The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 09/11/2022 19:04, D.J. wrote:
>> On Wed, 09 Nov 2022 18:07:30 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>> wrote:
>>> D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 09:57:34 -0600, Charles Richmond
>>>> <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think you will find that the people who own FOX tv, also own many of
>>>>> the influential gossip "newspapers"in Britain... so their philosophies
>>>>> come through those papers as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> Charles Richmond
>>>>
>>>> Yup, and the owner of Fox lives in England.
>>>
>>> Does he? He was born in Australia and is a naturalized US
>>> citizen.
>>>
>>> (Note that I'm not defending him, his family, or Faux in any way).
>>
>> Last time I saw him on telly, it was on the BBC America and they
>> mentioned him and his kids were arguing on who would take over after
>> he died. And it looked to me like they were in London, England.
>> --
>> Jim
> Kids are British. He aint.
>
> He only has the Times and the Sun left in the UK, and he ruined both.
> Had to sell the rest after various scandals. Still owns Sky I think. But
> that's on the wane as the Internet takes over from terrestrial and
> satellite transmissions.
>
>
> All mass media is compltely pwned by various consortia of commercial and
> political interests. Many papers are nothing but cut and pasted press
> releases. Some include material cut an pasted from mere general
> newsfeeds like Reuters or Bloomberg.

That’s what those services are for, like AP or the lamented UPI. Looking
thru old newspapers shows that this was common since the invention of the
telegraph. You find occasional articles about a huge flood in China or
whatever buried on a back page, possibly as filler.

>
> But its all crap. If you want facts you cant rely on any of it.
>
>

--
Pete

The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 09/11/2022 19:26, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>> On Wed, 09 Nov 2022 18:07:30 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>>> wrote:
>>>> D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>>>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 09:57:34 -0600, Charles Richmond
>>>>> <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think you will find that the people who own FOX tv, also own many of
>>>>>> the influential gossip "newspapers"in Britain... so their philosophies
>>>>>> come through those papers as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Charles Richmond
>>>>>
>>>>> Yup, and the owner of Fox lives in England.
>>>>
>>>> Does he? He was born in Australia and is a naturalized US
>>>> citizen.
>>>>
>>>> (Note that I'm not defending him, his family, or Faux in any way).
>>>
>>> Last time I saw him on telly, it was on the BBC America and they
>>> mentioned him and his kids were arguing on who would take over after
>>> he died. And it looked to me like they were in London, England.
>>
>> On a visit, no doubt. Rupert lives in oz.
>
> I thought to check.
>
> "In 2003, Murdoch bought "Rosehearty", an 11 bedroom home on a 5-acre
> waterfront estate in Centre Island, New York. In May 2013, he purchased
> the Moraga Estate, an estate, vineyard and winery in Bel Air, Los
> Angeles, California. In 2019, Murdoch and his new wife Jerry Hall
> purchased Holmwood, an 18th-century house and estate in the English
> village of Binfield Heath, some 4 miles (6.4 km) north-east of Reading.
>
> In late 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, it was reported that Murdoch
> and Hall had been isolating in their Binfield Heath home for much of the
> year. He received his first COVID-19 vaccine in nearby Henley-on-Thames
> on 16 December."
>
> So it looks like he is UK or USA based these days
>
>

Really rich people can’t be said to “live” anywhere. Jokes about
earth-filled coffins aside, they flit around as the mood strikes them.

