synopses up to Friday

[v***@gmail.com]

https://ambridgereporter.org.uk/synopses/2024.html#June
these are very detailed. I ca't see where to thank him for them. I
rather like his asides.

[Kosmo]

Post by v***@gmail.com
https://ambridgereporter.org.uk/synopses/2024.html#June
these are very detailed. I ca't see where to thank him for them. I
rather like his asides.

There is a discussion forum where it may be possible to offer thanks:
https://discussion.ambridgereporter.org.uk/

I have recently utilised the post at:
https://discussion.ambridgereporter.org.uk/t/financial-transparency/3306

to send them some money as feral-techie's latest post in that thread
indicated a significant financial shortfall and making a tangible
contribution as recognition of my use of the resource was worthwhile.

Writing that sort of detail each day is a significant task!

[v***@gmail.com]

Post by Kosmo

Post by v***@gmail.com
https://ambridgereporter.org.uk/synopses/2024.html#June
these are very detailed. I ca't see where to thank him for them. I
rather like his asides.

https://discussion.ambridgereporter.org.uk/
https://discussion.ambridgereporter.org.uk/t/financial-transparency/3306
to send them some money as feral-techie's latest post in that thread
indicated a significant financial shortfall and making a tangible
contribution as recognition of my use of the resource was worthwhile.
Writing that sort of detail each day is a significant task!

They want you to register and join, as do so many places, to feed
back. I am thinking whether I want to.

[Jenny M Benson]

Post by v***@gmail.com
They want you to register and join, as do so many places, to feed
back. I am thinking whether I want to.

Royal Cheshire Show had a live feed this year (probably welcomed by many
since their entry price was astronomical). I was going to watch it but
was required to enter various log-in-type details to do so. Having done
that I was told I had to submit my credit card details. Not, they
assured me, that they would deduct any money from it but to make it
easier for me to make purchases at that website in the future. At that
point I backed out.

[J. P. Gilliver]

Post by v***@gmail.com
https://ambridgereporter.org.uk/synopses/2024.html#June
these are very detailed. I ca't see where to thank him for them. I
rather like his asides.

https://discussion.ambridgereporter.org.uk/categories might be a way in.

[Iain Archer]

Post by v***@gmail.com
https://ambridgereporter.org.uk/synopses/2024.html#June
these are verydetailed. I ca't see where to thank him for them.
I rather like his asides.

MustardLand. :) But do note his latest post. I don't know if anyone fills the gaps.
<https://www.paranormal.org.uk/mustardland/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4377&start=175>

[Kosmo]

Post by Iain Archer

Post by v***@gmail.com
https://ambridgereporter.org.uk/synopses/2024.html#June
these are verydetailed. I ca't see where to thank him for them.
I rather like his asides.

MustardLand. :) But do note his latest post. I don't know if anyone fills the gaps.
<https://www.paranormal.org.uk/mustardland/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4377&start=175>

Looking back I think that whilst he does not write them when away they
are written up when he returns.

[Nick Odell]

Post by v***@gmail.com
https://ambridgereporter.org.uk/synopses/2024.html#June
these are very detailed. I ca't see where to thank him for them. I
rather like his asides.

Who is Chris Ghoti? I thought there was a writer called Chris
something who used to write lots of witty stuff in an Archers' blog
but I have a feeling that might have been Beth Miller.[1]

Nick
[1] I know... I know..

[Kosmo]

Post by Nick Odell

Post by v***@gmail.com
https://ambridgereporter.org.uk/synopses/2024.html#June
these are very detailed. I ca't see where to thank him for them. I
rather like his asides.

Who is Chris Ghoti? I thought there was a writer called Chris
something who used to write lots of witty stuff in an Archers' blog
but I have a feeling that might have been Beth Miller.[1]
Nick
[1] I know... I know..

Well I assume he (or she) might be called Chris Fish?

The original daily reports were commenced by Chris Harrison I believe -
but there was later a team contributing to Lowfield (as twas) including
Brenda Selwyn who now provides the hosting of theambridgearchives.org.uk
- which ends in August 2018 whilst the Chris Ghoti records commence in
2020 I believe (perhaps a lockdown activity initially?).

[Iain Archer]

https://ambridgereporter.org.uk/synopses/2024.html#June these are very
detailed. I ca't see where to thank him for them. I rather like his
asides.

Who is Chris Ghoti? I thought there was a writer called Chris something
who used to write lots of witty stuff in an Archers' blog but I have a
feeling that might have been Beth Miller.[1]

A trace of an ancient memory trace suggests to me that the Ghoti
is a play on the heterogeneity of english spelling<->pronunciation
practice, and that leads to the putative surname Fish[1], which itself
suggests to me the likely veridicality of that surname. But aparrt from
that I don't know nuffing gov. Quite possibly he was a regular contributor
to Beeb Mustardland, but of that no mental trace as yet, and searching
my digital files for any remnant would likely mentally disable me for at
least half an hour, so I think I'll leave it there. Who's Beth Miller anyway?

[1} Is all that probably common knowledge anyway?

Nick [1] I know... I know..

I've heard of him.

iain

[Sam Plusnet]

Post by Iain Archer

https://ambridgereporter.org.uk/synopses/2024.html#June these are very
detailed. I ca't see where to thank him for them. I rather like his
asides.

Who is Chris Ghoti? I thought there was a writer called Chris something
who used to write lots of witty stuff in an Archers' blog but I have a
feeling that might have been Beth Miller.[1]

A trace of an ancient memory trace suggests to me that the Ghoti
is a play on the heterogeneity of english spelling<->pronunciation
practice, and that leads to the putative surname Fish[1], which itself
suggests to me the likely veridicality of that surname. But aparrt from
that I don't know nuffing gov. Quite possibly he was a regular contributor
to Beeb Mustardland, but of that no mental trace as yet, and searching
my digital files for any remnant would likely mentally disable me for at
least half an hour, so I think I'll leave it there. Who's Beth Miller anyway?
[1} Is all that probably common knowledge anyway?

Nick [1] I know... I know..

I've heard of him.

Perhaps his real name is Shaw? - since GBS was the source of that GHOTI
= fish statement (or so I recall).

[Ben Blaney]

Post by Nick Odell
Who is Chris Ghoti?

Unrelated, probably, but memory jogged: there was Kirsten from Cambridge who
posted here, who had "ghoti" in her signature. I always thought she was
unconventional, smart and cool. I hope life is treating her well.

