Sciolus wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 8:30 pm
I dunno when that was filmed, but his mother died just a few days ago. I detest him, but you've got to cut him some slack right now.
Not only that but he's been on TV for hours a day over a period of about ten days and is expected to put no feet wrong in that entire time. Whilst grieving for his mother.
If I had a pen that was leaking everywhere I'd be a bit pissed off too after all that.
Bird on a Fire wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 9:33 am
Seems a bit pointless protesting somebody who's already dead, tbf. Whether or not you care about others' grief.
Might make more sense to protest at the recipient of the undemocratic transition of power, rather than an old lady's corpse.
Who is protesting the queen? I think people are protesting against the excessive coverage / events /spending or just wanting to respond to the non-stop crap that’s getting uttered.
And since it’s the excessive coverage of the death (with no regard to the feelings of people who don’t like it), the disruption to peoples lives from events around it and the wasteful spending of public money on such events that is making people unhappy, waiting to protest the coronation doesn’t make much sense.
Well for instance there's people going to the lying-in-state lines in London, for instance, which is basically a queen-scale funeral. Even if you want to e.g. shout at a famous nonce there's better places to do it than his mum's funeral in front of the rest of his family, I'd say.
For protesting the monarchy in general, there's plenty of other events to choose where you're not treading on people's grief.
Not saying any of these arrests are ok, though.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.
headshot wrote: Mon Sep 12, 2022 3:33 pm
My company had two performances cancelled by the National Trust this weekend. It would have meant about £6k in lost revenue there were to cover costs of about £3.5k. Luckily the Trust have said they will cover our losses. But they made the decision unilaterally. I think it was a bit of a knee jerk reaction…
What would be their contractual basis for that? A 96-year-old woman dying is hardly force majeure.
There wasn’t one. The effectively broke contract and accepted they would have to pay the penalty for that.
Their head office took the decision because Charles is their president.
I'm glad they're covering your losses. Don't really see why everything has to stop myself. Things that usually shut on a bank holiday shutting on the day of the funeral is enough, surely.
MrRaven was double-booked this week, attending a conference in person in Greece & remote-attending a UK one to give a talk. This was going to be a bit tricky. Then an order came down from on high, no UK conference while the nation is in mourning. I was a bit gobsmacked at that. Science grinding to a halt for a week because of all this.
Was in a meeting today with people from the department for transport. Two of them had gone abroad to go to a conference. Whilst they were there an edict came down from on high that under no circumstances was anyone in the DfT to go to any events for work. They had booked flights and hotels so they spent day two just bumming around, not attending the conference they were there for, even though they had nothing else to do and it was all paid for.
Opti wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 9:03 pm
For something that must have been planned a long time ago this is all going quite shonky. A 5 mile slow-moving queue of people to see the lying in state is, I think, likely to see a fair few casualties and maybe a couple of deaths among the many elderly that are certain to be there.
It's a shambles.
Seeing as five miles worth of people want to queue to see the Queen's coffin, I think they're doing as reasonable a job as can be expected tbh. Toilets, first aid, refreshments, wristbands, live updates on queue length, an accessible route with timed entry slots for those who can't queue for so long, and St John's Ambulance and the scouts helping out.
The CEO of Disability Rights UK isn't happy, but unfortunately the article doesn't make it clear what isn't right. Otherwise though, it doesn't seem too bad to me.
shpalman wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 7:02 am
I'm so angry about what you said that I want to punch you. Therefore you should be arrested.
I think the general principle is that if you're in a crowd of people and say something that provokes sombody to punch you, then that person gets arrested. If you say something that provokes hundreds of people to punch you, then you get arrested. And, for completeness, if there are lots of people all punching one another, they all get arrested and it'll be sorted out down at the station.
plodder wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 9:54 am
the point in doing a protest is ultimately that it annoys the people who have the power to change the thing you want changing, and so they change it for you, in order to stop being annoyed all the time.
Not in any case I have heard of. Protest can be just a whinge, possibly intended to annoy, but purposeful protest might be to make people consider an issue, thereby making them support you, or to show support for an issue, thereby making other like-minded people realise that there are enough of them that they can achieve something. But if you annoy people who have the power to change things, you're like Brian Haw who got his form of protest banned. You are extremely unlikely to achieve anything that you want.
shpalman wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 7:02 am
I'm so angry about what you said that I want to punch you. Therefore you should be arrested.
I think the general principle is that if you're in a crowd of people and say something that provokes sombody to punch you, then that person gets arrested. If you say something that provokes hundreds of people to punch you, then you get arrested. And, for completeness, if there are lots of people all punching one another, they all get arrested and it'll be sorted out down at the station.