--
Pete

On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 10:34:13 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>On 09/11/2022 19:26, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>> On Wed, 09 Nov 2022 18:07:30 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>>> wrote:
>>>> D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>>>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 09:57:34 -0600, Charles Richmond
>>>>> <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think you will find that the people who own FOX tv, also own many of
>>>>>> the influential gossip "newspapers"in Britain... so their philosophies
>>>>>> come through those papers as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Charles Richmond
>>>>>
>>>>> Yup, and the owner of Fox lives in England.
>>>>
>>>> Does he? He was born in Australia and is a naturalized US
>>>> citizen.
>>>>
>>>> (Note that I'm not defending him, his family, or Faux in any way).
>>>
>>> Last time I saw him on telly, it was on the BBC America and they
>>> mentioned him and his kids were arguing on who would take over after
>>> he died. And it looked to me like they were in London, England.
>>
>> On a visit, no doubt. Rupert lives in oz.
>
>I thought to check.
>
>"In 2003, Murdoch bought "Rosehearty", an 11 bedroom home on a 5-acre
>waterfront estate in Centre Island, New York. In May 2013, he purchased
>the Moraga Estate, an estate, vineyard and winery in Bel Air, Los
>Angeles, California. In 2019, Murdoch and his new wife Jerry Hall
>purchased Holmwood, an 18th-century house and estate in the English
>village of Binfield Heath, some 4 miles (6.4 km) north-east of Reading.
>
>In late 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, it was reported that Murdoch
>and Hall had been isolating in their Binfield Heath home for much of the
>year. He received his first COVID-19 vaccine in nearby Henley-on-Thames
>on 16 December."
>
>So it looks like he is UK or USA based these days

Interesting he got the vaccine, while his Fox employees tell people to
not get it.
--
Jim

On 2022-11-10, D.J <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 10:34:13 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> In late 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, it was reported that Murdoch
>> and Hall had been isolating in their Binfield Heath home for much of the
>> year. He received his first COVID-19 vaccine in nearby Henley-on-Thames
>> on 16 December."
>>
>> So it looks like he is UK or USA based these days
>
> Interesting he got the vaccine, while his Fox employees tell people to
> not get it.

"Do as I say, not as I do."

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

On 2022-11-10, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 2022-11-09, Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
>>>
>>>> Some people just aren't happy unless they're unhappy.
>>>
>>> So that’s why you get upset at “they” with singular referent...?
>>
>> No, I'm just irritated by woke-speak. I'm not against a language
>> evolving - but I'm careful to point out the difference between
>> evolution and decay. What we really need is a new pronoun to
>> meet a newly-recognized requirement. This will extend English,
>> rather than increasing ambiguity (as if it isn't bad enough already).
>
> When I hear “they” I always think of someone like the woman with several
> personalities. I wonder how well “they” get along with each other.

I think that typically only one personality is active at a time.
Still, that wouldn't stop one personality from trying to undo the
actions of another personality. Sort of like political parties...

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

On 10/11/2022 13:40, Peter Flass wrote:
> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2022-11-09, Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
>>>
>>>> Some people just aren't happy unless they're unhappy.
>>>
>>> So that’s why you get upset at “they” with singular referent...?
>>
>> No, I'm just irritated by woke-speak. I'm not against a language
>> evolving - but I'm careful to point out the difference between
>> evolution and decay. What we really need is a new pronoun to
>> meet a newly-recognized requirement. This will extend English,
>> rather than increasing ambiguity (as if it isn't bad enough already).
>>
>
> When I hear “they” I always think of someone like the woman with several
> personalities. I wonder how well “they” get along with each other.
>
It was much simpler before feminisation. human beings were in general
men unless they had tits and a vagina, and this was in the context
vaguely relevant.

Like everything else, it's all become pointlessly complicated.

--
“A leader is best When people barely know he exists. Of a good leader,
who talks little,When his work is done, his aim fulfilled,They will say,
“We did this ourselves.”

― Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

On 10/11/2022 16:53, D.J. wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 10:34:13 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 09/11/2022 19:26, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>> D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>>> On Wed, 09 Nov 2022 18:07:30 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>>>>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 09:57:34 -0600, Charles Richmond
>>>>>> <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think you will find that the people who own FOX tv, also own many of
>>>>>>> the influential gossip "newspapers"in Britain... so their philosophies
>>>>>>> come through those papers as well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Charles Richmond
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yup, and the owner of Fox lives in England.
>>>>>
>>>>> Does he? He was born in Australia and is a naturalized US
>>>>> citizen.
>>>>>
>>>>> (Note that I'm not defending him, his family, or Faux in any way).
>>>>
>>>> Last time I saw him on telly, it was on the BBC America and they
>>>> mentioned him and his kids were arguing on who would take over after
>>>> he died. And it looked to me like they were in London, England.
>>>
>>> On a visit, no doubt. Rupert lives in oz.
>>
>> I thought to check.
>>
>> "In 2003, Murdoch bought "Rosehearty", an 11 bedroom home on a 5-acre
>> waterfront estate in Centre Island, New York. In May 2013, he purchased
>> the Moraga Estate, an estate, vineyard and winery in Bel Air, Los
>> Angeles, California. In 2019, Murdoch and his new wife Jerry Hall
>> purchased Holmwood, an 18th-century house and estate in the English
>> village of Binfield Heath, some 4 miles (6.4 km) north-east of Reading.
>>
>> In late 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, it was reported that Murdoch
>> and Hall had been isolating in their Binfield Heath home for much of the
>> year. He received his first COVID-19 vaccine in nearby Henley-on-Thames
>> on 16 December."
>>
>> So it looks like he is UK or USA based these days
>
> Interesting he got the vaccine, while his Fox employees tell people to
> not get it.
> --
> Jim