[Serena Blanchflower]

Post by Ben Blaney

Post by Nick Odell
Who is Chris Ghoti?

Unrelated, probably, but memory jogged: there was Kirsten from Cambridge who
posted here, who had "ghoti" in her signature. I always thought she was
unconventional, smart and cool. I hope life is treating her well.

Yes, I still see her, on FB, on occasion and I think all's well with her.

[Rosie Mitchell]

Post by Ben Blaney

Post by Nick Odell
Who is Chris Ghoti?

Unrelated, probably, but memory jogged: there was Kirsten from Cambridge who
posted here, who had "ghoti" in her signature. I always thought she was
unconventional, smart and cool. I hope life is treating her well.

Kirsten is alive and well, living near Ely and active on Basefuck.

Rosie

[J. P. Gilliver]

In message <***@milou.golgonooza.co.uk> at Tue, 2 Jul 2024
22:57:15, Rosie Mitchell <***@golgonooza.co.uk> writes
[]

Post by Rosie Mitchell
Kirsten is alive and well, living near Ely and active on Basefuck.
Rosie

LOL (literally for once!). I've not heard it called that before - will
really have to try to remember that one!

[Nick Odell]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
[]

Post by Rosie Mitchell
Kirsten is alive and well, living near Ely and active on Basefuck.
Rosie

LOL (literally for once!). I've not heard it called that before - will
really have to try to remember that one!

I'd rather people didn't call Facebook anything at all. Every mention,
however witty, is a mention. They don't need the publicity and the
sooner it's forgotten about and consigned to history, the better, IMO.

Nick

[Jenny M Benson]

Post by Nick Odell
I'd rather people didn't call Facebook anything at all. Every mention,
however witty, is a mention. They don't need the publicity and the
sooner it's forgotten about and consigned to history, the better, IMO.

Please may I join your club?

What particularly irks me is that quite often I want to do something,
like look at a pub's menu, for example and am told to visit their *££^%%
site - then very often one is required to sign up to the darned site in
order to do so. At that point I tell them where to stuff their menu, of
course.

[J. P. Gilliver]

Post by Jenny M Benson

Post by Nick Odell
I'd rather people didn't call Facebook anything at all. Every mention,
however witty, is a mention. They don't need the publicity and the
sooner it's forgotten about and consigned to history, the better, IMO.

Please may I join your club?
What particularly irks me is that quite often I want to do something,
like look at a pub's menu, for example and am told to visit their
*££^%% site - then very often one is required to sign up to the darned
site in order to do so. At that point I tell them where to stuff their
menu, of course.

Me too! About the only one I've accepted - under protest, but it's a
monopoly - was for map updates to my SatNav (XGODY).

As well as the assumption that you're willing to sign up to things, I
just hate the way a basefuck page _works_, or doesn't; it keeps loading
for ever, and navigating it - though presumably some people find it
intuitive, or at least comprehensible - most definitely isn't for me.

[Sam Plusnet]

Post by Jenny M Benson

Post by Nick Odell
I'd rather people didn't call Facebook anything at all. Every mention,
however witty, is a mention. They don't need the publicity and the
sooner it's forgotten about and consigned to history, the better, IMO.

Please may I join your club?
What particularly irks me is that quite often I want to do something,
like look at a pub's menu, for example and am told to visit their *££^%%
site - then very often one is required to sign up to the darned site in
order to do so.  At that point I tell them where to stuff their menu, of
course.

Even if you did sign up, that menu might be the Christmas Lunch - with
little indication of which Christmas was intended.

[Kosmo]

Post by Jenny M Benson

Post by Nick Odell
I'd rather people didn't call Facebook anything at all. Every mention,
however witty, is a mention. They don't need the publicity and the
sooner it's forgotten about and consigned to history, the better, IMO.

Please may I join your club?
What particularly irks me is that quite often I want to do something,
like look at a pub's menu, for example and am told to visit their *££^%%
site - then very often one is required to sign up to the darned site in
order to do so.  At that point I tell them where to stuff their menu, of
course.

Next week I am going to a restaurant that tells me the current menu is
to be found on something called "Instagram". I can only assume that
they send a telegram with the menu to your door. Why can they not put
it on their website?

[john ashby]

Post by Kosmo

Post by Jenny M Benson

Post by Nick Odell
I'd rather people didn't call Facebook anything at all. Every mention,
however witty, is a mention. They don't need the publicity and the
sooner it's forgotten about and consigned to history, the better, IMO.

Please may I join your club?
What particularly irks me is that quite often I want to do something,
like look at a pub's menu, for example and am told to visit their
*££^%% site - then very often one is required to sign up to the darned
site in order to do so.  At that point I tell them where to stuff
their menu, of course.

Next week I am going to a restaurant that tells me the current menu is
to be found on something called "Instagram".  I can only assume that
they send a telegram with the menu to your door.  Why can they not put
it on their website?

It keeps out the undesirables (FSVO desire).

john

[Kosmo]

Post by john ashby

Post by Kosmo

Post by Jenny M Benson

Post by Nick Odell
I'd rather people didn't call Facebook anything at all. Every mention,
however witty, is a mention. They don't need the publicity and the
sooner it's forgotten about and consigned to history, the better, IMO.

Please may I join your club?
What particularly irks me is that quite often I want to do something,
like look at a pub's menu, for example and am told to visit their
*££^%% site - then very often one is required to sign up to the
darned site in order to do so.  At that point I tell them where to
stuff their menu, of course.

Next week I am going to a restaurant that tells me the current menu is
to be found on something called "Instagram".  I can only assume that
they send a telegram with the menu to your door.  Why can they not put
it on their website?

It keeps out the undesirables (FSVO desire).
john

I would have thought I was an ideal customer - it will be interesting to
see what sort of custom they do desire.

[Sam Plusnet]

Post by Kosmo

Post by john ashby

Post by Kosmo

Post by Jenny M Benson

Post by Nick Odell
I'd rather people didn't call Facebook anything at all. Every mention,
however witty, is a mention. They don't need the publicity and the
sooner it's forgotten about and consigned to history, the better, IMO.

Please may I join your club?
What particularly irks me is that quite often I want to do
something, like look at a pub's menu, for example and am told to
visit their *££^%% site - then very often one is required to sign up
to the darned site in order to do so.  At that point I tell them
where to stuff their menu, of course.

