Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@tom wrote:
@dan Jackiels wrote:
10 unsullied British Pounds to the first person(other than Tom) to name the publication Tom plagerises in his diatribes.
It’s a shame that you don’t know the meaning of plagiarizes. But, considering you can’t even spell it that’s no surprise. :lol:
It’s ‘plagiarises’ actually.
I had no need for a dictionary either! However, if I WERE to look for an online one, I would be sure to choose one with English rather than American spellings :wink:
I wouldn’t normally have passed comment … but the irony made me giggle.
@pepsi wrote:
School photos with a difference….
Omg having looked at some of my old school photographs …..you should see the hairstyles !
:shock:
You should see the one of me in my brownie uniform … yes, yes … my Mum thought it was an amazing idea
@wordsworth60 wrote:
Yes Anc, but then the landed gentry didn’t depend on cash for their power, that’s why they held the developing bougoisie in such disdain in Victorian times, while having to marry off their progeny to the nouveau riche in order to avoid penury.
And yes, Manners maketh man, but look who said it . . . .
You don’t want your yeomanry too well mannered if they need to be out in the fields gathering the harvest before the rains come (from which you’ll take your taxes of course). And you certainly don’t want them too well mannered if they’re going to stand in a field ‘sticking it up’ some foreigner who won’t let you take over their territory – you just want them compliant.
Now, where did I put my copy off The Red Flag, I know I was singing it a moment ago . . . . .
Was it up your arse?
@sceptical guy wrote:
a combination of wealth, social confidence, odd accent (listen to Christchurch students at Oxford – a weird accent all of their own), birth into the top drawer of society, centre of a fawning social circle, the employer of personal servants, top public school (Eton or Harrow, Winchester for the radicals) and university (Oxbridge or Sandhurst) are the easiest. Lack of one or more of these makes someone either ‘gone down in the world’ oor wanna-be posh.
Manners are too complicated to cover the term – a posh person can be of High Culture or a Philistine, suave and/or boorish, loud-voiced or quietly-spoken, ruthless and/or formally considerate, sexually libertine or puritan.
Bankers were wanna-be posh over 100 years ago, but were looked down by the then-posh on as nouveaux-riche and Villa Tories who didn’t know how to enjoy hunting foxes and women.
The poshest women had to save their virginity for their husband to ensure that the children were his. After the children were born, it was chocks away and where’s the big gardener?
But posh changes. Today bankers look down on the lottery winners as the nouveaux riches; academics have moved from never having read Milton to never having heard of him.
Today’s lottery winnners are tomorrow’s posh. Nobody can stand being looked down upon, everyone seeks to look down on others. Unhappy bunch we all are.
I like that explanation, skept …
I’m not in the slightest bit posh (under any of those headings!), but I DO enjoy occasions where an effort has been made. Not an ostentatious effort, nor simply one of monetary worth … but genuine thoughtfulness.
So, I don’t think I am ‘wannabe posh’ either … just happy with who I am and what I want.
Is that more ‘sensible’ than ‘posh’?!
@pepsi wrote:
Good morning Su :)
Hi ian …Thinking it is maybe …Labrador ?
oooooo … morning! :)
Bet you’re right hahaha
@wordsworth60 wrote:
@simplysu wrote:
@wordsworth60 wrote:
@terry wrote:
The thing I dislike about all of this is the little clique that you, wordsworth and panda are a part of. And your answers are always so smug and righteous. And then you pat each other on the back at your smugness. Neither one of you has a valid point to make, but that’s not my problem..it’s yours .
Terry!!!!! Shame on you!!! First of all don’t drag my name into your personal arguments when I’m not participating.
Secondly I have longed for righteousness ever since iniquity lost its sheen, thank you again.
Thirdly thank you for putting me in a clique, I had adopted a posture of splendid isolation in my late forties but it outlived its usefulness. Now I belong once more!!! And with Panda and jen_jen!! We’re like a left-wing Terry, Terry and Terry!!
Fourthly your critique of my back patting technique is most welcome, I was aiming for a grope. Must work on my reach-around.
Fifthly you mention three of us then say “neither”. I know precise use of English is your claimed forte, so perhaps you could identify which of two out of the three you meant.
Sixthly thank you for relieving me of the suspicion that I might have born down on you too hard, now I know my assertions are not your problem I can give myself some lattitude.
Gawd bless yer guvnor! Yer a diamond geezer!!!!
tsk
Su, if your attention to detail is that consistent, you and me should definitely take on a project or something . . . . . 8) :lol: 8) :lol: 8) :lol: 8)
I just KNOW you meant to type “you and I” … ( :-# )
D?
:)
@ian52hants wrote:
@simplysu wrote:
O?
The littlest room in the house. Sigh that letter always raised a giggle in blockbusters – “I’ll take a P please Bob”
I chose to ignore your toilet humour :wink:
Is there a bloody ‘O’ or not?
Oh I say … Are you lonesome tonight?
@wordsworth60 wrote:
@terry wrote:
The thing I dislike about all of this is the little clique that you, wordsworth and panda are a part of. And your answers are always so smug and righteous. And then you pat each other on the back at your smugness. Neither one of you has a valid point to make, but that’s not my problem..it’s yours .
Terry!!!!! Shame on you!!! First of all don’t drag my name into your personal arguments when I’m not participating.
Secondly I have longed for righteousness ever since iniquity lost it’s sheen, thank you again.
Thirdly thank you for putting me in a clique, I had adopted a posture of splendid isolation in my late forties but it outlived its usefulness. Now I belong once more!!! And with Panda and jen_jen!! We’re like a left-wing Terry, Terry and Terry!!
Fourthly your critique of my back patting technique is most welcome, I was aiming for a grope. Must work on my reach-around.
Fifthly you mention three of us then say “neither”. I know precise use of English is your claimed forte, so perhaps you could identify which of two out of the three you meant.
Sixthly thank you for relieving me of the suspicion that I might have born down on you too hard, now I know my assertions are not your problem I can give myself some lattitude.
Gawd bless yer guvnor! Yer a diamond geezer!!!!
tsk