In a sense this is a fairly honest position. He has a news service, but
he doesn't run it personally. It is run for a specific audience for profit.

So it says what that audience wants to hear.

--
Canada is all right really, though not for the whole weekend.

"Saki"

On 10/11/2022 19:08, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2022-11-10, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2022-11-09, Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Some people just aren't happy unless they're unhappy.
>>>>
>>>> So that’s why you get upset at “they” with singular referent...?
>>>
>>> No, I'm just irritated by woke-speak. I'm not against a language
>>> evolving - but I'm careful to point out the difference between
>>> evolution and decay. What we really need is a new pronoun to
>>> meet a newly-recognized requirement. This will extend English,
>>> rather than increasing ambiguity (as if it isn't bad enough already).
>>
>> When I hear “they” I always think of someone like the woman with several
>> personalities. I wonder how well “they” get along with each other.
>
> I think that typically only one personality is active at a time.
> Still, that wouldn't stop one personality from trying to undo the
> actions of another personality. Sort of like political parties...
>
"Schizophrenia as time division multiplexing"

Not sure if that's what it was, but I knew someone who would seamlessly
slip from paranoia 'that land rover is following us, its the GCHQ again'
to apparently normal with apparently no memory of the transition.

Of course since a human worldview is, in essence, an unprovable
inductive proposition, we are all capable of having more than one, and
we all live in some form of personal conspiracy theory.

I.e. we live in worlds comprising what we *think* is going on.

Manipulating those beliefs and assumptions is the business of left wing
politics, religion, marketing, propaganda, and latterly, 'black magic'.

More conservative politics busies itself solely with objective
externalities, so that what someone *meant* by what they said is not an
object for legal discussion.
Only what they *did*.
Far simpler. More efficient. One should not "seek to peer into men's
souls". Merely to regulate their public behaviour...

--
It is the folly of too many to mistake the echo of a London coffee-house
for the voice of the kingdom.

Jonathan Swift

On 11/8/2022 1:59 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2022-11-08, Charles Richmond <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>
>> On 11/6/2022 8:18 AM, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>
>>> Some people seem to look for opportunities to take offense.
>>
>> It's called "wearing your heart on your sleeve."
>
> My favourite example is Vancouver city councillor (and Pentecostal
> minister) Bernice Gerard. The beach around Point Grey, at the base
> of the cliffs below the University of British Columbia, is known as
> "Wreck Beach", and has been a favourite nude sunbathing spot for,
> well, forever. It's not easy to get to - you have to follow a steep,
> narrow, twisting path down a ravine, with a vertical drop of several
> hundred feet, to reach it. It's not the kind of place you find yourself
> in by accident. Yet in 1977 Ms. Gerard made the arduous journey so that
> she could enjoy the privilege of being offended by nudity and protest
> against it. You have to admire her dedication if nothing else.
>
> Some people just aren't happy unless they're unhappy.
>

“Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.”