Next week I am going to a restaurant that tells me the current menu
is to be found on something called "Instagram".  I can only assume
that they send a telegram with the menu to your door.  Why can they
not put it on their website?

It keeps out the undesirables (FSVO desire).
john

I would have thought I was an ideal customer - it will be interesting to
see what sort of custom they do desire.

People who 'do' Instagram?

[v***@gmail.com]

Post by Sam Plusnet

Post by Kosmo

Post by john ashby

Post by Kosmo

Post by Jenny M Benson

Post by Nick Odell
I'd rather people didn't call Facebook anything at all. Every mention,
however witty, is a mention. They don't need the publicity and the
sooner it's forgotten about and consigned to history, the better, IMO.

Please may I join your club?
What particularly irks me is that quite often I want to do
something, like look at a pub's menu, for example and am told to
visit their *££^%% site - then very often one is required to sign up
to the darned site in order to do so.  At that point I tell them
where to stuff their menu, of course.

Next week I am going to a restaurant that tells me the current menu
is to be found on something called "Instagram".  I can only assume
that they send a telegram with the menu to your door.  Why can they
not put it on their website?

It keeps out the undesirables (FSVO desire).
john

I would have thought I was an ideal customer - it will be interesting to
see what sort of custom they do desire.

People who 'do' Instagram?

I follow daughters and other relatives. They post photos of grandkids
and #2 daughter's tv channels, Drama and Alibi, and the company UKTV,
just to be known as U soon, post there. I follow a few others, one is
the sports comentator with the two dogs, Olive and Mabel :). Oh and
some umrats post there. Kim sends nice photos of Cornwall. I have only
managed to post one thing.

[Jenny M Benson]

Post by v***@gmail.com
They post photos of grandkids
and #2 daughter's tv channels, Drama and Alibi, and the company UKTV,
just to be known as U soon, post there.

Ah! Is that why Drama is becoming U & Drama (1) and another one also
changing. Has UKTV bought them out or did they always belong but not
carried the brand?

(1) Or is is U and Drama or U + Drama or something else? I've heard it
said a few times but not noticed it written.

[J. P. Gilliver]

Post by Jenny M Benson

Post by v***@gmail.com
They post photos of grandkids
and #2 daughter's tv channels, Drama and Alibi, and the company UKTV,
just to be known as U soon, post there.

Ah! Is that why Drama is becoming U & Drama (1) and another one also
changing. Has UKTV bought them out or did they always belong but not
carried the brand?

- from the excellent Adam
Martin - will tell you more than you could possibly want to know. (I say
he's excellent, but this is a boring - IMO - subject, so don't expect
excitement. [It's 13'9" long.])

Dave, DRAMA, YESTERDAY, and W will all have ...

Post by Jenny M Benson
(1) Or is is U and Drama or U + Drama or something else? I've heard it
said a few times but not noticed it written.

... "U&" stuck on the beginning of their names, from 2024-7-16.

The network also owns the pay channels Gold, Alibi, and Eden. Those
_may_ be rebranded later. UKTV Play (a streaming site) will become just
U. (At www.u.co.uk .)

UKTV is fully owned by the BBC's commercial subsidiary BBC Studios; I
didn't know that. (Explains why they show a lot of old BBC stuff.)

Whatever happens to the BBC after 2027 will obviously have effects too.

[Kosmo]

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by v***@gmail.com
They post photos of grandkids
and #2 daughter's tv channels, Drama and Alibi, and the company UKTV,
just to be known as U soon, post there.

Ah!  Is that why Drama is becoming U & Drama (1) and another one also
changing.  Has UKTV bought them out or did they always belong but not
carried the brand?

http://youtu.be/ED3anP1mkkc - from the excellent Adam
Martin - will tell you more than you could possibly want to know. (I say
he's excellent, but this is a boring - IMO - subject, so don't expect
excitement. [It's 13'9" long.])
Dave, DRAMA, YESTERDAY, and W will all have ...

(1) Or is is U and Drama or U + Drama or something else?  I've heard
it said a few times but not noticed it written.

... "U&" stuck on the beginning of their names, from 2024-7-16.
The network also owns the pay channels Gold, Alibi, and Eden. Those
_may_ be rebranded later. UKTV Play (a streaming site) will become just
U. (At www.u.co.uk .)
UKTV is fully owned by the BBC's commercial subsidiary BBC Studios; I
didn't know that. (Explains why they show a lot of old BBC stuff.)

Sounds like the same people that thought up the bright idea of "your
BBC" some years ago - roundly derided by the late Sir Terry at the time.

At what point does "some years ago" become "many years ago" please for
all the pedants out there as I was not sure which one to use?

[Nick Odell]

Post by Kosmo

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by v***@gmail.com
They post photos of grandkids
and #2 daughter's tv channels, Drama and Alibi, and the company UKTV,
just to be known as U soon, post there.

Ah!  Is that why Drama is becoming U & Drama (1) and another one also
changing.  Has UKTV bought them out or did they always belong but not
carried the brand?

http://youtu.be/ED3anP1mkkc - from the excellent Adam
Martin - will tell you more than you could possibly want to know. (I say
he's excellent, but this is a boring - IMO - subject, so don't expect
excitement. [It's 13'9" long.])
Dave, DRAMA, YESTERDAY, and W will all have ...

(1) Or is is U and Drama or U + Drama or something else?  I've heard
it said a few times but not noticed it written.

... "U&" stuck on the beginning of their names, from 2024-7-16.
The network also owns the pay channels Gold, Alibi, and Eden. Those
_may_ be rebranded later. UKTV Play (a streaming site) will become just
U. (At www.u.co.uk .)
UKTV is fully owned by the BBC's commercial subsidiary BBC Studios; I
didn't know that. (Explains why they show a lot of old BBC stuff.)

Sounds like the same people that thought up the bright idea of "your
BBC" some years ago - roundly derided by the late Sir Terry at the time.
At what point does "some years ago" become "many years ago" please for
all the pedants out there as I was not sure which one to use?

I think that is probably the point at which you can remember it as if
it were yesterday but your kids have never heard of it.

Talking of remembering things as if they were yesterday, one of my
Kennedy moments is about hearing a particular song for the first time
on the radio and its 30th anniversary is coming up next year. Its
never been featured on Soul Music (I checked) so how do I contact the
programme and drop a gentle hint about this song when, as far as I can
see, Soul Music has been produced by many different individuals
working out of many different BBC regional studios? Is there a
central BBC correspondence address which forwards mail to the regions?

