Flag dynamics

[SUNRAY]

We know that it is the flag of a country recognised by hundreds of others.

Yes we do.

We know that it is a flag which is flown by the UN.

Yes we do.

We know that it is a flag which is flown on embassies across Europe.

Yes we do.

We know that it is not the flag of a proscribed organisation.

In that case why do menbers of two proscribed organisation fly it so proudly

We know that it is not a flag which is illegal to fly or display in the UK.

Yes
However you forgot this one: We know it is a flag flown by groups internationally recognised as terrorists

How selective to you think we should be in choosing which knowledge to admit to?

I try to look at the world in a balanced way and accept people have differing views and ideals, in the case of a flag I look at who is using it and what it means to them an me. Obviously, unlike yourself, I don't know everything so I can only make judgements on information I am aware of and try to apply that in a fair way.

When will you accept that no matter who may fly it,it is the flag of a country recognised by hundreds of others, it is flown by the UN, and it is flown on embassies across Europe,

I have never disputed that.

it is not the flag of a proscribed organisation,

In that case why do at least two of them fly it so proudly?

and it is not illegal to fly or display in the UK?

Why are you telling me that?

So do you really believe that if any flag is used by terrorists then everybody else has to stop using it, that nobody must use it unless they are expressing support for the terrorists?

No and I have not at any time suggested it to be the case BUT YOU HAVE stated the Union and St George flags have been hijacked by horrible people, and please note they are not a proscribed organisation, and suggested that anyone flying those flags is considered to be supporting such peoples.

As that is what you have suggested then I can only make the same suggestion that the terrorist group hamas, and has also now been pointed out the PA too, are both using this flag

, therefore as you are displaying this flag

, applying your own explanation it would not be unreasonable to consider you to be a supporter or active member of either of those TWO terrorist groups.

You can't have it both ways.

Is that really the position you wish to claim?

That is not a claim I have made.

 

[SUNRAY]

But you haven't answered my question

I take it you haven't seen the news reports of the hamas personel flying the same flag you display alongside their headbands.

Actually, I genuinely haven't.

My apologies, I missed this post.
Are you saying:

1) You have not seen any news reports? In which case where are you gleaning your facts from?

Or

2) You have seen news reports of proscribed organisations flying this flag

but you are so biased and blinkered you see the facts as fake news?

 

[SUNRAY]

Indeed so - but the point I was making was not only that but, rather, that the extent to which one would be 'disappointed'would depend upon the order in which the three discounts had been applied.

It is in the seller's interests to first apply the largest discount and then to move down the progressively lower ones - but the opposite order would leave the buyer less 'disappointed'

I placed an order today and had to queery the invoice amount:

The invoice is an electronic PDF which opened fine into XL, the red bits are mine and G37 clearly shows as 20% of the pre discount price.
The goods came to £468.69 and VAT of £93.74 came up as £117.27.
Seems they make the same mistake my quizateers make and they say they have been using the order form which becomes the invoice for 'a while'... Make me wonder how many check invoices?
Amended invoice, as an apology see first lines unit price

 

[JohnW2]

I placed an order today and had to queery the invoice amount: ..... The invoice is an electronic PDF which opened fine into XL, the red bits are mine and G37 clearly shows as 20% of the pre discount price.

Fair enough, but, as you illustrate, that's obviously just a 'programming error', with the VAT (column G) calculated as 20% of the pre-discount price (column D), whereas it obviously should be 20% of the discounted price (column F).

Make me wonder how many check invoices?

I certainly always do - since I've seen too many errors in them over the years! (and most clients seem to do the same with my invoices ).

Amended invoice, as an apology see first lines unit price

Nice to see a gesture - unless, of course, it's another error
Had I been making such a 'gesture', I think I would probably have increased the % discount for that item, rather than altering the pre-discount price.

 

[SUNRAY]

Fair enough, but, as you illustrate, that's obviously just a 'programming error', with the VAT (column G) calculated as 20% of the pre-discount price (column D), whereas it obviously should be 20% of the discounted price (column F).

I certainly always do - since I've seen too many errors in them over the years! (and most clients seem to do the same with my invoices ).

