Fjool

Invite plx!

What is 'it', specifically?

For this thread in general: Nice collection of tunes appearing. Keep it up, folks!

You know that these were originally developed as a board game, relying on the Ideomotor Effect? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideomotor_effect There's nothing 'paranormal' about them.

^ It's a fair cop. The whole thing needs some TLC. The phpBB system it's based on is old-school and creaking at the seams. Unfortunately, it's a question of having the time and resources available to make any meaningful update.

People filling up my privately hired skip while I'm not looking...

Erm... that's rather what I intended to convey. But rather that simply state your opinion, let's hear a bit more about what you don't like about it. And also what you prefer instead.

Furthermore, I'm quite pleased to see someone demonstrating a passion in a positive and enthusiastic way. I think this thread is a credit to Shetlink, and that Kavi should be encouraged, not criticised. If you don't like the house style, then that's perfectly ok too, but let's see some photos of your preferred style; or perhaps a discussion on the pros and cons of the design.

Starting a poll is reasonably straight forward, but can only be done when you start a new topic. At the bottom of the New Topic page, you'll find the interface for doing this. Alternatively, the options could be added by a mod to this current topic if you let me know what they should be. I'm not sure whether a new topic or augmenting this one would be best. Tinks?

Never having been a dog owner, I can only offer some advice I saw on the telly: Take a cushion, or something he's previously pee'd on and take this outside with you when you walk him. Put it down and the smell should encourage him to pee there. Once he's used to peeing on that, in a specific location, you can dispense with the cushion. Best I can offer I'm afraid. /shrug

It's the first I've heard is all I'm saying, and I wonder what your source for this is. Rumours are rife, so it would be better if you can back up your statement somehow. I.e. which reliable source did you get this from?

[Citation needed]

Weren't me!

Connection has usually been ~7mbit, but the last few days... http://www.speedtest.net/result/1479642000.png

Congratulations to everyone who got a part. http://www.betweenweathers.com/

Indeed. Thanks, Twerto.

From http://www.shetlink.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=187081: The problem with this approach is that the genuinely worthwhile messages then get lost amongst this kind of hysterical bleating. How to emphasise the seriousness of heroin addiction when the volume is already cranked up to eleven over relatively harmless substances? And what scope for genuine education when misinformation is peddled at every turn? No. Far better is to be honest. You consider the smoking of cannabis to be acceptable, perhaps? You would be ok for someone to get behind the wheel of a car when they are high on cannabis? Of course there are shades of drugs just as there is with alcohol where a pint of spirits is far worse than a pint of strong lager. However, I don't condone any drugs where they are deemed to be illegal; be it cannabis, heroin or cocaine. All are addictive and dangerous and there is always the danger that a cannabis smoker may want to "upgrade" to "something stronger". If you start preaching that cannabis is ok when compared to heroin then it gives out the completely wrong message. My thoughts, anyway. Personally, I do consider the smoking of cannabis to be acceptable (within certain constraints), yes. If someone wants to smoke cannabis, then why not let them? Indeed, compared to alcohol it is the lesser of two evils. Only my opinion, of course. I don't think it should be illegal and have said so many times in this and other threads. However, to suggest that I consider driving under the influence to be acceptable because of this stance is disingenuous and ridiculous. Do you consider drink driving acceptable because alcohol is legal? Quite. The addictive/dangerous-therefore-illegal argument is flawed and falls down right at the first hurdle: alcohol. Alcohol is both these things, but is legal. The legality of a substance demonstrably has no bearing on it's safety or otherwise. These are the very same mixed messages that you allude to. The sooner we get away from this idea that somehow the law bears any reflection on the danger of particular substances (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/31_07_06_drugsreport.pdf), the sooner we can get down to providing accurate and responsible information.

The problem with this approach is that the genuinely worthwhile messages then get lost amongst this kind of hysterical bleating. How to emphasise the seriousness of heroin addiction when the volume is already cranked up to eleven over relatively harmless substances? And what scope for genuine education when misinformation is peddled at every turn? No. Far better is to be honest.

^ That's very cool.

Yes, it is against Shetlink policy. We try and keep down on this, but it's a manual task. Perhaps we need to be harsher when dealing with violations...

^ I hear ya. We've had some problems ourselves and can fully understand why you'd want to prevent hotmail (etc) addresses.

Nice one. Good to hear a positive story

I accidentally ate one once. It was crunchy and very bitter. Not something I'd recommend.

Drugs are bad, m'kay? Modified ecstasy 'attacks blood cancers'

The version I heard was quite clean and perfectly innocent. I dread to think of the alternative...