On 30/03/2022 15:15, maus wrote:
> On 2022-03-30, Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
>> Nicholas D. Richards said:
>>> In article <jahm4kFp8caU2@mid.individual.net>, Mike Fleming
>>> <mike@tauzero.co.uk> on Wed, 30 Mar 2022 at 01:21:39 awoke Nicholas
>>> from his slumbers and wrote
>>>> On 29/03/2022 20:21, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 13:26:16 -0500
>>>>> Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>
>>> Shakespeare's Richard III, who appears to have led from the front, was
>>> not even fast enough over the ground.
>>>
>>> Some Russian generals appear to have been leading from the front <cough>
>>> which is not the best place to lead from in the case of modern war.
>>
>>
>> I think that was the point, wasn't it, that there'd be less of it if
>> more of them did ?
>>
>>
>> That WW1 phrase about "Lions led by donkeys" is surreal - if you see a
>> pack of lions following along behind a donkey, what do you expect to
>> happen next ?
>>
>
> The Military theory at the time was that the Generals would be affected
> by the deaths and suffering of the front line troops, so the idea was
> that they would make the plans in places well away from the front line,
> and do something else while the attack was going on. Maybe go fishing.
>
>

May I submit track 7?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_AxSUu89Rg&t=69s

Tone

On 30/03/2022 13:44, Nicholas D. Richards wrote:
> In article <jahm4kFp8caU2@mid.individual.net>, Mike Fleming
> <mike@tauzero.co.uk> on Wed, 30 Mar 2022 at 01:21:39 awoke Nicholas
> from his slumbers and wrote
>> On 29/03/2022 20:21, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 13:26:16 -0500
>>> Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot said:
>>>
>>>>> Well now perhaps if the requirement for declaring war was that
>>>>> the declarer must lose their head it might go a long way to curtailing
>>>>> the practice.
>>>>
>>>> Put 'em up front when the shooting starts. They used to, didn't they ?
>>>
>>> Yep it certainly used to be the case that if you wanted people to
>>> charge into battle for you then you had to be in front and when you went
>>> down they went home. There seems to be a lot to be said for it, but I note
>>> that in those days they *did* go out in front quite a lot so it's probably
>>> not the deterrent I'd like to hope it was.
>>
>> I'm not sure about the "went home" bit. I don't think there was a
>> concept of prisoners of war then, so your survival if you were on the
>> losing side depended on your speed over the ground.
>
> Survival depended upon, amongst other things, your ransom value. In
> quality armour with your coat of arms on your surcoat, would see you
> paroled and sent back to the rear. None of those, your head or chest
> would be stoved in, if you were lucky.
>
> Shakespeare's Richard III, who appears to have led from the front, was
> not even fast enough over the ground.
>
> Some Russian generals appear to have been leading from the front <cough>
> which is not the best place to lead from in the case of modern war.
>
One of them without the nous to step out of the way o a tank...

--
Rusty Hinge
To err is human. To really foul things up requires a computer and the BOFH.

