chrisjpainter

Thames Water is doing its bit...by flooding half of Islington. Burst water main causes 4ft flood in London borough of Islington | UK News | Sky News

It's inspirational threads like this that make Pigeonwatch such a tour de force of social media.

I agree and as a youth worker I get media safeguarding training (it's grim) on every media platform you could imagine on how to spot signs and how to educate young people of the dangers of them. The trouble is, these things are like the Hydra's heads. You shut one off and more fill its place. Also, sometimes they don't actually exist until after the claims about them are made high profile, which is odd. Both Momo and Blue Whale probably didn't initially exist - and may still not. However, especially with Momo, young people hear about them and what people are apparently doing and being made to do, even if it was all a hoax in the first place. The language used in these challenges can be incredibly vague, so it's impossible to definitively prove intention was to incite suicide - or even to self harm. That causes a problem for the algorithms that make firewalls work. If they were triggered by phrases like 'congratulations on levelling up' and 'are you ready to master the ultimate challenge?' every gaming platform in the world would be shut out completely unnecessarily - as would the government's development plan for the North! Education in internet safety for young people is critical. Social media's permanence means the next one is never far away, so if we can't beat them, at least we can try to educate young people about them, because they won't be able to protect themselves without it. As to the case and Archie, here's a good article on the case from The Guardian, written by a palliative care doctor: What can we learn from the awful tragedy of Archie Battersbee’s death? | Rachel Clarke | The Guardian As an aside, I want to know one thing. Is there evidence that this was an internet challenge? They're the vogue fear for parents these days (good ol' social media) but at the same time, how many times have parents said 'I never saw the signs' and 'he was always so happy and full of life' after their child has chosen to commit suicide?

This isn't a completely fair representation. It's not a scam and it's not about desperate people being conned. They are a legal professional outfit that mostly work within the remit of their own beliefs for those who don't have the legal skills/knowledge to put their case forward themselves. They were also the people representing the bakers in the 'gay wedding cake' case, where the courts tried to force a company to make a cake based on something they disagreed with, something which a lot of non-christians (and a fair few gay activists) found...er...distasteful! They showed the case wasn't about homophobia but about the right to practice beliefs openly, which they won eventually. BASC and other organisations frequently do it - and it's recommended on here often enough. 'Contact BASC's legal department, they'll have advice'. It's just the stakes are higher and it's something you don't believe in. I can't tell you the number of times I've heard anti friends describe BASC as crooks for jumping on shooting bandwagons to blow something out of all proportion because it suits their agenda. Is that fair? Probably not, it's just they're anti BASC, so they're happy to call them scammers. There's a big difference between organisations like CC and the ambulance chasing compensation companies. With CC they articulate pre-existing beliefs, as we saw for the cake case. All the bakers had to work with initially was 'we're not homophobic, we're just practicing what we believe, which is allowed'. Without asking CC to get involved, a case they should have won (for everyone's sakes), they would have lost. That being said, this case is a bit odd and I'm not sure who's being manipulated by whom. As far as I can make out, the initial argument was 'we can see some signs of life, he just needs more time' but then they asked CC to get involved and it became about the sanctity of life. It's felt for a while like the family's been using CC to drive their agenda through a proxy war armed with Christian values they don't necessarily believe, but find convenient right now. Why do families do it? Hope that isn't there. We've seen a fair few of these of late (this is the first one involving CC; it's not about them creating the situation to exploit). People don't want to let go. Whether it's more time, a new treatment, different doctors it's the same: too often they believe they know more about their child's illness and suffering, simply because they're parents. What really needs to change is preparation for bereavement. One conversation by a preoccupied surgeon or an overworked nurse will never be enough to prepare a family for the worst possible news they can ever comprehend. It's their world falling apart at the seams. As to that last bit Minky about where was the mother. Downstairs. Think it through before you accuse someone of negligence that results in the death of a child. A parent cannot and should not be watching over a child 24/7. That's how overprotective parenting turns into domination and then a form of abuse. Sometimes, young people get themselves into situations quicker than they or their guardians can get them out of it. Whatever it was, the real culprits are whoever put out the material he was watching. This sort of stuff dodges firewalls and parental filters constantly. You can be the best parent in the world, but a tiny, tiny percentage of times, you just have to hope that your kid doesn't do something extraordinarily stupid.

Anyone interested in science and space on here will know that a few months ago a $10 billion telescope was punted into space. Its primary role was observation in infrared and can show stars in incredible detail from light years away. Anyway, our hero, Étienne Klein, research director at France’s Alternative Energies and Atomic Energy Commission, posted a photo last week, showing the closest star to the sun, Proxima Centauri. “This level of detail,” Klein wrote. “A new world is revealed day after day.” Something familiar about it? That's because it's actually a slice of chorizo, but no one noticed. A few days later he was forced to own up, saying '“According to contemporary cosmology, no object belonging to Spanish charcuterie exists anywhere but on Earth.” He did it to demonstrate the trouble with fake news. More here: French Scientist's Photo of ‘Distant Star’ Was Actually Chorizo - VICE Well played, sir, well played indeed.

This is the first time I've heard of this one, so thought I'd share. Yesterday my mum received a Whatsapp message saying: 'Hi mum, it's me, just to let you know I've got a new number' She was sceptical, but unfortunately replied to say 'that's fine, is this Chris', to which a reply inevitably came back 'yes it is'. She changed her number for me in her phone. Fortunately this morning she sent me a whatsapp message to check this had happened, and I confirmed that it hadn't and that I'd never have replied to the question 'is this Chris' with something so tediously mundane as 'yes it is'. I'm not sure what the ultimate goal is, probably the usual personal details mining, but just to let you all know this one's about - and to contact the person directly on a different contacting platform to confirm, rather than just a reply. Unless you smell a rat immediately and then just get on with your life after deleting and blocking the number. Variants to this apparently include 'Hi mum/dad I dropped my phone in the bath/loo/sink etc and this is my new phone and number'.

