Consumer unit breakers

[ban-all-sheds]

In retrospect I can see your point.

I suppose one should not be surprised about how immature, pathetic or downright stupid some people can be when it comes to finding amusement, but I often am.

 

[JohnW2]

In retrospect I can see your point. I suppose one should not be surprised about how immature, pathetic or downright stupid some people can be when it comes to finding amusement, but I often am.

Well, if the questions were "too bad to be true", there could be too possibilities. Firstly, it might have just been a pathetic 'wind up' - such as you elude to above. However, more seriously, it could also have been someone with views like yourself, probing to see how irresponsible the responses to the questions might be.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Blimey - is the sun already over the yard-arm in Bucks?

Well, if the questions were "too bad to be true", there could be too possibilities. Firstly, it might have just been a pathetic 'wind up' - such as you elude to above. However, more seriously, it could also have been someone with views like yourself, probing to see how irresponsible the responses to the questions might be.

Anyway - possibility #2 seems unlikely - it went on for far too long.

I still prefer the most obvious explanation - he is just a t**t.

 

[JohnW2]

Anyway - possibility #2 seems unlikely - it went on for far too long. ... I still prefer the most obvious explanation - he is just a t**t.

You're probably right. However, I have seen "possibility #2" in other forums/fora - in at least one case done by mods-in-disguise!

Why, given that he's anonymous, anyway, he bothered to 'do a Holmslaw' with all his posts in this thread is a bit less clear!

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

You're probably right. However, I have seen "possibility #2" in other forums/fora - in at least one case done by mods-in-disguise!

Unbelievable.

I do wonder sometimes if there is another species on the planet that happens to look human, so alien and incomprehensible is their behaviour.

Why, given that he's anonymous, anyway, he bothered to 'do a Holmslaw' with all his posts in this thread is a bit less clear!

Stop looking for motives.

Stop engaging in the practice of "I wonder what he meant by that".

He is simply a t**t.

 

[JohnW2]

You're probably right. However, I have seen "possibility #2" in other forums/fora - in at least one case done by mods-in-disguise!

Unbelievable. ... I do wonder sometimes if there is another species on the planet that happens to look human, so alien and incomprehensible is their behaviour.

Not at all. It was in a situation in which there had been complaints that a certain forum member was persistently giving seriously dangerous (aka 'irresponsible') advice - so the mods decided to find out 'how far (s)he would go' in order to determine whether they should ban the person (which they did).

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

That's entrapment.

So is Andy going to get banned?

 

[JohnW2]

That's entrapment.

I don't really see that - it's more like a 'bait car'. Just like the car, the questions were merely 'posted out there', for anyone to respond to, or not, as they chose. Anyone who responded did so voluntarily and through their own choice.

So is Andy going to get banned?

That is not for me, or you, to decide. There is, however, a big difference between this thread and the case I was talking about above. At least the advice Andy was giving was generally correct, the question being as to whether anyone should be giving any advice, even if correct, to someone who was clearly out of his depth, and in no way 'competent'.

In the case I was talking about someone was 'advising' crazy, certainly 'incorrect' and useless, DIY treatments for various serious illnesses. If someone started persistently giving crazy, dangerous and incorrect electrical advice in this forum ("use blue for line and brown for neutral", "don't bother about switching off the lecky - just wear Marigolds" etc.), I would hope that they would either be stopped or banned.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

OK

 

[securespark]

I still can't understand why you have to resort to insults without fail.

Posters can be many things. Deluded, unskilled, thoughtless, unthinking, illogical.

You don't have to default to that word.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Posters can be many things. Deluded, unskilled, thoughtless, unthinking, illogical.

And idiotic, and stupid, and t**ts

You don't have to default to that word.

I don't default to it.


And it is not an insult, in the sense that I am not using it in order to insult the OP.

People who behave like t**ts may well feel insulted by being called it, but then they might equally well feel insulted by being told that they are deluded, unskilled, thoughtless, unthinking or illogical.

 

[securespark]

Search ban-all-sheds.

The wordcount is as follows (some words have more "*"'s than others):

t*at 94
f*ckwit 29
w*nker 8
prat 4
Oddly, there is only one "t*sser"

 

[ban-all-sheds]

So less than 0.3% of my posts then.

Or less still if there's more than one instance in any posts.

 

[securespark]

That's obviously OK, then.

 

[JohnW2]

That's obviously OK, then.

Apparently, at least in the eyes of some! Comparative figures for other 'regulars' would be interesting!

Kind Regards, John