On 30/03/2022 14:02, Richard Robinson wrote:
> Nicholas D. Richards said:
>> In article <jahm4kFp8caU2@mid.individual.net>, Mike Fleming
>> <mike@tauzero.co.uk> on Wed, 30 Mar 2022 at 01:21:39 awoke Nicholas
>> from his slumbers and wrote
>>> On 29/03/2022 20:21, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 13:26:16 -0500
>>>> Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot said:
>>>>
>>>>>> Well now perhaps if the requirement for declaring war was that
>>>>>> the declarer must lose their head it might go a long way to curtailing
>>>>>> the practice.
>>>>>
>>>>> Put 'em up front when the shooting starts. They used to, didn't they ?
>>>>
>>>> Yep it certainly used to be the case that if you wanted people to
>>>> charge into battle for you then you had to be in front and when you went
>>>> down they went home. There seems to be a lot to be said for it, but I note
>>>> that in those days they *did* go out in front quite a lot so it's probably
>>>> not the deterrent I'd like to hope it was.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure about the "went home" bit. I don't think there was a
>>> concept of prisoners of war then, so your survival if you were on the
>>> losing side depended on your speed over the ground.
>>
>> Survival depended upon, amongst other things, your ransom value. In
>> quality armour with your coat of arms on your surcoat, would see you
>> paroled and sent back to the rear. None of those, your head or chest
>> would be stoved in, if you were lucky.
>>
>> Shakespeare's Richard III, who appears to have led from the front, was
>> not even fast enough over the ground.
>>
>> Some Russian generals appear to have been leading from the front <cough>
>> which is not the best place to lead from in the case of modern war.
>
>
> I think that was the point, wasn't it, that there'd be less of it if
> more of them did ?
>
>
> That WW1 phrase about "Lions led by donkeys" is surreal - if you see a
> pack of lions following along behind a donkey, what do you expect to
> happen next ?
>
Ee-ore on speed

--
Rusty Hinge
To err is human. To really foul things up requires a computer and the BOFH.

Richard Robinson wrote:

> if you see a pack of lions following along behind a donkey, what do you
> expect to happen next ?
om-nom-nom.

Nick Odell wrote:

> maus wrote:
>
>> Shades of the 737 that crashed recently in china
>
> Sadly, that cockpit didn't appear to have had the dog.
>
> In some circles they are saying that this is all looking very much
> like Germanwings 9525 but with a Chinese airliner in Chinese territory
> I don't have a lot of confidence that the real answers will come out.

They have a datarecorder, a good ubend channel by an hactual boeing pilot wot
avoids speculation is Juan Browne's Blancolirio

<https://www.youtube.com/user/blancolirio/videos>

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 08:02:10 -0500
Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:

> That WW1 phrase about "Lions led by donkeys" is surreal - if you see a
> pack of lions following along behind a donkey, what do you expect to
> happen next ?

A whispery voice start to describe the scene.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

On 30/03/2022 15:43, RustyHinge wrote:
> On 30/03/2022 14:02, Richard Robinson wrote:
>> Nicholas D. Richards said:
>>> In article <jahm4kFp8caU2@mid.individual.net>, Mike Fleming
>>> <mike@tauzero.co.uk>  on Wed, 30 Mar 2022 at 01:21:39 awoke Nicholas
>>> from his slumbers and wrote
>>>> On 29/03/2022 20:21, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 13:26:16 -0500
>>>>> Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot said:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>     Well now perhaps if the requirement for declaring war was that
>>>>>>> the declarer must lose their head it might go a long way to
>>>>>>> curtailing
>>>>>>> the practice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Put 'em up front when the shooting starts. They used to, didn't
>>>>>> they ?
>>>>>
>>>>>       Yep it certainly used to be the case that if you wanted
>>>>> people to
>>>>> charge into battle for you then you had to be in front and when you
>>>>> went
>>>>> down they went home. There seems to be a lot to be said for it, but
>>>>> I note
>>>>> that in those days they *did* go out in front quite a lot so it's
>>>>> probably
>>>>> not the deterrent I'd like to hope it was.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure about the "went home" bit. I don't think there was a
>>>> concept of prisoners of war then, so your survival if you were on the
>>>> losing side depended on your speed over the ground.
>>>
>>> Survival depended upon, amongst other things, your ransom value. In
>>> quality armour with your coat of arms on your surcoat, would see you
>>> paroled and sent back to the rear. None of those, your head or chest
>>> would be stoved in, if you were lucky.
>>>
>>> Shakespeare's Richard III, who appears to have led from the front, was
>>> not even fast enough over the ground.
>>>
>>> Some Russian generals appear to have been leading from the front <cough>
>>> which is not the best place to lead from in the case of modern war.
>>
>>
>> I think that was the point, wasn't it, that there'd be less of it if
>> more of them did ?
>>
>>
>> That WW1 phrase about "Lions led by donkeys" is surreal - if you see a
>> pack of lions following along behind a donkey, what do you expect to
>> happen next ?
>>
> Ee-ore on speed
>

