You beat me to it.

On the question of IQ or high positions, I don't think you can really tell. I've seen some people with high IQ's not having a clue, while those that are regarded average or lower than average amaze me. I read an article a long time ago question the IQ tests.

I was just looking at the poll and it seems overwhelmingly people on here prefer the status quo. So I wonder if rules were put into force, would the regulars leave? I suppose it all depends on how forceful moderators are really.

I do feel that this thread has been more stimulating than usual. And no I don't think a mod was needed. As for breaking the rules. There has been a few threads that made me laugh out loud, if that counts?

Fair crack of the whip to you both (that is Charlie and you). It would be good if somebody started a good debate and as Petra claims to be an intellect then maybe she should start something. Providing she doesn't go over the top and swamps us poor plebs with science.

I would like to see the Administrator play an active role on here. I come on here for debate, but there are little signs of it. I wonder if this forum would improve if the main protagonists left or were marginalised. For this forum to survive it must have new blood and a bit less of those that are on here all the time. That is my honest opinion. Now I shall go back to where I came from.

Sad news. I am a great Rugby fan and saw him play live.

Those that know least is the main problem with the internet, if you can find it, you can get some good educated debates.

I thought the food bank debate was interesting so let us get back to that top gentleman and just agree to disagree.

Food banks have helped people and that is was is important. If it is abused then shame on those that abuse it.

Really? I thought what the women said was irony, but no, it couldn't be, could it?

I thought the remarks against Petra where sexist and the comments towards Heather were belittling, but to be honest it isn't really surprising. There is an air of superior arrogance. This forum used to have many members of both sexes, but a few have highjacked it. If people like Petra come along and people don't agree, or have a strong vocabulary they are marginalised and belittled. What this forum needs is an administrator to take charge when things get out of control.

In between my job as a driver I worked in a food bank. Most people are voluntary there. I can tell you people come into the food banks for various reasons. Some people need food to tie them over, until they get their money. But most are referred. Those that are referred are referred by professionals, as stated, but they also must work under a fair criterion. But that criterion is a simple one and can easily bypassed. Over the years many of us have felt that the food banks have been jumped upon, shall we say, by people who want a slice of the cake. And of course this creates a vicious loop. There comes a point that people rely on it because it is there and once that happens it is hard to stop it.

An article in the Mail today explains more (see link below). I know some of you may dismiss the Mail as a scaremongering, but you talk to people who work within food banks and you will see a nod of agreement.

What is the criteria? You are struggling, you have no money, you are in a desperate situation etc. Most of these can be manipulated. Those professionals that have been mentioned probably know that they’ve been hoodwinked, but they can only follow the guidelines that have been set before them. They are not allowed to go around to one’s house and do a search to see if they are actually desperate. It boils down to, after being asked certain pointed questions, the word of the claimant.

As I said, give a helping hand, and it will end up being relied upon and before you know it, it becomes sewn into the fabric of society. Take it away and you will hear cries of cruelty or worse.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-26...ank-claims.html

As for whether people have mobile phones, satellite or other modern cons, well, that isn’t taken into consideration. Even though people do question whether people have got their priorities right. Somebody on £25,000 a year or more can struggle for various reasons. I suppose the questions is how do you define somebody who is poor and who isn’t? In today’s society somebody who is classified as poor is very wealthy compared to those deprived from the 30s or beyond. Whatever way you look at it they seem to be here to stay.

Are you trying to laugh your way out what others have observed?

That first line doesn't make sense. And am I being ridiculous? Your obsession with Petra and I am not the only one to pick this up. HeatherW seems to have picked it up as well, among others, and of course your comments I quoted. Add it up yourself.

I always thought you were a misogynist and here you are confirming it. Shame on you. No wonder you have a problem with people like Petra on here.

As a lorry driver it is becoming a lot harder for us drivers to find a parking space so we can deliver our goods. That is another reason why town centres will die.

I am not on here a lot, because of my driving job, but I am impressed that people like Edge, GMR, Heather, Biker and even Petra have come on here to sock it to Andy Capp. This forum needs to be taken back, but then if Mr Capp does own this forum then it looks like it has already been taken back and the lunatic has really taken over the asylum. So the Petra's and Heather's of the world will never win. To be honest, if Mr Capp believes that they are trolls then why hasn't he deleted them? Or is his amusement those he criticizes. I am confused. Maybe somebody can help me out here?

I don't think there is any thing wrong with the modern clause 4. All such constitutions should reflect today's society, not past society's.

I am a former Lib-Dem, but since joining in coalition with the Conservative party I've moved back to Labour. Corbyn says some great things, but I am not sure if he is right for today's politics. So I've voted for Yvette Cooper. But whether she is good enough to win in 2020 is another matter. Whoever wins has to sort out Scotland (win them back) and also convince England.

My job is driving lorries, so I often have to go through bollards. I noticed that they differ, depending on which ones you use. But they can take up to a few minutes, and in some cases longer, depending if they click into action straight away. I’ve never used the bollards in Newbury, but mainly areas like Reading or further out. My cousin is an ambulance driver, unfortunately, he says, that an ambulance can’t go around the bollards so have to go through the procedure. This is fine in some bollard operational areas, while others could take minutes. There has been issues arising over bollard times, but there is a unwillingness to put money into the problem to solve it. I must say I have witnessed a police car and a small ambulance car (which is preferably used when being called out in Newbury town centre, if possible) going around the bollards. Even though I haven’t personally timed them, in Newbury, they do seem to take the police car ages to get through.

What is in a letter or two?

Your third paragraph answers your first two.

As I pointed out they blocked boundary changes and blocked other areas as well. You might not agree that the Tory's wouldn't have moved more right, I disagree. As for mandate, that hasn't stopped parties in the past.

Doesn't everything point to the license free, one way or another?

Hi Don and welcome. I am glad you've got all your marbles as we need some interesting debates and intelligent answers on here.

I used to support the Lib-Dems so I am no fan of theirs. But are you saying that the coalition with the Tories made no difference and they would have done the same with or without them? I do not think so. I think you question is naive or you are just playing games. For a start the Lib-Dems stopped them going too far right. The tax policies were influenced by the Lib-Dems (at least in some cases). I also believe that Cameron, who is of the left of his party, was glad of the Lib-Dems. Otherwise he would have been held hostage to the right of his party. Then there is the boundary changes, which were stopped by the Lib-Dems.