Please: no social media. I was thinking of a letter with an envelope
and a stamp. Oh and if anybody interested in knowing which song I'm
thinking of, just go through the list of previous editions of Soul
Music (where I spotted one duplicate) and you may be quietly confident
that it's not one of them

Thanks,

Nick

[v***@gmail.com]

On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 10:40:35 +0100, Jenny M Benson

Post by Jenny M Benson

Post by v***@gmail.com
They post photos of grandkids
and #2 daughter's tv channels, Drama and Alibi, and the company UKTV,
just to be known as U soon, post there.

Ah! Is that why Drama is becoming U & Drama (1) and another one also
changing. Has UKTV bought them out or did they always belong but not
carried the brand?
(1) Or is is U and Drama or U + Drama or something else? I've heard it
said a few times but not noticed it written.

Unlimited free streaming continues View this email in your browser
UKTV Play is becoming U You may have already seen that UKTV Play is
changing its name, but we want to remind you that our website, mobile
and TV apps have started to update. You don't need to do a thing and
you can still stream your favourite shows for free.
New series to stream now
Future Man
Drama • Comedy This drama comedy stars Josh Hutcherson as a
janitor-turned-hero who must save humanity after beating an unbeatable
video game.
Watch Now
Love Me
Drama • Romance
Watch Now
Secrets of the London Underground
New Series • Engineering
Watch Now

[Kosmo]

Post by v***@gmail.com
Secrets of the London Underground

That will that young Mr Dunn being super-enthusiastic again.

[Kosmo]

Post by Kosmo

Post by v***@gmail.com
Secrets of the London Underground

That will that young Mr Dunn being super-enthusiastic again.

And thank you for the reminder - I see the first episode has already
been transmitted and the Sky box has again failed to automatically
record it.

[v***@gmail.com]

Post by Kosmo

Post by Kosmo

Post by v***@gmail.com
Secrets of the London Underground

That will that young Mr Dunn being super-enthusiastic again.

And thank you for the reminder - I see the first episode has already
been transmitted and the Sky box has again failed to automatically
record it.

That was the train to Aldwych and I worked at Bush House, BBC Extrnal
Services, at various times in the early 70s. Sometimes I drove in and
parked in Covent Gdn but also went by tube. The train didn't run all
day. it was just Holborn to Aldwych I think. In the rush hours.

[Kosmo]

Post by v***@gmail.com
it was just Holborn to Aldwych I think.

Indeed it was. Until relatively recently it was all still connected
underground and could be used for filming, but I think it has all been
disconnected now and there is no power to the track.

[v***@gmail.com]

Post by Kosmo

Post by v***@gmail.com
it was just Holborn to Aldwych I think.

Indeed it was. Until relatively recently it was all still connected
underground and could be used for filming, but I think it has all been
disconnected now and there is no power to the track.

Actually, not only did I use that ine when I worked for the BBC but
years later, helping organise Basic Skills courses for City and
Islington College, I started courses for London Underground workers.
We ran literacy for engineers in various places. An example was a
team where the man in charge relied on the second to read notices and
they were doing work on live lines. I also did a tube safety course,
which line is live and how to be safe when part of a work team.

[Joe Kerr]

Post by Jenny M Benson

Post by Nick Odell
I'd rather people didn't call Facebook anything at all. Every mention,
however witty, is a mention. They don't need the publicity and the
sooner it's forgotten about and consigned to history, the better, IMO.

Please may I join your club?
What particularly irks me is that quite often I want to do something,
like look at a pub's menu, for example and am told to visit their *££^%%
site - then very often one is required to sign up to the darned site in
order to do so.  At that point I tell them where to stuff their menu, of
course.

There is another related problem I have found that is possibly all round
worse. That is people of a younger generation setting up business and
using only a mobile phone and a page on that place that Nick dislikes so
much[1]. The result is no entry in the Yellow Pages, or any other
directory, and a web presence that is almost unfindable without knowing
the business name because the details, if provided, are in a graphic.
The result is potential customers unable to find the goods and services
they need, the business failing from lack of custom and a hit to the
economy. This can probably be expanded to include an increase in
benefits paid to former business owners (and staff), boarded up shops
and an increase in litter and vandalism. And you need to take in to
consideration that that place that Nick dislikes so much[2] blocks some
pages unless you are a member of their evil empire.

[1] Phew! Managed to skirt round that one.
[2] And again.

[J. P. Gilliver]

In message <v66tli$2svh2$***@dont-email.me> at Thu, 4 Jul 2024 20:37:18,
Joe Kerr <***@cheerful.com> writes
[]

Post by Joe Kerr
There is another related problem I have found that is possibly all
round worse. That is people of a younger generation setting up business
and using only a mobile phone and a page on that place that Nick
dislikes so much[1]. The result is no entry in the Yellow Pages, or any
other directory, and a web presence that is almost unfindable without
knowing the business name because the details, if provided, are in a
graphic. The result is potential customers unable to find the goods and

This is actually a serious point - not just on BaseFuck, but "ordinary"
web pages too: if information (especially navigation) is _only_ there as
a graphic (even if it's a picture of text, let alone some weird symbol
like three dots or dashes), those using screenreader software cannot see
it. I think in theory in the US it breaks the Americans with
Disabilities act, but I've not heard of anyone being prosecuted under
it, and of course we don't have the same legislation (I don't think even
Europe does for once).
[]

[Nick Odell]

Post by Joe Kerr

Post by Jenny M Benson

Post by Nick Odell
I'd rather people didn't call Facebook anything at all. Every mention,
however witty, is a mention. They don't need the publicity and the
sooner it's forgotten about and consigned to history, the better, IMO.

Please may I join your club?
What particularly irks me is that quite often I want to do something,
like look at a pub's menu, for example and am told to visit their *££^%%
site - then very often one is required to sign up to the darned site in
order to do so.  At that point I tell them where to stuff their menu, of
course.