Thereby hung a tale

Tone

maus said:
> On 2022-03-30, Chris Elvidge <chris@mshome.net> wrote:
>>
>> Don't psychiatrists have to undergo regular psychiatric examination?
>>
> Yes, by other psychiatrists :)
>
> I knew a man who worked in a [loony bin]. He used say that dealing with
> alternative views of the world would eventually make anyone crazy.
>
> In the original Bedlam, they charged admission for casual visitors

Around here we have a "de Vitre Street", named after one of the 18C
doctors who pioneered the idea of Lunatic Asylums, as places where the
poor sods would be safe from being pestered by such visitors.

Which, I think, was also the original idea of "Bethlehems".

Concept-rot, or something. Humans, who'd have 'em ?

--
Richard Robinson
"The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes" - S. Lem

My email address is at http://qualmograph.org.uk/contact.html

Nick Odell <nick@themusicworkshop.plus.com> wrote:
>
> In some circles they are saying that this is all looking very much
> like Germanwings 9525 but with a Chinese airliner in Chinese territory
> I don't have a lot of confidence that the real answers will come out.

Nonsense - the Chinese civil aviation authority have a very high
reputation and have excellent skills. Add to that the involvement of
Boeing and (CFM ?) as makers of the aircraft and engines and you will
get a very professional investigation.
The flight data and audio recorders will be decoded by their makers
before the results can be interpreted, this often requires forensic
analysis of damaged remains and can take a while.
It is normal practice to release an initial statement in 3-6 months,
the final report will probably take around 2 years and be agreed by
all parties involved.
Until we get the initial statement there will be the usual useless
speculation and crazy theories.

--
http://www.netunix.com/

RustyHinge said:
> On 30/03/2022 14:02, Richard Robinson wrote:
>>
>> That WW1 phrase about "Lions led by donkeys" is surreal - if you see a
>> pack of lions following along behind a donkey, what do you expect to
>> happen next ?
>>
> Ee-ore on speed

*grin*. I don't think I've seen that pair of words linked together
before.

--
Richard Robinson
"The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes" - S. Lem

My email address is at http://qualmograph.org.uk/contact.html

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 16:08:11 -0000 (UTC)
crn@nospam.com wrote:

> It is normal practice to release an initial statement in 3-6 months,
> the final report will probably take around 2 years and be agreed by
> all parties involved.
> Until we get the initial statement there will be the usual useless
> speculation and crazy theories.

This matches my experience with uncanny precision.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 15:23:26 +0100, Tone <tone@email.com> wrote:

>On 30/03/2022 15:15, maus wrote:
>> On 2022-03-30, Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
>>> Nicholas D. Richards said:
>>>> In article <jahm4kFp8caU2@mid.individual.net>, Mike Fleming
>>>> <mike@tauzero.co.uk> on Wed, 30 Mar 2022 at 01:21:39 awoke Nicholas
>>>> from his slumbers and wrote
>>>>> On 29/03/2022 20:21, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 13:26:16 -0500
>>>>>> Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Shakespeare's Richard III, who appears to have led from the front, was
>>>> not even fast enough over the ground.
>>>>
>>>> Some Russian generals appear to have been leading from the front <cough>
>>>> which is not the best place to lead from in the case of modern war.
>>>
>>>
>>> I think that was the point, wasn't it, that there'd be less of it if
>>> more of them did ?
>>>
>>>
>>> That WW1 phrase about "Lions led by donkeys" is surreal - if you see a
>>> pack of lions following along behind a donkey, what do you expect to
>>> happen next ?
>>>
>>
>> The Military theory at the time was that the Generals would be affected
>> by the deaths and suffering of the front line troops, so the idea was
>> that they would make the plans in places well away from the front line,
>> and do something else while the attack was going on. Maybe go fishing.
>>
>>
>
>May I submit track 7?
>
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_AxSUu89Rg&t=69s
>
Ah yes. Very apt.