A lot to like about this England team...

The commentary's not been great for the whole tournament. The trouble is a lot of it is far too positive, which is out of kilter with the critical analysis that you get in the men's game. Russo's back heel was a case in point. Cheeky, inventive and well timed, for sure. But the goal keeper's had a shocker. It's such poor decision making. She tries to go with her hands, then goes with her feet but it's all too late. Any decent goal keeper - men's or women's - would have gone with the legs first time. If she does that, it's a simple save. Too many things are 'unlucky' or 'not quite on the same wavelength' when really they're just a complete waste, or really poor positionally. As to the crowds, there are a couple of reasons, one obvious, one a bit more sciency! Firstly, men can shout louder. There are far more men at men's games than there are at women's games. Secondly, though women's games are at a very different pitch. they're much higher and shrill than the men's games because the demographics in the crowd aren't the same. But most humans hear the lower registers better, so most people would get a more enriched hearing experience from the men's game, even if the raw numbers in the decibels would say they're equal.

Fair play to captain Leah Williamson for quoting The Who in her live BBC interview '...you know what? The kids are alright!' How right she is.

YEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!! Magic!!!

Well that answers that question. The ladies do rip their shirts off in celebration. GET IN CHLOE KELLY!!!!!

TOOOOONE!

That first yellow card sent a good game into a bit of a tail spin. But I'd put England ahead on points. Just need to take our chances to avoid the dreaded 1-0

Popp injured in the warmup! Sad for her and Germany, but that's great news for us

Bye then. We're both sat on the sofa waiting for it to start and very excited. It's not a lot of people's cups of tea on here and if you start threads about football, you get the antis who are unable to talk in anything other than clichés to voice their dislike or apathy. Are you watching? It should be a cracker. If England score either of the first two goals, they'll win. My fear is Germany going ahead and then defending out for a 1-0 win. If England play well, we win

This is how Ray Mears does it and if it's good enough for Mears... One copycat Lansky ordered. Many thanks, chaps

Are the copycat versions effective? In myt experience the chinese copies are hit and miss ,but if these are a hit, then they look good. Thanks for taking the time to leave such a full reply.

I need to bring a few knives back to sharpness. These aren't kitchen ones, more bushcraft/outdoor knives, but not sure where to begin with getting the right stone and how fine they need to be. I've already got the dents out of the blades, so we're now talking sharpening rather than repairing, but they are practically childproof blunt! So where's the best place to begin? Also, any recommendations on what ones to actually buy would be great, especially if they tell you how fine they are I looked at a few and definitions of 'fine' for example seem to vary wildly when it comes to the grit number.

By this place do you mean airgun forum or here? You're wrong on both accounts, so why not go back to not commenting on here too? Four posts in 18 years says you're not going to be missed much

Any mention of Mark Knopfler of Dire Straits? He's got a dinosaur named after him. True story

But they have said that they wouldn't want them to be an MP because of it - independent of what this chap's done: 'For the record no I don't want men in womens clothes sat in Parliament.' And there have been numerous posts tying their outrage (whether mock or genuine) to both the accident and what he was wearing - occasionally more the latter. But as Vince Green said, that's got absolutely nothing to do with the case and has nothing to do with how good an MP he is. So for people to also claim that if he doesn't have 'blokish traits about himself' he should not be canvassing is inherently discriminatory. I have no idea what blokish would look like, but it sounds remarkably like a candidate who's not going to appeal to at least half the population of his constituency - and if it's got anything to do with the sort of 'blokish' behaviour one sees at football matches, then the only thing I can say is I'm glad he doesn't have 'blokish traits'. Scully's wokism extends to wanting people to be allowed to do as the please free of judgement and criticism - but that includes being allowed to dress up as a black character! But too often we can't do things because offence is assumed, whether it's felt or not and things get banned. I've always wanted to go as Virginia Woolf to a fancy dress party, but these days the blacking up issue makes that impossible - a spectacular irony there.

Quite. There is nothing about him choosing to wear women's clothing that automatically makes him unworthy of being in parliament. It's unusual. It's not for everyone. But what is it about cross dressing, or being transgender or whatever it is that he is doing/being that would make him unable to treat his office's responsibilities with the respect they deserve. He could be the most honourable, dedicated chap in the building, but that would have nothing to do with his clothing choice or what gender he feels comfortable in being. He's a lousy choice for politician because he fled the scene of an accident, tried to hide from the responsibility and then lied about it being because of PTSD. That's not about being a man in women's clothing, that's about a serious dereliction of the responsibilities of his position.

Yup. I could understand initial shock. I could understand shame and embarrassment of the incident, particularly as someone did see him at the scene. But to then blame PTSD for the legion of missed opportunities is a grave insult to the thousands of servicemen and women, rape victims, abuse and trauma sufferers who really do have it. The prosecution nailed it. If it really had have triggered something connected to PTSD, he'd likely have been unable to make any decision, not simply a bad decision. Appalling behaviour. The judge was too kind to simply write it off as 'not credible'.

What a silly. I have been asked similar questions. Why would you go out on a kayak just to put a hook through a fish? Simple answer: Why would you not?