There is another related problem I have found that is possibly all round
worse. That is people of a younger generation setting up business and
using only a mobile phone and a page on that place that Nick dislikes so
much[1]. The result is no entry in the Yellow Pages, or any other
directory, and a web presence that is almost unfindable without knowing
the business name because the details, if provided, are in a graphic.
The result is potential customers unable to find the goods and services
they need, the business failing from lack of custom and a hit to the
economy. This can probably be expanded to include an increase in
benefits paid to former business owners (and staff), boarded up shops
and an increase in litter and vandalism. And you need to take in to
consideration that that place that Nick dislikes so much[2] blocks some
pages unless you are a member of their evil empire.
[1] Phew! Managed to skirt round that one.
[2] And again.

<grin>

I wonder whether a substantial number of people who have businesses
like this started them up as an informal side-hustle and then never
expanded their presence beyond the platform they launched from?

Nevertheless, I think it's a dangerously vulnerable place to be:
invested solely in a social media presence that could simply evaporate
without notice. It might be because of a whim on the part of the
platform owner, legislation by one government or another or just that
platform falling out of fashion - something that has happened to
previous platforms both suddenly and unexpectedly.

Given that about 20% of new businesses are known to have failed within
their first year and around 60% go down within the first three,
building a little more resilience into the business while you can
ought to be, IMO, at the front of the business owners' priorities.

And that's all before we start to consider those large groups of
potential customers who don't use particular platforms or like me who
don't use any who are effectively blocked from doing business with
them because of this.

Nick

[J. P. Gilliver]

In message <***@4ax.com> at Fri, 5 Jul
2024 00:07:21, Nick Odell <***@yahoo.ca> writes
[]

Post by Nick Odell
And that's all before we start to consider those large groups of
potential customers who don't use particular platforms or like me who
don't use any who are effectively blocked from doing business with
them because of this.
Nick

Yes, I've actively decided against options where their main - or only! -
means of access is FacePuke. It's a bit like not dealing with companies
who only give a mobile number (offering one _as well_ is fine), though
that's becoming increasingly common even for OK people, and with the
imminent demise (2025 or 2027) of POTS will become commoner.

[v***@gmail.com]

Post by Nick Odell

Post by Joe Kerr

Post by Jenny M Benson

Post by Nick Odell
I'd rather people didn't call Facebook anything at all. Every mention,
however witty, is a mention. They don't need the publicity and the
sooner it's forgotten about and consigned to history, the better, IMO.

Please may I join your club?
What particularly irks me is that quite often I want to do something,
like look at a pub's menu, for example and am told to visit their *££^%%
site - then very often one is required to sign up to the darned site in
order to do so.  At that point I tell them where to stuff their menu, of
course.

There is another related problem I have found that is possibly all round
worse. That is people of a younger generation setting up business and
using only a mobile phone and a page on that place that Nick dislikes so
much[1]. The result is no entry in the Yellow Pages, or any other
directory, and a web presence that is almost unfindable without knowing
the business name because the details, if provided, are in a graphic.
The result is potential customers unable to find the goods and services
they need, the business failing from lack of custom and a hit to the
economy. This can probably be expanded to include an increase in
benefits paid to former business owners (and staff), boarded up shops
and an increase in litter and vandalism. And you need to take in to
consideration that that place that Nick dislikes so much[2] blocks some
pages unless you are a member of their evil empire.
[1] Phew! Managed to skirt round that one.
[2] And again.

<grin>
I wonder whether a substantial number of people who have businesses
like this started them up as an informal side-hustle and then never
expanded their presence beyond the platform they launched from?
invested solely in a social media presence that could simply evaporate
without notice. It might be because of a whim on the part of the
platform owner, legislation by one government or another or just that
platform falling out of fashion - something that has happened to
previous platforms both suddenly and unexpectedly.
Given that about 20% of new businesses are known to have failed within
their first year and around 60% go down within the first three,
building a little more resilience into the business while you can
ought to be, IMO, at the front of the business owners' priorities.
And that's all before we start to consider those large groups of
potential customers who don't use particular platforms or like me who
don't use any who are effectively blocked from doing business with
them because of this.
Nick

We watch and even rewatch when no new ones, 4 in a Bed. This is B&B
owners staying in each others premises and assessing for good value.
They pay what they think the stay is worth, which is revealed at the
end.

During the visits they give written feed back on each stay. They don't
seem to think ahead, as the organisations you complain of. They don't
seem to bother about seeming nasty. It is not whoever wins. It is who
the viewers might go and stay with. A clean venue, reasonable
breakfast and pleasant owners seem basic.

[Sam Plusnet]

Post by Nick Odell

Post by Joe Kerr

Post by Jenny M Benson

Post by Nick Odell
I'd rather people didn't call Facebook anything at all. Every mention,
however witty, is a mention. They don't need the publicity and the
sooner it's forgotten about and consigned to history, the better, IMO.

Please may I join your club?
What particularly irks me is that quite often I want to do something,
like look at a pub's menu, for example and am told to visit their *££^%%
site - then very often one is required to sign up to the darned site in
order to do so.  At that point I tell them where to stuff their menu, of
course.

There is another related problem I have found that is possibly all round
worse. That is people of a younger generation setting up business and
using only a mobile phone and a page on that place that Nick dislikes so
much[1]. The result is no entry in the Yellow Pages, or any other
directory, and a web presence that is almost unfindable without knowing
the business name because the details, if provided, are in a graphic.
The result is potential customers unable to find the goods and services
they need, the business failing from lack of custom and a hit to the
economy. This can probably be expanded to include an increase in
benefits paid to former business owners (and staff), boarded up shops
and an increase in litter and vandalism. And you need to take in to
consideration that that place that Nick dislikes so much[2] blocks some
pages unless you are a member of their evil empire.
[1] Phew! Managed to skirt round that one.
[2] And again.

<grin>
I wonder whether a substantial number of people who have businesses
like this started them up as an informal side-hustle and then never
expanded their presence beyond the platform they launched from?
invested solely in a social media presence that could simply evaporate
without notice. It might be because of a whim on the part of the
platform owner, legislation by one government or another or just that
platform falling out of fashion - something that has happened to
previous platforms both suddenly and unexpectedly.
Given that about 20% of new businesses are known to have failed within
their first year and around 60% go down within the first three,
building a little more resilience into the business while you can
ought to be, IMO, at the front of the business owners' priorities.
And that's all before we start to consider those large groups of
potential customers who don't use particular platforms or like me who
don't use any who are effectively blocked from doing business with
them because of this.