I must admit I misread that at first as Track 2 and wondered what on
earth you were on about - a bit like the folk club audiences must have
been when I was singing Sally Free And Easy from the floor at around
the age of seventeen.

Nick

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 15:42:28 +0100, RustyHinge
<rusty.hinge@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote:

>On 30/03/2022 13:44, Nicholas D. Richards wrote:
>> In article <jahm4kFp8caU2@mid.individual.net>, Mike Fleming
>> <mike@tauzero.co.uk> on Wed, 30 Mar 2022 at 01:21:39 awoke Nicholas
>> from his slumbers and wrote
>>> On 29/03/2022 20:21, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 13:26:16 -0500
>>>> Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot said:
>>>>
>>>>>> Well now perhaps if the requirement for declaring war was that
>>>>>> the declarer must lose their head it might go a long way to curtailing
>>>>>> the practice.
>>>>>
>>>>> Put 'em up front when the shooting starts. They used to, didn't they ?
>>>>
>>>> Yep it certainly used to be the case that if you wanted people to
>>>> charge into battle for you then you had to be in front and when you went
>>>> down they went home. There seems to be a lot to be said for it, but I note
>>>> that in those days they *did* go out in front quite a lot so it's probably
>>>> not the deterrent I'd like to hope it was.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure about the "went home" bit. I don't think there was a
>>> concept of prisoners of war then, so your survival if you were on the
>>> losing side depended on your speed over the ground.
>>
>> Survival depended upon, amongst other things, your ransom value. In
>> quality armour with your coat of arms on your surcoat, would see you
>> paroled and sent back to the rear. None of those, your head or chest
>> would be stoved in, if you were lucky.
>>
>> Shakespeare's Richard III, who appears to have led from the front, was
>> not even fast enough over the ground.
>>
>> Some Russian generals appear to have been leading from the front <cough>
>> which is not the best place to lead from in the case of modern war.
>>
>One of them without the nous to step out of the way o a tank...

Funnily enough, I only heard this Flanders and Swann song for the
first time today: https://youtu.be/JWpjCFn0nfw?t=31

Spoiler alert, it involves a tank.

Nick

On 30-Mar-22 13:44, Nicholas D. Richards wrote:
> In article <jahm4kFp8caU2@mid.individual.net>, Mike Fleming
> <mike@tauzero.co.uk> on Wed, 30 Mar 2022 at 01:21:39 awoke Nicholas
> from his slumbers and wrote
>> On 29/03/2022 20:21, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 13:26:16 -0500
>>> Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot said:
>>>
>>>>> Well now perhaps if the requirement for declaring war was that
>>>>> the declarer must lose their head it might go a long way to curtailing
>>>>> the practice.
>>>>
>>>> Put 'em up front when the shooting starts. They used to, didn't they ?
>>>
>>> Yep it certainly used to be the case that if you wanted people to
>>> charge into battle for you then you had to be in front and when you went
>>> down they went home. There seems to be a lot to be said for it, but I note
>>> that in those days they *did* go out in front quite a lot so it's probably
>>> not the deterrent I'd like to hope it was.
>>
>> I'm not sure about the "went home" bit. I don't think there was a
>> concept of prisoners of war then, so your survival if you were on the
>> losing side depended on your speed over the ground.
>
> Survival depended upon, amongst other things, your ransom value. In
> quality armour with your coat of arms on your surcoat, would see you
> paroled and sent back to the rear. None of those, your head or chest
> would be stoved in, if you were lucky.

If you go back further than that, any that survived the battle had value
- as slaves.
Having an economy which did not rely on slavery is a (comparatively)
recent idea.

