own prejudice against a topic or person. It was only vaguely referring to something that was in the newspapers and on all the TV news and although off topic was no more so than many others. Anyone who is reading this forum has the ability to access far worse and the present attitude in the community to protect children from personal harm by wrapping them in cotton wool and stopping them from doing anything at all incase they break a bone or bruise themselves is starting to be reflected in this forum. It was only the over reaction from Billy T from an innocent comment by Thomas which turned the thread sour. I suggest everyone stop being so precious and take it on the chin if it comes your way in this forum, after all life is not all roses and hugs and kisses and I would like this forum to continue to reflect the real world.	Jim B (153)
198992	2003-12-10 05:36:00	:_| AAWWwwll Jim! Do you mean I've been missing out on roses :_|. This is serious, I'm calling a family conference. Sniff sniff Murray ;P PS. Jim, I do agree with you regards not allowing our kids to live life and take some knocks but some things don't need to be encouraged any more than they need to be locked away. It's always a fine line and that's life too.	Murray P (44)
198993	2003-12-10 05:49:00	Ooooooeerrrrrr! Now Jim has scared me. We wimps are very sensitive. But seriously folks. I accept that for my own part, I may have over-reacted. It was probably the discomforting memory of explaining to a six year old. I agree with Jim that we over-protect our children but I cannot persuade my wife of that. There are a lot of dangers in the world, mostly physical (cars), but sometimes people. The phrase "age appropriate" makes me reach for a bucket but I acknowledge that there is behaviour and knowledge which should not be openly available to every agegroup. I do not like censorship but it has it's place.	Winston001 (3612)
1 2