My limited experience of small one-man, or man + wife + son, businesses
is that they may be good at their trade (I usually ask around to see
which ones have a good local reputation) but they are all lousy at
running a business.
Expecting them to manage and maintain (say) a website is a waste of
time. Sticking something up on Facebook, or whatever, is pretty much
the limit (and most of the enthusiastic reviews are written by members
of the family).

[Joe Kerr]

Post by Sam Plusnet

Post by Nick Odell

Post by Joe Kerr

Post by Jenny M Benson

Post by Nick Odell
I'd rather people didn't call Facebook anything at all. Every mention,
however witty, is a mention. They don't need the publicity and the
sooner it's forgotten about and consigned to history, the better, IMO.

Please may I join your club?
What particularly irks me is that quite often I want to do something,
like look at a pub's menu, for example and am told to visit their *££^%%
site - then very often one is required to sign up to the darned site in
order to do so.  At that point I tell them where to stuff their menu, of
course.

There is another related problem I have found that is possibly all round
worse. That is people of a younger generation setting up business and
using only a mobile phone and a page on that place that Nick dislikes so
much[1]. The result is no entry in the Yellow Pages, or any other
directory, and a web presence that is almost unfindable without knowing
the business name because the details, if provided, are in a graphic.
The result is potential customers unable to find the goods and services
they need, the business failing from lack of custom and a hit to the
economy. This can probably be expanded to include an increase in
benefits paid to former business owners (and staff), boarded up shops
and an increase in litter and vandalism. And you need to take in to
consideration that that place that Nick dislikes so much[2] blocks some
pages unless you are a member of their evil empire.
[1] Phew! Managed to skirt round that one.
[2] And again.

<grin>
I wonder whether a substantial number of people who have businesses
like this started them up as an informal side-hustle and then never
expanded their presence beyond the platform they launched from?
invested solely in a social media presence that could simply evaporate
without notice. It might be because of a whim on the part of the
platform owner, legislation by one government or another or just that
platform falling out of fashion - something that has happened to
previous platforms both suddenly and unexpectedly.
Given that about 20% of new businesses are known to have failed within
their first year and around 60% go down within the first three,
building a little more resilience into the business while you can
ought to be, IMO, at the front of the business owners' priorities.
And that's all before we start to consider those large groups of
potential customers who don't use particular platforms or like me who
don't use any who are effectively blocked from doing business with
them because of this.

My limited experience of small one-man, or man + wife + son, businesses
is that they may be good at their trade (I usually ask around to see
which ones have a good local reputation) but they are all lousy at
running a business.

Everybody has their limitations.

Post by Sam Plusnet
Expecting them to manage and maintain (say) a website is a waste of
time.  Sticking something up on Facebook, or whatever, is pretty much
the limit (and most of the enthusiastic reviews are written by members
of the family).

All it needs is a single page including name, address, contact details,
opening hours and products or services on offer. Using Wordpress would
be hardly any more effort than using that place that Nick dislikes so
much[3], but would cost a little more. Which leads on to something else
that irks me: People (or even worse, web developers) using templates and
possibly stock images when creating web sites that then claim they offer
services that they can't provide[4] and accept credit cards that they
don't accept[5] (but the online payment system does and then the
transaction fails).

[3] See [1] and [2] above.
[4] Compare the number of garages offering welding with the number
actually able to offer it, for example.
[5] A lot of takeaways, for example.

[Kate B]

Post by Joe Kerr

Post by Sam Plusnet

Post by Nick Odell

Post by Joe Kerr

Post by Jenny M Benson

Post by Nick Odell
I'd rather people didn't call Facebook anything at all. Every mention,
however witty, is a mention. They don't need the publicity and the
sooner it's forgotten about and consigned to history, the better, IMO.

Please may I join your club?
What particularly irks me is that quite often I want to do something,
like look at a pub's menu, for example and am told to visit their *££^%%
site - then very often one is required to sign up to the darned site in
order to do so.  At that point I tell them where to stuff their menu, of
course.

There is another related problem I have found that is possibly all round
worse. That is people of a younger generation setting up business and
using only a mobile phone and a page on that place that Nick dislikes so
much[1]. The result is no entry in the Yellow Pages, or any other
directory, and a web presence that is almost unfindable without knowing
the business name because the details, if provided, are in a graphic.
The result is potential customers unable to find the goods and services
they need, the business failing from lack of custom and a hit to the
economy. This can probably be expanded to include an increase in
benefits paid to former business owners (and staff), boarded up shops
and an increase in litter and vandalism. And you need to take in to
consideration that that place that Nick dislikes so much[2] blocks some
pages unless you are a member of their evil empire.
[1] Phew! Managed to skirt round that one.
[2] And again.

<grin>
I wonder whether a substantial number of people who have businesses
like this started them up as an informal side-hustle and then never
expanded their presence beyond the platform they launched from?
invested solely in a social media presence that could simply evaporate
without notice. It might be because of a whim on the part of the
platform owner, legislation by one government or another or just that
platform falling out of fashion - something that has happened to
previous platforms both suddenly and unexpectedly.
Given that about 20% of new businesses are known to have failed within
their first year and around 60% go down within the first three,
building a little more resilience into the business while you can
ought to be, IMO, at the front of the business owners' priorities.
And that's all before we start to consider those large groups of
potential customers who don't use particular platforms or like me who
don't use any who are effectively blocked from doing business with
them because of this.

My limited experience of small one-man, or man + wife + son,
businesses is that they may be good at their trade (I usually ask
around to see which ones have a good local reputation) but they are
all lousy at running a business.

Everybody has their limitations.

Post by Sam Plusnet
Expecting them to manage and maintain (say) a website is a waste of
time.  Sticking something up on Facebook, or whatever, is pretty much
the limit (and most of the enthusiastic reviews are written by members
of the family).

All it needs is a single page including name, address, contact details,
opening hours and products or services on offer. Using Wordpress would
be hardly any more effort than using that place that Nick dislikes so
much[3], but would cost a little more. Which leads on to something else
that irks me: People (or even worse, web developers) using templates and
possibly stock images when creating web sites that then claim they offer
services that they can't provide[4] and accept credit cards that they
don't accept[5] (but the online payment system does and then the
transaction fails).
[3] See [1] and [2] above.
[4] Compare the number of garages offering welding with the number
actually able to offer it, for example.
[5] A lot of takeaways, for example.

