Jump to content

Recommended Posts

We over estimate how well built buildings were in the past because almost all surviving examples of antique architecture were built well enough to stand the test of time or ongoing maintenance work and preservation kept the more delicate examples around.

 

Plenty of crapshacks that our ancestors lived in but while their descendants live today most of the cheaper run of the mill architecture they inhabited has long gone.

 

And because we only see the better examples of buildings constructed by our ancestors we forget that there have always been sloppy Buildings that only stood a few decades at best because only the minimum was put in

 

This hotel and it's proponents however were advocating for its competitors to shut down as this was according to its supporters the superior building, yet it seems Moorfeild was a Paper Tiger.

 

The real worry is how widespread these dangerous building materials have become.

For example when the Grenfell Commieblock caught fire due to the cladding layer that was added to counteract the building not being rain proof hundreds of buildings were discovered to have the same type of cladding.

 

Buildings will be slapped together cheaply but we also use lots more seldom tested methods and materials thus we can overlook a few details and once a problem becomes apparent it's already been copy and pasted thousands of times over.

 

Compare with the days when people used block and tackle instead of craine and horse instead of bulldozer and tractor many non-residential churches, tomb's  etc took decades or in extreme cases multiple generations to complete  so more  became faults apparent during construction rather than after the fact thus it was corrected while architect's were present instead of after the fact.

 

What you really need to find out is what materials were used in its most affected parts and how can you check if any buildings near you have the same defects so they can be fixed.

Edited by NullVoid
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes,some interesting views but when these buildings are being built we have building surveyors and architects who are supposedly complying and supervising the workforce to ensure that the rigorous rules and regulations laid down by the EU and associate governments are adhered to.

 

Some rather spectacular recent fires in modern buildings leaves me in some doubt whether any of the fire regulations are carried out properly ,but we have to remember who inspects the completed building and issues the fire certificate,to allow the business to operate is that not the fire service themselves.

 

As has already been said as long as folk have time to evacuate safely, but surely containment to a particular area would indicate some form of fire control  but I was not aware of that at Moorfield.

 

Many buildings are insured on a replace "like for like" consequentially the building might have to be rebuilt .

Link to post
Share on other sites

^A disposable building for a throwaway age, or an insurance job? I know what I think but it's only a thought :cool: 

 

I tink an insurance job is very unlikely given da size o da company dat owns it (it's no as if ony individual is losin £millions by it closin - it'll no mak much odds tae the company accounts), da scale of da investigation dat will be takin place, da fact that the person(s) responsible wid be takin da risk o prosecution for multiple manslaughter, and dat da internet wid be awash we conspiracy theorists pittin 2 and 2 tagidder and makin 5!

Link to post
Share on other sites

^And yet no backup to justify the statement, "You could, shortly, get arrested for your thoughts." Claims that it's illegal to think?

 

Some Wrongthink is classified as "Non-Crime hate" so weather or not its illegal is questionable but weather or not it is incurs penalties is not up for debate

You can literally get a criminal record with a "non-Crime" offense because of existing UK Blaspheme... Hate speech laws.

 

 

UK is already a place where you can get a criminal record for a “non-crime” what is the strategic benefit for Scotland to voluntarily make things worse than the rest of the UK?

 

I bet you are able to criticise they above since it is a Westminster jackboot but as soon as its an SNP Jackboot why is it so different?

 

Maybe Scotland gets its independence in the future as a result of England(not UK) breaking up like Yugoslavia which might have been made more likely since the Lockdown has euthanized some of the last opportunities in many areas and people are about to be evicted form their slums en mass large swaths are at par with parts of South America and Eastern Europe now anyway.

 

Imagine 10x the normal amount of indigent people listening to the prime minister saying “Lots of people have lost their businesses, jobs and houses we need millions more people to come in and put additional strain on the housing market to keep rents up and keep people from moving to were the jobs are to stifle social mobility and keep wages low, Minimum wage only applies to small business and those workers in public view Diversity is our strength.

 

Threat of losing job, savings and house is what keeps people in check lol

But 10 consecutive lockdowns will guarantee people exclusively see doors close and stop caring as a result.

 

The 2 possible outcomes are things getting quashed quickly or a Pyrrhic victory by the established order that ensures it happens again,

but if in the meantime the Scottish economy recovers faster than the English you demographically lose the vote due to Scotland's electorate becoming more "British/"New-briton" than Scottish due to people moving for work.

Scottish Independence is only popular with people actually from Scotland and SNP is open boarders LOL so maybe it is in your best interest from an electoral/strategic view for Scotland to be poorer due to voter demographics

 

Ever wonder why so many anti-squatting and “x-speech” laws are being pumped out in the last 10 years?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@George;

 

My posting said "could" and "shortly".  It was (clearly) an opinion!  No "backup" was required.

 

It was speculation aimed at goading "dyed in the wool" SNP suppurters into trying to defend the indefensible attack on free speech in the proposed new laws.

 

In return, you attacked my post and demanded(?) justification which, as most can probably see, is set out very clearly in all the "professional" objections (legal, police, etc.) to the proposed legislation.

 

If "wastemonster" came up with that proposal, you would be screaming from the rooftops.

 

I don't think that I can make it any clearer than that.

Edited by Colin
Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't think it's worth discussing further. The SNP government and their "independent" planning man had already condemned this hotel to death anyway.

Perhaps a quicker death is better, and I do believe this Scottish government will be quite relieved as they know full well that the whole unhappy episode will be forgotten so much sooner.

They will not be blamed for the demise of this hotel and I have no doubt there will be a few celebratory drams flying around in Edinburgh.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't think it's worth discussing further. The SNP government and their "independent" planning man had already condemned this hotel to death anyway.

Perhaps a quicker death is better, and I do believe this Scottish government will be quite relieved as they know full well that the whole unhappy episode will be forgotten so much sooner.

They will not be blamed for the demise of this hotel and I have no doubt there will be a few celebratory drams flying around in Edinburgh.

 

Really? Du tinks da government will be celebrating? At best, dey'll be ambivalent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In return, you attacked my post and demanded(?) justification which, as most can probably see, is set out very clearly in all the "professional" objections (legal, police, etc.) to the proposed legislation.

 

@Colin,

 

In no way whatsoever did I attack your post. I did ask for justification of your statement, no more and no less. However, I did ensure that everything I wrote was grammatically correct.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...