― H.L. Mencken, A Mencken Chrestomathy

--

Charles Richmond

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On 2022-11-11, Charles Richmond <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
> On 11/8/2022 1:59 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> On 2022-11-08, Charles Richmond <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/6/2022 8:18 AM, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>
>>>> Some people seem to look for opportunities to take offense.
>>>
>>> It's called "wearing your heart on your sleeve."
>>
>> My favourite example is Vancouver city councillor (and Pentecostal
>> minister) Bernice Gerard. The beach around Point Grey, at the base
>> of the cliffs below the University of British Columbia, is known as
>> "Wreck Beach", and has been a favourite nude sunbathing spot for,
>> well, forever. It's not easy to get to - you have to follow a steep,
>> narrow, twisting path down a ravine, with a vertical drop of several
>> hundred feet, to reach it. It's not the kind of place you find yourself
>> in by accident. Yet in 1977 Ms. Gerard made the arduous journey so that
>> she could enjoy the privilege of being offended by nudity and protest
>> against it. You have to admire her dedication if nothing else.
>>
>> Some people just aren't happy unless they're unhappy.
>>
>
> “Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.”
>
> ― H.L. Mencken, A Mencken Chrestomathy
>
> --
>
> Charles Richmond
>
>

I have found over the years that there is an inverse relationship
between the urge to display their selves, and the pleasure of viewing
what is exposed.

--
greymausg@mail.com

Fe, Fi, Fo, Fum, I smell the stench of an Influencer.
Where is our money gone, Dude?

On 11/11/2022 9:56 AM, greymaus wrote:
> On 2022-11-11, Charles Richmond <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>> On 11/8/2022 1:59 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>> On 2022-11-08, Charles Richmond <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/6/2022 8:18 AM, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Some people seem to look for opportunities to take offense.
>>>>
>>>> It's called "wearing your heart on your sleeve."
>>>
>>> My favourite example is Vancouver city councillor (and Pentecostal
>>> minister) Bernice Gerard. The beach around Point Grey, at the base
>>> of the cliffs below the University of British Columbia, is known as
>>> "Wreck Beach", and has been a favourite nude sunbathing spot for,
>>> well, forever. It's not easy to get to - you have to follow a steep,
>>> narrow, twisting path down a ravine, with a vertical drop of several
>>> hundred feet, to reach it. It's not the kind of place you find yourself
>>> in by accident. Yet in 1977 Ms. Gerard made the arduous journey so that
>>> she could enjoy the privilege of being offended by nudity and protest
>>> against it. You have to admire her dedication if nothing else.
>>>
>>> Some people just aren't happy unless they're unhappy.
>>>
>>
>> “Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.”
>>
>> ― H.L. Mencken, A Mencken Chrestomathy
>>
>> --
>>
>> Charles Richmond
>>
>>
>
> I have found over the years that there is an inverse relationship
> between the urge to display their selves, and the pleasure of viewing
> what is exposed.
>
>

....it was the great law of compensation--the great law that regulates
Nature's heedless agents, and sees that when they make a mistake, they
shall at the self-same moment prevent that mistake from working evil
consequences. Behold, the same gust of wind that blows a lady's dress
aside, and exposes her ankle, fills your eyes so full of sand that you
can't see it. Marvellous are the works of Nature!

--- "Concerning the Conundrum" by Mark Twain

--

Charles Richmond

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On 11/10/2022 4:19 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 09/11/2022 18:01, D.J. wrote:
>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 09:57:34 -0600, Charles Richmond
>> <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>>> On 11/6/2022 5:15 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 05/11/2022 20:41, D.J. wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 5 Nov 2022 15:50:28 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
>>>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> On 05/11/2022 14:01, D.J. wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 04 Nov 2022 17:35:21 GMT, Charlie Gibbs
>>>>>>> <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2022-11-04, Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> writes:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Leave "they" alone.  It's plural.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It’s grammatically plural, but that doesn’t stop it taking
>>>>>>>>> singular
>>>>>>>>> referent (just like ‘you’).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The use of they as a singular for unknown gender is old and very
>>>>>>>>>> common.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Indeed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've long seen it used when making a general reference which covers
>>>>>>>> any number of people, and I don't have much of a problem with that.
>>>>>>>> What's becoming more prevalent, though, is its use when referring
>>>>>>>> to a single specific person - and that doesn't sit well with me.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Mind you, anything that smells of "wokeness" sets off my alarm
>>>>>>>> bells.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thats terrible that you don't know woke means 'don't be stupid'.
>>>>>> And is only used by those who are....
>>>>>
>>>>> I didn't understand where you were coming from. But I get it now. Fox
>>>>> Entertaiment is your 'news' of choice. Because that is one of the
>>>>> originators of such nonsense.
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jim
>>>>
>>>> Dearly beloved Jim., we don't get Fox news in the UK
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think you will find that the people who own FOX tv, also own many of
>>> the influential gossip "newspapers"in Britain...  so their philosophies
>>> come through those papers as well.
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Charles Richmond
>>
>> Yup, and the owner of Fox lives in England.
>> --
>> Jim
>
> Sadly all of the 'gossip "newspapers"in Britain' are now owned by large
> corporate left using organisations spreading the 'woke' meme as a way of
> selling more shit.
>
> The 'right' view is simply not profitable.
>
>