Setting up even a one-page WordPress (or Wix or SquareSpace which are
both much simpler than WP) site takes vastly more effort than putting up
a Faceache page. And you have to sort out a domain name and probably
find a developer to do it - which results in all those stock services
that don't actually exist (because it is a rare developer that actually
listens to the client...). FB is a doddle in comparison.

[Sam Plusnet]

Post by Kate B

Post by Joe Kerr

Post by Sam Plusnet

Post by Nick Odell

Post by Joe Kerr

Post by Jenny M Benson

Post by Nick Odell
I'd rather people didn't call Facebook anything at all. Every mention,
however witty, is a mention. They don't need the publicity and the
sooner it's forgotten about and consigned to history, the better, IMO.

Please may I join your club?
What particularly irks me is that quite often I want to do something,
like look at a pub's menu, for example and am told to visit their *££^%%
site - then very often one is required to sign up to the darned site in
order to do so.  At that point I tell them where to stuff their menu, of
course.

There is another related problem I have found that is possibly all round
worse. That is people of a younger generation setting up business and
using only a mobile phone and a page on that place that Nick dislikes so
much[1]. The result is no entry in the Yellow Pages, or any other
directory, and a web presence that is almost unfindable without knowing
the business name because the details, if provided, are in a graphic.
The result is potential customers unable to find the goods and services
they need, the business failing from lack of custom and a hit to the
economy. This can probably be expanded to include an increase in
benefits paid to former business owners (and staff), boarded up shops
and an increase in litter and vandalism. And you need to take in to
consideration that that place that Nick dislikes so much[2] blocks some
pages unless you are a member of their evil empire.
[1] Phew! Managed to skirt round that one.
[2] And again.

<grin>
I wonder whether a substantial number of people who have businesses
like this started them up as an informal side-hustle and then never
expanded their presence beyond the platform they launched from?
invested solely in a social media presence that could simply evaporate
without notice. It might be because of a whim on the part of the
platform owner, legislation by one government or another or just that
platform falling out of fashion - something that has happened to
previous platforms both suddenly and unexpectedly.
Given that about 20% of new businesses are known to have failed within
their first year and around 60% go down within the first three,
building a little more resilience into the business while you can
ought to be, IMO, at the front of the business owners' priorities.
And that's all before we start to consider those large groups of
potential customers who don't use particular platforms or like me who
don't use any who are effectively blocked from doing business with
them because of this.

My limited experience of small one-man, or man + wife + son,
businesses is that they may be good at their trade (I usually ask
around to see which ones have a good local reputation) but they are
all lousy at running a business.

Everybody has their limitations.

Post by Sam Plusnet
Expecting them to manage and maintain (say) a website is a waste of
time.  Sticking something up on Facebook, or whatever, is pretty much
the limit (and most of the enthusiastic reviews are written by
members of the family).

All it needs is a single page including name, address, contact
details, opening hours and products or services on offer. Using
Wordpress would be hardly any more effort than using that place that
Nick dislikes so much[3], but would cost a little more. Which leads on
to something else that irks me: People (or even worse, web developers)
using templates and possibly stock images when creating web sites that
then claim they offer services that they can't provide[4] and accept
credit cards that they don't accept[5] (but the online payment system
does and then the transaction fails).
[3] See [1] and [2] above.
[4] Compare the number of garages offering welding with the number
actually able to offer it, for example.
[5] A lot of takeaways, for example.

Setting up even a one-page WordPress (or Wix or SquareSpace which are
both much simpler than WP) site takes vastly more effort than putting up
a Faceache page. And you have to sort out a domain name and probably
find a developer to do it - which results in all those stock services
that don't actually exist (because it is a rare developer that actually
listens to the client...). FB is a doddle in comparison.

I suspect some of those are rough 'dummy' websites lashed together by a
freelance developer - in the hopes of being paid to make a proper job of
it.

[Sam Plusnet]

Post by Joe Kerr

Post by Sam Plusnet

Post by Nick Odell

Post by Joe Kerr

Post by Jenny M Benson

Post by Nick Odell
I'd rather people didn't call Facebook anything at all. Every mention,
however witty, is a mention. They don't need the publicity and the
sooner it's forgotten about and consigned to history, the better, IMO.

Please may I join your club?
What particularly irks me is that quite often I want to do something,
like look at a pub's menu, for example and am told to visit their *££^%%
site - then very often one is required to sign up to the darned site in
order to do so.  At that point I tell them where to stuff their menu, of
course.

There is another related problem I have found that is possibly all round
worse. That is people of a younger generation setting up business and
using only a mobile phone and a page on that place that Nick dislikes so
much[1]. The result is no entry in the Yellow Pages, or any other
directory, and a web presence that is almost unfindable without knowing
the business name because the details, if provided, are in a graphic.
The result is potential customers unable to find the goods and services
they need, the business failing from lack of custom and a hit to the
economy. This can probably be expanded to include an increase in
benefits paid to former business owners (and staff), boarded up shops
and an increase in litter and vandalism. And you need to take in to
consideration that that place that Nick dislikes so much[2] blocks some
pages unless you are a member of their evil empire.
[1] Phew! Managed to skirt round that one.
[2] And again.

<grin>
I wonder whether a substantial number of people who have businesses
like this started them up as an informal side-hustle and then never
expanded their presence beyond the platform they launched from?
invested solely in a social media presence that could simply evaporate
without notice. It might be because of a whim on the part of the
platform owner, legislation by one government or another or just that
platform falling out of fashion - something that has happened to
previous platforms both suddenly and unexpectedly.
Given that about 20% of new businesses are known to have failed within
their first year and around 60% go down within the first three,
building a little more resilience into the business while you can
ought to be, IMO, at the front of the business owners' priorities.
And that's all before we start to consider those large groups of
potential customers who don't use particular platforms or like me who
don't use any who are effectively blocked from doing business with
them because of this.

My limited experience of small one-man, or man + wife + son,
businesses is that they may be good at their trade (I usually ask
around to see which ones have a good local reputation) but they are
all lousy at running a business.

Everybody has their limitations.

Post by Sam Plusnet
Expecting them to manage and maintain (say) a website is a waste of
time.  Sticking something up on Facebook, or whatever, is pretty much
the limit (and most of the enthusiastic reviews are written by members
of the family).