--
Sam Plusnet

On 30-Mar-22 15:15, maus wrote:
> On 2022-03-30, Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
>> Nicholas D. Richards said:
>>> In article <jahm4kFp8caU2@mid.individual.net>, Mike Fleming
>>> <mike@tauzero.co.uk> on Wed, 30 Mar 2022 at 01:21:39 awoke Nicholas
>>> from his slumbers and wrote
>>>> On 29/03/2022 20:21, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 13:26:16 -0500
>>>>> Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>
>>> Shakespeare's Richard III, who appears to have led from the front, was
>>> not even fast enough over the ground.
>>>
>>> Some Russian generals appear to have been leading from the front <cough>
>>> which is not the best place to lead from in the case of modern war.
>>
>>
>> I think that was the point, wasn't it, that there'd be less of it if
>> more of them did ?
>>
>>
>> That WW1 phrase about "Lions led by donkeys" is surreal - if you see a
>> pack of lions following along behind a donkey, what do you expect to
>> happen next ?
>>
>
> The Military theory at the time was that the Generals would be affected
> by the deaths and suffering of the front line troops, so the idea was
> that they would make the plans in places well away from the front line,
> and do something else while the attack was going on. Maybe go fishing.

I thought you sought a suitable hill top - from which you could see all
the various forces on the battlefield, and direct your troops hither and
yon to achieve the best result.

--
Sam Plusnet

On 30-Mar-22 20:57, Nick Odell wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 15:42:28 +0100, RustyHinge

>> One of them without the nous to step out of the way o a tank...
>
> Funnily enough, I only heard this Flanders and Swann song for the
> first time today: https://youtu.be/JWpjCFn0nfw?t=31
>
> Spoiler alert, it involves a tank.

<wipes unexplained moisture from an eye>

Sad that.

--
Sam Plusnet

On 30-Mar-22 0:40, Richard Robinson wrote:
> Nick Odell said:
>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 21:50:09 +0100, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 29-Mar-22 19:26, Richard Robinson wrote:
>>>
>>>> Less drastic was an early-80s piece in New Scientist: "Psychiatrists For
>>>> Peace". All national leaders with access to a Big Red Button has a
>>>> psychiatrist keeping an eye on them, so that if they show any signs of
>>>> pushing it they get sectioned as self-evidently MAD.
>>>>
>>>> It never got taken seriously, though ...
>>>
>>> Good. Is there much evidence that the people who go into the
>>> psychiatric profession are themselves stable and sane?
>>
>> Quis psychiatriet ipsos psychiatres sort of thing?
>
> Who would look for such evidence, and evaluate it ?
>
Seismology students. Obv.

"This one's about to blow his top."

--
Sam Plusnet

On 30-Mar-22 1:23, Mike Fleming wrote:
> On 29/03/2022 21:50, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>> On 29-Mar-22 19:26, Richard Robinson wrote:
>>
>>> Less drastic was an early-80s piece in New Scientist: "Psychiatrists For
>>> Peace". All national leaders with access to a Big Red Button has a
>>> psychiatrist keeping an eye on them, so that if they show any signs of
>>> pushing it they get sectioned as self-evidently MAD.
>>>
>>> It never got taken seriously, though ...
>>
>> Good.  Is there much evidence that the people who go into the
>> psychiatric profession are themselves stable and sane?
>
> In the same way as doctors are dedicated to the well-being of their
> patients? That Dr Shipman, such a nice man.
>
He didn't just alleviate their symptoms, he cured all that ailed them.