ISTM that some talking heads on TV said the Royals (including Queen
Elizabeth and King Charles III) take care *not* to get crossways with
the tabloids... because *too* many of the working class actually
*believe* there is some truth in the factless sensationalism that the
gossip rags publish.

--

Charles Richmond

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On 2022-11-10 11:53 a.m., D.J. wrote:
>
> Interesting he got the vaccine, while his Fox employees tell people to
> not get it.

Not only was Fox saying not to get the vaccine, Fox REQUIRED all its
employees to get the vaccine. I.e. Tucker and Hannity while spewing
lies about how dangerous the vaccine might be had already been
vaccinated.

On 11/11/2022 23:05, Charles Richmond wrote:
> On 11/10/2022 4:19 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 09/11/2022 18:01, D.J. wrote:
>>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 09:57:34 -0600, Charles Richmond
>>> <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>>>> On 11/6/2022 5:15 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>> On 05/11/2022 20:41, D.J. wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Nov 2022 15:50:28 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
>>>>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 05/11/2022 14:01, D.J. wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 04 Nov 2022 17:35:21 GMT, Charlie Gibbs
>>>>>>>> <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2022-11-04, Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Leave "they" alone.  It's plural.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It’s grammatically plural, but that doesn’t stop it taking
>>>>>>>>>> singular
>>>>>>>>>> referent (just like ‘you’).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The use of they as a singular for unknown gender is old and very
>>>>>>>>>>> common.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Indeed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I've long seen it used when making a general reference which
>>>>>>>>> covers
>>>>>>>>> any number of people, and I don't have much of a problem with
>>>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>>>> What's becoming more prevalent, though, is its use when referring
>>>>>>>>> to a single specific person - and that doesn't sit well with me.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Mind you, anything that smells of "wokeness" sets off my alarm
>>>>>>>>> bells.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thats terrible that you don't know woke means 'don't be stupid'.
>>>>>>> And is only used by those who are....
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I didn't understand where you were coming from. But I get it now. Fox
>>>>>> Entertaiment is your 'news' of choice. Because that is one of the
>>>>>> originators of such nonsense.
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>
>>>>> Dearly beloved Jim., we don't get Fox news in the UK
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think you will find that the people who own FOX tv, also own many of
>>>> the influential gossip "newspapers"in Britain...  so their philosophies
>>>> come through those papers as well.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Charles Richmond
>>>
>>> Yup, and the owner of Fox lives in England.
>>> --
>>> Jim
>>
>> Sadly all of the 'gossip "newspapers"in Britain' are now owned by
>> large corporate left using organisations spreading the 'woke' meme as
>> a way of selling more shit.
>>
>> The 'right' view is simply not profitable.
>>
>>
>
> ISTM that some talking heads on TV said the Royals (including Queen
> Elizabeth and King Charles III) take care *not* to get crossways with
> the tabloids... because *too* many of the working class actually
> *believe* there is some truth in the factless sensationalism that the
> gossip rags publish.
>
>
That is typical leftists patronising bullshit.
The true working classes - the few that are left - believe that all
newspapers print shit, the government is definitely out to shag them
shitless, and the establishment, from school teachers to police and to
politicians, are absolutely on someone else's side and are there to make
their lives a misery.

But a girl with her mammaries hanging out is at least harmless fun.

Stuff is *believed* by the middle classes, who think that being able to
read gives them access to some kind of superior knowledge.

And papers such as in the USA the NY times, and in the UK the Guardian,
pander to their primped puritan patronising pretentiousnesses by
printing articles hinting how stupid the plebs are, who read tabloids.
And why they shouldn't really be allowed to vote.

--
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the
other is to refuse to believe what is true.”