All it needs is a single page including name, address, contact details,
opening hours and products or services on offer. Using Wordpress would
be hardly any more effort than using that place that Nick dislikes so
much[3], but would cost a little more. Which leads on to something else
that irks me: People (or even worse, web developers) using templates and
possibly stock images when creating web sites that then claim they offer
services that they can't provide[4] and accept credit cards that they
don't accept[5] (but the online payment system does and then the
transaction fails).
[3] See [1] and [2] above.
[4] Compare the number of garages offering welding with the number
actually able to offer it, for example.
[5] A lot of takeaways, for example.

Don't forget the "Contact Us" email address given on that website, which
is never read.

[john ashby]

Post by Joe Kerr

Post by Sam Plusnet

Post by Nick Odell

Post by Joe Kerr

Post by Jenny M Benson

Post by Nick Odell
I'd rather people didn't call Facebook anything at all. Every mention,
however witty, is a mention. They don't need the publicity and the
sooner it's forgotten about and consigned to history, the better, IMO.

Please may I join your club?
What particularly irks me is that quite often I want to do something,
like look at a pub's menu, for example and am told to visit their *££^%%
site - then very often one is required to sign up to the darned site in
order to do so.  At that point I tell them where to stuff their menu, of
course.

There is another related problem I have found that is possibly all round
worse. That is people of a younger generation setting up business and
using only a mobile phone and a page on that place that Nick dislikes so
much[1]. The result is no entry in the Yellow Pages, or any other
directory, and a web presence that is almost unfindable without knowing
the business name because the details, if provided, are in a graphic.
The result is potential customers unable to find the goods and services
they need, the business failing from lack of custom and a hit to the
economy. This can probably be expanded to include an increase in
benefits paid to former business owners (and staff), boarded up shops
and an increase in litter and vandalism. And you need to take in to
consideration that that place that Nick dislikes so much[2] blocks some
pages unless you are a member of their evil empire.
[1] Phew! Managed to skirt round that one.
[2] And again.

<grin>
I wonder whether a substantial number of people who have businesses
like this started them up as an informal side-hustle and then never
expanded their presence beyond the platform they launched from?
invested solely in a social media presence that could simply evaporate
without notice. It might be because of a whim on the part of the
platform owner, legislation by one government or another or just that
platform falling out of fashion - something that has happened to
previous platforms both suddenly and unexpectedly.
Given that about 20% of new businesses are known to have failed within
their first year and around 60% go down within the first three,
building a little more resilience into the business while you can
ought to be, IMO, at the front of the business owners' priorities.
And that's all before we start to consider those large groups of
potential customers who don't use particular platforms or like me who
don't use any who are effectively blocked from doing business with
them because of this.

My limited experience of small one-man, or man + wife + son,
businesses is that they may be good at their trade (I usually ask
around to see which ones have a good local reputation) but they are
all lousy at running a business.

Everybody has their limitations.

Post by Sam Plusnet
Expecting them to manage and maintain (say) a website is a waste of
time.  Sticking something up on Facebook, or whatever, is pretty much
the limit (and most of the enthusiastic reviews are written by members
of the family).

All it needs is a single page including name, address, contact details,
opening hours and products or services on offer. Using Wordpress would
be hardly any more effort than using that place that Nick dislikes so
much[3],

Does this need to become an official umracronym? TPTNDSM.

john

[J. P. Gilliver]

[]

Post by john ashby

Wordpress would be hardly any more effort than using that place that
Nick dislikes so much[3],

Does this need to become an official umracronym? TPTNDSM.
john

Had to think for a moment about that one!

I fear it, being only one letter shorter than that which it represents,
would be hard to establish - besides, I prefer the one Jenny (ITIW) told
us, Basefuck; however, that triggered a warning when I used it on my
local nextdoor, though it accepted Facepuke.

[Jenny M Benson]

besides, I prefer the one Jenny (ITIW) told us, Basefuck;

Can't lay claim to that one, unfortunately.

[v***@gmail.com]

On Tue, 2 Jul 2024 21:13:03 -0000 (UTC), Ben Blaney

Post by Ben Blaney

Post by Nick Odell
Who is Chris Ghoti?

Unrelated, probably, but memory jogged: there was Kirsten from Cambridge who
posted here, who had "ghoti" in her signature. I always thought she was
unconventional, smart and cool. I hope life is treating her well.

She is on fb and is fine. She has the original son, I think about to
go to uni, a daughtr about 8 yrs and a son about 5 and a little girl
of 3ish. But her bio says 3 children so am checking. Definitely
Benedict, daughter 8ish and small daughter age 3ish. ....

[v***@gmail.com]

Post by v***@gmail.com
On Tue, 2 Jul 2024 21:13:03 -0000 (UTC), Ben Blaney

Post by Ben Blaney

Post by Nick Odell
Who is Chris Ghoti?

Unrelated, probably, but memory jogged: there was Kirsten from Cambridge who
posted here, who had "ghoti" in her signature. I always thought she was
unconventional, smart and cool. I hope life is treating her well.

She is on fb and is fine. She has the original son, I think about to
go to uni, a daughtr about 8 yrs and a son about 5 and a little girl
of 3ish. But her bio says 3 children so am checking. Definitely
Benedict, daughter 8ish and small daughter age 3ish. ....

Ah I am a few years out of date

' I do have four! I should fix my bio. Ben’s 25 now! And then they’re
15, 12 and 4! They do grow up. Second child is a boy I’ve got three
boys and then the girl.'

[Ben Blaney]

Post by v***@gmail.com

Post by v***@gmail.com
On Tue, 2 Jul 2024 21:13:03 -0000 (UTC), Ben Blaney

Post by Ben Blaney

Post by Nick Odell
Who is Chris Ghoti?

Unrelated, probably, but memory jogged: there was Kirsten from Cambridge who
posted here, who had "ghoti" in her signature. I always thought she was
unconventional, smart and cool. I hope life is treating her well.

She is on fb and is fine.

So glad to hear.

Post by v***@gmail.com

Post by v***@gmail.com
She has the original son, I think about to
go to uni, a daughtr about 8 yrs and a son about 5 and a little girl
of 3ish. But her bio says 3 children so am checking. Definitely
Benedict, daughter 8ish and small daughter age 3ish. ....

Ah I am a few years out of date
' I do have four! I should fix my bio. Ben’s 25 now! And then they’re
15, 12 and 4! They do grow up. Second child is a boy I’ve got three
boys and then the girl.'

"Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies...."