--
Sam Plusnet

On Wednesday, March 30, 2022 at 3:26:46 PM UTC-5, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> On 30-Mar-22 1:23, Mike Fleming wrote:
> > On 29/03/2022 21:50, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> >> On 29-Mar-22 19:26, Richard Robinson wrote:
> >>
> >>> Less drastic was an early-80s piece in New Scientist: "Psychiatrists For
> >>> Peace". All national leaders with access to a Big Red Button has a
> >>> psychiatrist keeping an eye on them, so that if they show any signs of
> >>> pushing it they get sectioned as self-evidently MAD.
> >>>
> >>> It never got taken seriously, though ...
> >>
> >> Good. Is there much evidence that the people who go into the
> >> psychiatric profession are themselves stable and sane?
> >
> > In the same way as doctors are dedicated to the well-being of their
> > patients? That Dr Shipman, such a nice man.
> >
> He didn't just alleviate their symptoms, he cured all that ailed them.
>
> --
> Sam Plusnet

Well, at least the psychiatrist would be able to monitor the people with access to the Big Red Button and ask if they're taking their medicines and check blood levels levels and ask them how their moods are but there's no real assuring that he/she would prevent them from pushing that button.

On 2022-03-30, Tone <tone@email.com> wrote:
> On 30/03/2022 15:15, maus wrote:
>> On 2022-03-30, Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:

Memory of when I was young and foolish, and Carlsberg Special Brew was
the thing.

May I suggest `So do I', many claimed authors, well sung by Christy
Moore,

--
greymausg@mail.com
That's not a mousehole!

On 2022-03-30, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
> On 30-Mar-22 15:15, maus wrote:
>> On 2022-03-30, Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
>>> Nicholas D. Richards said:
>>>> In article <jahm4kFp8caU2@mid.individual.net>, Mike Fleming
>>>> <mike@tauzero.co.uk> on Wed, 30 Mar 2022 at 01:21:39 awoke Nicholas
>>>> from his slumbers and wrote
>>>>> On 29/03/2022 20:21, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 13:26:16 -0500
>>>>>> Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Shakespeare's Richard III, who appears to have led from the front, was
>>>> not even fast enough over the ground.
>>>>
>>>> Some Russian generals appear to have been leading from the front <cough>
>>>> which is not the best place to lead from in the case of modern war.
>>>
>>>
>>> I think that was the point, wasn't it, that there'd be less of it if
>>> more of them did ?
>>>
>>>
>>> That WW1 phrase about "Lions led by donkeys" is surreal - if you see a
>>> pack of lions following along behind a donkey, what do you expect to
>>> happen next ?
>>>
>>
>> The Military theory at the time was that the Generals would be affected
>> by the deaths and suffering of the front line troops, so the idea was
>> that they would make the plans in places well away from the front line,
>> and do something else while the attack was going on. Maybe go fishing.
>
> I thought you sought a suitable hill top - from which you could see all
> the various forces on the battlefield, and direct your troops hither and
> yon to achieve the best result.
>
>
>

Not since sniper rifles became common.
--
greymausg@mail.com
That's not a mousehole!

Tease'n'Seize said:
> Richard Robinson wrote:
>
>> if you see a pack of lions following along behind a donkey, what do you
>> expect to happen next ?
> om-nom-nom.

Quite. But they didn't take the hint.

--
Richard Robinson
"The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes" - S. Lem

My email address is at http://qualmograph.org.uk/contact.html

On 30/03/2022 20:51, Nick Odell wrote:
>> May I submit track 7?
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_AxSUu89Rg&t=69s
>>
> Ah yes. Very apt.
>
> I must admit I misread that at first as Track 2 and wondered what on
> earth you were on about - a bit like the folk club audiences must have
> been when I was singing Sally Free And Easy from the floor at around
> the age of seventeen.
>
> Nick

No, a 7 looks like this- 7. But a 2 looks like this- 2.

Should have gone to Spacesavers?

Tone

On 30/03/2022 20:57, Nick Odell wrote:
> Funnily enough, I only heard this Flanders and Swann song for the
> first time today:https://youtu.be/JWpjCFn0nfw?t=31
>
> Spoiler alert, it involves a tank.
>
> Nick

Coo. Didn't have that one.

Thanks Nick. That'll do for Midday Mayhem next Monday.

Tone

On 30/03/2022 21:11, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> Having an economy which did not rely on slavery is a (comparatively)
> recent idea.

Although. to be fair, it is making a comeback.

Tone