OT - Call Centres......Arrrggggg!

On or around Thu, 24 Aug 2006 11:51:59 +1200, EMB enlightened us thusly:

sort of a cross between ozzie and sithe effrican, ain't it?

I was once accused of having a chameleon accent - my accent tends to morph to those around me. trouble with that is that people tend to think you're taking the piss.

On or around Thu, 24 Aug 2006 16:28:35 +1200, EMB enlightened us thusly:

yeah, we have smaller sheep here.

They've got that covered - even a business, with no aerial at all nad no internet connection, needs a licecnce if they have a PC or any other device capable of displaying a TV picture - e.g. DVD's.

Richard

Philosophicaly, half a bee cannot be. Singing, doh ray me, la tee dee Eric the Half A Bee....

Richard

Srtgray wrote: (snip)

Yes, NZ was given the option of joining the federation, but failed to do so. I am not sure whether the option is still open or not, there may have been a time limit. But the original offer is still there in the constitution. JD

Most of them are here anyway ... looks as if we're stuck with the b@rstards anyway :)

Will the last Kiwi to leave home please turn the lights out ...

No they don't. Please read the requirements on the TV license website. You can have as many bits of TV receiving gear as you want, as long as none of them is capable of receiving, e.g. has no aerial, then you don't need a TV license. You need to tell them that you do not have an aerial connection, and they may send someone round to check.

Sure thing babe - I'll hit the switch as I head for the UK. ;-)

Well, nuclear power is actually fairly safe; yes, when things go wrong they go interestingly wrong, but the failure rate is much lower than most other methods. And it's far cleaner than, say, coal or oil. In Sweden they've even developed a way of safely disposing of the fuel rods. Which is nice.

Which isn't strictly wrong, actually. All depends on the type and level of radiation. Humans would find it very difficult to live without UV light, for instance, which is strictly speaking radiation.

OK, so they're being a bit sloppy with the context, but they're not strictly speaking *wrong*.

Ah, but that's so they don't confuse it with London-Nevada, London-Massachusetts or London-Oregon. (I have no idea if there are Londons in those states, but they do tend to lift names from everywhere...)

I particularly enjoyed, on a trip to the States, travelling through Moscow, Maine, population 620...

Don't we all?

Well that is an improvement, prevously US atlases had only one country in them. It was well known Canada was the state between WA (Washington) and Alaska.

Texas once decided to susceed (sp?) from the Union, and applied to joint the Comonwealth. They were "talked" out of it! (Not recently, obviously)

Richard

You aren't?

Strangely England per se doesn't have a capital city! London if anything is the capital of the UK!

That's not what they sat when the write to us - regularly.....

Richard

There was a documentry that looked at the "evidence" from Chernobyl, posing the question; why wasn't the physical evidence of harm caused by the radiation matching the theortical effects. The consclusion was, by scientists, not the programme makers, that the expected problems were extrapolated downwards from the effects of Hirosima, the only available case study until Chernobyl happened. A lot of the "evidence" of harmful effects had been deduced from the Hirosima data (and belived by those chose to), rather than actually studied for that particular case. It was found, and seeming amongst scientists who "do" radiation agreed, that below some level (which Chernobyl was) extrapolating the Hiroshima data fails, and the actual physical results were nowhere near as bad as would have been expected (and indeed reported - falsely in some cases).

Richard

On or around Thu, 24 Aug 2006 11:04:40 +0100, Torak enlightened us thusly:

There's a Birmingham in Alabama. perhaps Ford could be persuaded to open a Land Rover factory there?