—Soren Kierkegaard

On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 11:12:53 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>On 11/11/2022 23:05, Charles Richmond wrote:
>> On 11/10/2022 4:19 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 09/11/2022 18:01, D.J. wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 09:57:34 -0600, Charles Richmond
>>>> <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 11/6/2022 5:15 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>> On 05/11/2022 20:41, D.J. wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Nov 2022 15:50:28 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
>>>>>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 05/11/2022 14:01, D.J. wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 04 Nov 2022 17:35:21 GMT, Charlie Gibbs
>>>>>>>>> <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-11-04, Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Leave "they" alone.  It's plural.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It’s grammatically plural, but that doesn’t stop it taking
>>>>>>>>>>> singular
>>>>>>>>>>> referent (just like ‘you’).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The use of they as a singular for unknown gender is old and very
>>>>>>>>>>>> common.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Indeed.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I've long seen it used when making a general reference which
>>>>>>>>>> covers
>>>>>>>>>> any number of people, and I don't have much of a problem with
>>>>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>>>>> What's becoming more prevalent, though, is its use when referring
>>>>>>>>>> to a single specific person - and that doesn't sit well with me.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Mind you, anything that smells of "wokeness" sets off my alarm
>>>>>>>>>> bells.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thats terrible that you don't know woke means 'don't be stupid'.
>>>>>>>> And is only used by those who are....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I didn't understand where you were coming from. But I get it now. Fox
>>>>>>> Entertaiment is your 'news' of choice. Because that is one of the
>>>>>>> originators of such nonsense.
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dearly beloved Jim., we don't get Fox news in the UK
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think you will find that the people who own FOX tv, also own many of
>>>>> the influential gossip "newspapers"in Britain...  so their philosophies
>>>>> come through those papers as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> Charles Richmond
>>>>
>>>> Yup, and the owner of Fox lives in England.
>>>> --
>>>> Jim
>>>
>>> Sadly all of the 'gossip "newspapers"in Britain' are now owned by
>>> large corporate left using organisations spreading the 'woke' meme as
>>> a way of selling more shit.
>>>
>>> The 'right' view is simply not profitable.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ISTM that some talking heads on TV said the Royals (including Queen
>> Elizabeth and King Charles III) take care *not* to get crossways with
>> the tabloids... because *too* many of the working class actually
>> *believe* there is some truth in the factless sensationalism that the
>> gossip rags publish.
>>
>>
>That is typical leftists patronising bullshit.
>The true working classes - the few that are left - believe that all
>newspapers print shit, the government is definitely out to shag them
>shitless, and the establishment, from school teachers to police and to
>politicians, are absolutely on someone else's side and are there to make
>their lives a misery.

Nah, I've heard with my own ears people, some relatives, who believe
everything they read in tabloids.
--
Jim

On 12/11/2022 11:12, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
> And papers such as in the USA the NY times, and in the UK the Guardian,
> pander to their primped puritan patronising pretentiousnesses by
> printing articles hinting how stupid the plebs are, who read tabloids.
> And why they shouldn't really be allowed to vote.

That remonds me of the old TV ads for Colgate toothpaste with MFP ...

Made For Proles.

On 2022-11-11, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 10/11/2022 19:08, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> On 2022-11-10, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> When I hear “they” I always think of someone like the woman with several
>>> personalities. I wonder how well “they” get along with each other.
>>
>> I think that typically only one personality is active at a time.
>> Still, that wouldn't stop one personality from trying to undo the
>> actions of another personality. Sort of like political parties...
>
> "Schizophrenia as time division multiplexing"

Wyman Guin's story _Beyond Bedlam_ (originally printed in the
August 1951 edition of _Galaxy_) describes it exactly that way,
although in a form carefully regulated in a future society.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

On 2022-11-11, Charles Richmond <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:

> On 11/8/2022 1:59 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> Some people just aren't happy unless they're unhappy.
>
> “Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.”
>
> ― H.L. Mencken, A Mencken Chrestomathy

Ah, thanks for reminding me of that one.
Mencken is one of my favourite cynics.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

On 2022-11-11, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> Like everything else, it's all become pointlessly complicated.