If taken seriously, this would mean that wearing the wrong football scarf would make you the one that gets arrested.
Just as well I won't take it seriously.
My avatar was a scientific result that was later found to be 'mistaken' - I rarely claim to be 100% correct
ETA 5/8/20: I've been advised that the result was correct, it was the initial interpretation that needed to be withdrawn
Meta? I'd say so!
plodder wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 9:54 am
the point in doing a protest is ultimately that it annoys the people who have the power to change the thing you want changing, and so they change it for you, in order to stop being annoyed all the time.
Not in any case I have heard of. Protest can be just a whinge, possibly intended to annoy, but purposeful protest might be to make people consider an issue, thereby making them support you, or to show support for an issue, thereby making other like-minded people realise that there are enough of them that they can achieve something. But if you annoy people who have the power to change things, you're like Brian Haw who got his form of protest banned. You are extremely unlikely to achieve anything that you want.
people in power will always be annoyed by protest though, that's the point. they don't tend to change things by people writing nice letters or something
"I got a flu virus named after me 'cause I kissed a bat on a dare."
shpalman wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 7:02 am
I'm so angry about what you said that I want to punch you. Therefore you should be arrested.
I think the general principle is that if you're in a crowd of people and say something that provokes sombody to punch you, then that person gets arrested. If you say something that provokes hundreds of people to punch you, then you get arrested. And, for completeness, if there are lots of people all punching one another, they all get arrested and it'll be sorted out down at the station.
If taken seriously, this would mean that wearing the wrong football scarf would make you the one that gets arrested.
Just as well I won't take it seriously.
There are pubs that won't let you in if you're wearing the wrong coloured clothes on match day. My friend moved to Fulham, and couldn't go for a pint in his local after work because he was wearing a blue shirt.
Guess what might happen if you try to assert your right to be in that pub?
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.
“Unfortunately my working hours coincide with the funeral,” wrote one angry respondent. “Is it OK with you if I don’t follow your absolutely ridiculous advice and bike to work? Or would you rather I, as a mark of respect, pollute the air with my car? Maybe I can honk the national anthem on my horn?”
plodder wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 9:54 am
the point in doing a protest is ultimately that it annoys the people who have the power to change the thing you want changing, and so they change it for you, in order to stop being annoyed all the time.
Not in any case I have heard of. Protest can be just a whinge, possibly intended to annoy, but purposeful protest might be to make people consider an issue, thereby making them support you, or to show support for an issue, thereby making other like-minded people realise that there are enough of them that they can achieve something. But if you annoy people who have the power to change things, you're like Brian Haw who got his form of protest banned. You are extremely unlikely to achieve anything that you want.
people in power will always be annoyed by protest though, that's the point. they don't tend to change things by people writing nice letters or something
I dunno. Perhaps if extinction rebellion had written a nice letter to the Queen she would have stopped climate change.
you make an excellent point, jdc. going to go and buy a nice letter writing set and see how I get on with the King. hopefully he won't get too angry at his pen when he signs his reply
"I got a flu virus named after me 'cause I kissed a bat on a dare."
people in power will always be annoyed by protest though, that's the point. they don't tend to change things by people writing nice letters or something
You've hit the nail on the head. Look at climate change. All asking nicely has got us is 40 years of obfuscation, b.llsh.t and lies.
And remember that if you botch the exit, the carnival of reaction may be coming to a town near you.
plodder wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 9:54 am
the point in doing a protest is ultimately that it annoys the people who have the power to change the thing you want changing, and so they change it for you, in order to stop being annoyed all the time.
Not in any case I have heard of.
Not in any case you've heard of? Not one? Not a single waffer thin case? Not even a little bit annoying? For sir? A little? A tiny waffer piece of annoying? Just the one?
plodder wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 9:54 am
the point in doing a protest is ultimately that it annoys the people who have the power to change the thing you want changing, and so they change it for you, in order to stop being annoyed all the time.
Not in any case I have heard of.
Not in any case you've heard of? Not one?
And presumably from this, not in any case you have heard of either - or you'd mention it.
ok suffragettes were annoying. Anti slavery campaigners were annoying. XR are annoying. the temperance league were annoying. Greenpeace are annoying. Jeremy Corbyn is annoying. the unions are annoying, including Mick Lynch when he's interviewed by Piers Morgan. Piers Morgan is annoying. literally everyone successfully affecting change is annoying someone in the process. I hope this is annoying you - it means it's working.