Nice to see a gesture - unless, of course, it's another error
Had I been making such a 'gesture', I think I would probably have increased the % discount for that item, rather than altering the pre-discount price.

Absolutely it's just a programme error but wacky it happens so close to our discussions about the same mistake.

Yes I check invoices but their comment that it's been in use 'for a while' implies it hasn't been pointed out before, either that or a deliberate attempt to glean some extra pennies from the unwary.

It is a gesture, and offered in the accompanying message, the method went through my mind too but at the end of it it makes little difference unless of course they called it 25%

 

[SUNRAY]

Apparently the new Iphone has "3x better scratch resistance"

 

[JohnW2]

Absolutely it's just a programme error but wacky it happens so close to our discussions about the same mistake.

We've all made simple (and very easy to make) programming errors like that one, and such is human frailty, but it's less excusable to let 'myths' distort one's mathematical thinking, as happened to myself (and, I presume, also morqthana)!

Yes I check invoices but their comment that it's been in use 'for a while' implies it hasn't been pointed out before, either that or a deliberate attempt to glean some extra pennies from the unwary.

Yes, it is a bit odd. One might expect (hope) that their annual accounts summaries would have identified the anomaly (unless, as you say, it was a deliberate act!).

It is a gesture, and offered in the accompanying message, the method went through my mind too but at the end of it it makes little difference unless of course they called it 25%

Yes, provided one gets the percentage correct, the bottom line is the same.
I suppose the reason I mentioned it is that, for reasons I've never really understood, my accountant has always advised me that when a client bullies me into paying less than my 'going rate' (only too common! ), I should invoice for the amount I think I deserve, and then apply a 'discount' to bring gthe bottom line down to what the client is prepared to pay. I suppose that 'rubs in' my point (although the client will probably look at nothing other than that 'bottom line'!), but beyond that I'm not sure why that is the advice.

 

[JohnW2]

Apparently the new Iphone has "3x better scratch resistance"

Ah - that must be why one can pay anything up to about £2,000 for one

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

Ah - that must be why one can pay anything up to about £2,000 for one

I'll stick with my recently bought new Iphone 13, bought for less than 1/2 price, because it wasn't the latest model. It replaced my very early Iphone, which still looked brand new when I sold that on.

 

[EFLImpudence]

No cries of Chinese rubbish ???

 

[JohnW2]

I'll stick with my recently bought new Iphone 13, bought for less than 1/2 price, because it wasn't the latest model. It replaced my very early Iphone, which still looked brand new when I sold that on.

I was eventually 'forced' (much to my annoyance) to 'upgrade' my iPhone 7 to an 11 (which I still have), despite the fact that the previous one was 'working fine' (including the battery), other than that new versions of 'apps' were increasingly unable to work with the most recent version of iOS that my phone was able to support.
I fear that it will not be too long that I am again 'forced to upgrade' - but, as you imply may be similar with you, there's no way that I am going to ever pay for a new and up-to-date version - for me it's always going to be refurbished phones which are already 'a good few versions old'!

 

[aveatry]

The whole phone thing is a rip off.
I was recently forced to change because increasingly apps would not work on my old android system. I looked into it and my phone when I brought it shipped with only 1 future android update so from then on it was a ticking - brick. So when I brought my new phone £200 I chose one that is scheduled to have 5 further android updates, it also has a expandable memory via a card so that should keep me going.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

I was eventually 'forced' (much to my annoyance) to 'upgrade' my iPhone 7 to an 11 (which I still have), despite the fact that the previous one was 'working fine' (including the battery), other than that new versions of 'apps' were increasingly unable to work with the most recent version of iOS that my phone was able to support.

Which was why I was 'forced to' reluctantly upgrade. My old phone, was bought as a refurb, then years later, I had to have a new battery fitted, then it needed yet another, when I replaced it, so I fitted a replacement to sell it. Fitting them, is not that difficult.

 

[EFLImpudence]

I am not a "tech-wiz" but what do iphones do that my £120 Samsung does not?

 

[SUNRAY]

I am not a "tech-wiz" but what do iphones do that my £120 Samsung does not?

Oh that's easy to answer:

It costs another £1000

I'm still firmly in the cheap ranges but it's getting more difficult as other people demand phones do more.

One of my big gripes is the size of them now.