Whether it's pointless depends on who you ask. Taxation systems
which pile on layer after layer of complexity in an attempt to get
a more equitable distribution of wealth usually wind up consuming
so much in bureaucratic overhead that everyone is poorer off.
Except for the bureaucrats themselves, of course.

Then there are the politicians, marketroids, and other charlatans
who use bafflegab to con the public - who, being unaware of the
difference between complexity and sophistication, naively believe
that the more complex a system, the better it must be.

Complexity is a weapon. (The KISS principle is a countermeasure -
which explains why it's so widely maligned.)

Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add,
but when there is nothing left to take away.
-- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

On 2022-11-12, D.J <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 11:12:53 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> That is typical leftists patronising bullshit.
>> The true working classes - the few that are left - believe that all
>> newspapers print shit, the government is definitely out to shag them
>> shitless, and the establishment, from school teachers to police and to
>> politicians, are absolutely on someone else's side and are there to make
>> their lives a misery.
>
> Nah, I've heard with my own ears people, some relatives, who believe
> everything they read in tabloids.

Brother's headed that way now I guess.
He just read something made his face turn blue.
I ain't got nothing 'gainst the press;
They wouldn't print it if it wasn't true.
-- Joe Jackson: Sunday Papers

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

On 11/12/2022 1:42 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2022-11-12, D.J <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 11:12:53 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>

[snip..] [snip..] [snip..]

>>
>> Nah, I've heard with my own ears people, some relatives, who believe
>> everything they read in tabloids.
>
> Brother's headed that way now I guess.
> He just read something made his face turn blue.
> I ain't got nothing 'gainst the press;
> They wouldn't print it if it wasn't true.
> -- Joe Jackson: Sunday Papers
>

"It *must* be true. I read it on Facebook!" :-(

Once I saw a single-frame cartoon of a high-society couple sitting at
the breakfast table. The woman says to the man:

"Let's hope it isn't true. But if it is true, let's hope it's not
generally known."

--

Charles Richmond

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On 12/11/2022 15:30, D.J. wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 11:12:53 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 11/11/2022 23:05, Charles Richmond wrote:
>>> On 11/10/2022 4:19 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 09/11/2022 18:01, D.J. wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 09:57:34 -0600, Charles Richmond
>>>>> <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/6/2022 5:15 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>> On 05/11/2022 20:41, D.J. wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Nov 2022 15:50:28 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
>>>>>>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 05/11/2022 14:01, D.J. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 04 Nov 2022 17:35:21 GMT, Charlie Gibbs
>>>>>>>>>> <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-11-04, Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Leave "they" alone.  It's plural.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It’s grammatically plural, but that doesn’t stop it taking
>>>>>>>>>>>> singular
>>>>>>>>>>>> referent (just like ‘you’).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The use of they as a singular for unknown gender is old and very
>>>>>>>>>>>>> common.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Indeed.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I've long seen it used when making a general reference which
>>>>>>>>>>> covers
>>>>>>>>>>> any number of people, and I don't have much of a problem with
>>>>>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>>>>>> What's becoming more prevalent, though, is its use when referring
>>>>>>>>>>> to a single specific person - and that doesn't sit well with me.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Mind you, anything that smells of "wokeness" sets off my alarm
>>>>>>>>>>> bells.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thats terrible that you don't know woke means 'don't be stupid'.
>>>>>>>>> And is only used by those who are....
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I didn't understand where you were coming from. But I get it now. Fox
>>>>>>>> Entertaiment is your 'news' of choice. Because that is one of the
>>>>>>>> originators of such nonsense.
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dearly beloved Jim., we don't get Fox news in the UK
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think you will find that the people who own FOX tv, also own many of
>>>>>> the influential gossip "newspapers"in Britain...  so their philosophies
>>>>>> come through those papers as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Charles Richmond
>>>>>
>>>>> Yup, and the owner of Fox lives in England.
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jim
>>>>
>>>> Sadly all of the 'gossip "newspapers"in Britain' are now owned by
>>>> large corporate left using organisations spreading the 'woke' meme as
>>>> a way of selling more shit.
>>>>
>>>> The 'right' view is simply not profitable.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> ISTM that some talking heads on TV said the Royals (including Queen
>>> Elizabeth and King Charles III) take care *not* to get crossways with
>>> the tabloids... because *too* many of the working class actually
>>> *believe* there is some truth in the factless sensationalism that the
>>> gossip rags publish.
>>>
>>>
>> That is typical leftists patronising bullshit.
>> The true working classes - the few that are left - believe that all
>> newspapers print shit, the government is definitely out to shag them
>> shitless, and the establishment, from school teachers to police and to
>> politicians, are absolutely on someone else's side and are there to make
>> their lives a misery.
>
> Nah, I've heard with my own ears people, some relatives, who believe
> everything they read in tabloids.

