Jump to content

PurpleCanary

Members
  • Content Count

    17,305
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    18

PurpleCanary last won the day on June 3

PurpleCanary had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,322 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The self-sufficiency project is the only financially viable one we have now, given our owners' lack of mega-money. I don't believe it necessarily forces us to play in one style or set of tactics or with a particular type of player. That seems to be more of matter of choice, based on a long-term perspective of what will work best eventually. We could, for example, if we wanted to develop or buy youngsters in the bruising style of a Chris Wood and sell them on for pots of money.
  2. Ray, the car analogy makes no sense. This is not perfect but it will do for now. You work in a small room in an office, along with five other people. You and one of the others have underlying but so far not fatal lung conditions. One of the other three is a heavy chain-smoker, but instead of going outside to puff away insists on doing in this small room. Smoking is legal and there is no office prohibition on smoking in that room, and this smoker says he has the right to damage his own health, and even end up killing himself if he wants to. But you and the other four, all non-smokers, say he has no right to threaten their health, citing the case of non-smoker Roy Castle who died of lung cancer from passive smoking. Even if it wasn't five against one, the liberty of a single person not to be given lung cancer would outweigh that of a selfish sod who stands on an absurd claim of personal freedom and knowingly endangers someone else.
  3. Yes, but be fair - Brexit has benefited the Estonian high-tech industry no end, with business moving there. And I'm sure I saw that predicted on the side of a bus during the referendum campaign. But perhaps it was while I was on holiday in Tallinn...
  4. Just to say, this afternoon I tried to put my seat on buyback for tomorrow. An email would be useless, given the delay nowadays, the Live Chat button was nowhere to be seen, and when I phoned I found I was ninth in the queue. So I hung up. I lose the chance of some buyback money but the club loses the chance in effect sell my seat twice.
  5. Ray, not wearing a seat belt is not the equivalent of not wearing a mask. I don't care if people decide to risk catching the virus and dying by, for example, not wearing a mask, on the false justification that it is purely their body and their life and can do what they want with it. The point is it is not just their body and their life. They categorically do not have the freedom to risk my body and my life or anyone else's by doing so. The Utilitarian principle of the greatest good of the greatest number trumps any faux libertarianism. And I repeat the question. What is the big libertarian deal about being forced to wear a mask? There are serious infringements on our liberties that are worth opposing, but this is not one of them.
  6. Group 4 of the Norwegian 3.Division. Fana to win at home against Ardal. Fana have an overall 4-1-1 and 16/9 record. Ardal have an overall 1-2-3 and 4/18 record, which doesn't look so bad but their last game was a home draw against the team below them, and before that they lost three in a row, with a 1/16 goal difference. Probably hence the odds of 1/8. - For the NCFC bet I suggest again Norwich City to score in both halves. It will happen one day. Good luck to all!
  7. I said 'knowingly risk''. And that 'risk' is crucial. Of course people who know they have the virus should isolate. I am not talking about them. My point is that people should take all possible precautions, such as mask-wearing, to avoid that risk. And this applies to people, including myself, who have been double-vaccinated. I fail to see the argument against it. Are people so fashion-conscious and egocentric they think it's not cool to wear a mask?
  8. Total b*llocks. Libertarianism is mostly a posh way of justifying an 'I'm all right, Jack' selfishness (as with Boris Johnson), but even when genuine there is nothing in its philosophy that says people have the freedom to knowingly risk passing on a killer disease to others.
  9. Totally by chance I came across this post from Cam's daughter. In the interests of not provoking even more trouble on this thread I have deleted the names of the posters referred to: Poor old Dad has been banned either by the mighty Web Team Pete or one of his acolytes but as a supporter of Norwich City with all the stuff from the gift shop to prove it I can say that he has survived that. He did not have an email telling him he had been banned but as he pointed out that would be too much to expect from Archant. He also asked me to state that Archant are more than twice in debt than Norwich City which they managed to hide in the business section. He sends his good wishes to …….....….. and ………............ who, for some reason, he regards as a beacon of light among what he otherwise thinks is a bunch of completely rural plonkers, pleasant though the location is. He regrets that .........……… has not yet grasped the concept of graphics but thinks that down to Ofsted's criticism of the Norfolk provision for ESN. He also thinks that the …………………….. chap has never run a business in his life.
  10. I would like to make it clear that I don’t understand that joke...
  11. I don't have an agenda here. I can't imagine what my agenda would be on this. But I do have a record of a post from Joe Ferrari on that message-board dated March 6 2011 saying this: I have yet again had to spend time removing several posts from regular users who should know better containing inappropriate language. You will note the very pleasing emergence of our @norwichcityfc official twitter service and the Club is currently actively considering other social networking possibilities for our supporters. In the light of this, and also because of the dwindling numbers of users of this bulletin board set against the disaproportionate amount of time required to monitor it, we may well close down this board in the near future. If this is something you really don't want to see happen, then you'll have to persuade us that you can refrain from posting inappropriate material and engage in good healthy debate and chats about NCFC and footy. Material published on here by users is our legal responsibility and therefore we will close it down if we're unhappy with the level of unacceptable material. I would hopefully look to some of the long-term, regular posters to help 'self-police' this board by discouraging others from posting offensive material - sadly some of them are the worst culprits! Thanks, Joe Bowkett and McNally joined the club in 2009, so they were certainly at the club when the message-board was shut down, and not only at the club but very much in charge.
  12. Or to put it another way, a poster here has to work very hard indeed to get themselves banned. Some real effort is needed over time to make it happen.
×
×
  • Create New...