Well I haven't heard anyone ever. Not since 'Freddy Starr ate my hamster'

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/tv/freddie-starr-really-eat-hamster-16254989

Nearly all my friends do however believe what they read in the Guardian
or hear on the BBC.

> --
> Jim

--
All political activity makes complete sense once the proposition that
all government is basically a self-legalising protection racket, is
fully understood.

On 12/11/2022 15:38, gareth evans wrote:
> On 12/11/2022 11:12, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>> And papers such as in the USA the NY times, and in the UK the Guardian,
>> pander to their primped puritan patronising pretentiousnesses by
>> printing articles hinting how stupid the plebs are, who read tabloids.
>> And why they shouldn't really be allowed to vote.
>
> That remonds me of the old TV ads for Colgate toothpaste with MFP ...
>
> Made For Proles.
>
>
LOL! First laugh of the day.

--
“It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established
authorities are wrong.”

― Voltaire, The Age of Louis XIV

On 12/11/2022 19:42, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2022-11-11, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Like everything else, it's all become pointlessly complicated.
>
> Whether it's pointless depends on who you ask. Taxation systems
> which pile on layer after layer of complexity in an attempt to get
> a more equitable distribution of wealth usually wind up consuming
> so much in bureaucratic overhead that everyone is poorer off.
> Except for the bureaucrats themselves, of course.
>
I see you tend towards libertarianism, like me.
Never mind fair, lets just make the cake bigger!

> Then there are the politicians, marketroids, and other charlatans
> who use bafflegab to con the public - who, being unaware of the
> difference between complexity and sophistication, naively believe
> that the more complex a system, the better it must be.

In my youth, the working class lads amongst whom I trained as an
apprentice had a saying:

Bullshit Baffles Brains.

In short the more self consciously educated or smart a person thought he
was the more he could be taken in by a complicated story.

Climate change?

They spent their waking days playing tricks on each other and inventing
preposterous stories, and roared with laughter if anyone got 'had'
They naturally assumed Politicians and the media were doing the same, as
were 'the management', and indeed any other figure 'in authority'.

>

> Complexity is a weapon. (The KISS principle is a countermeasure -
> which explains why it's so widely maligned.)
>

I strongly recommend Joseph Tainter's 'Collapse of Complex Societies'

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Collapse-Complex-Societies-Studies-Archaeology/dp/052138673X

for example.

> Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add,
> but when there is nothing left to take away.
> -- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
>

--
“It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established
authorities are wrong.”

― Voltaire, The Age of Louis XIV

On 12/11/2022 19:42, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2022-11-12, D.J <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 11:12:53 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> That is typical leftists patronising bullshit.
>>> The true working classes - the few that are left - believe that all
>>> newspapers print shit, the government is definitely out to shag them
>>> shitless, and the establishment, from school teachers to police and to
>>> politicians, are absolutely on someone else's side and are there to make
>>> their lives a misery.
>>
>> Nah, I've heard with my own ears people, some relatives, who believe
>> everything they read in tabloids.
>
> Brother's headed that way now I guess.
> He just read something made his face turn blue.
> I ain't got nothing 'gainst the press;
> They wouldn't print it if it wasn't true.
> -- Joe Jackson: Sunday Papers
>

If you don't read the papes you are uninformed
If you do read the papers you are misinformed

Mark Twain

I think the Internet and such exchanges as we are engaged in here are
slowly eroding public trust in *anything* that a paid for organisation
promotes as truth or reality.

My conclusions derive from no one source - they are a result of a
lifetimes experience. The higher the stakes the bigger the lie.

$3.8 trillion spent on 'renewable energy'
0.2% change in carbon emissions

Cui Bono?

--
"Women actually are capable of being far more than the feminists will
let them."