C'mon FagAsh


#1

…even my old AT&T answering machine provided the useful function of remote-access of messages (that was back in the early 1980s) “…I need to check my land-line!” (…really? C’mon SWs, this is the 21st century!)


#2

Careful - the shock might be too much for them


#3

Would Lilian have noticed?

Alternatively, like us she may feel that anyone who really wants to get in touch will ring again, and may not want to spend money on talking to a machine which will get a message to us at a time which may not be convenient for them if we ring them back.


#4

I tell people never to leave voice messages, but some of them insist.


#5

…wow! That is so convoluted that I think my brain is about to blow a gasket! …er, um!


#6

Is “it is rude to make other people spend money to be told you are not there” easier to understand?

Or perhaps “The person I am ringing may get the message at a time I don’t want to be rung back, so I won’t leave one”?

Or “If it matters, you can ring again later; if it doesn’t why do I need to hear from you?”?


#7

…exactly! …good point!

…I am reminded of my doctor who, when we were discussing the crash-helmet law (…it is not mandatory to wear a helmet when riding a motor-bike here in New Hampshire (:roll_eyes:)), her attitude is “…well, only wear a helmet if you have something worth protecting!” My view is that I think Charles Darwin was on to something!

…another friend (also a medic) regards motorcyclists as “fresh-organs-storage-on-wheels”


#8

Indeed. And any biker who is copped in town by a police-car ought to be done for driving without due care and attention, because he ought to have seen it before they saw him. Likewise it is good to ride as if all motorists were mad, deaf, blind and trying to kill you, because a fair percentage of them are.

On the other hand, have they yet started to do impact-testing on cycle-helmets (as opposed to bike ones)? Last time I looked, that had nothing on them that said what they actually would withstand, just a kitemark which showed precisely nothing in the way of what they were actually good for.


#9

…exactly! …and that is precisely why I don’t ride a motor-bike here on the LeftCoast, although I do have a license with an M/C endorsement, and used to ride a Triumph when I lived back in Blighty. …and it’s far worse nowadays what with SmartPhones, and distracted driving etc. etc.


#10

Oh, the kitemark is an impact rating. It’s an impact rating which will make no diffence to the vast majority of plausible incidents, but it’s an impact rating.

The DoT’s approach is to say nothing about this and recommend helmets, then when enough people are wearing them anyway make them compulsory. (In Australia doing this cut cycling by about a third, and increased the number of incidents involving injury to cyclists.)


#11

< grinnity >


#12

…Darwin! (…told you so!)


#13

No - I think he meant all of Australia


#14

You bastard! It’s a cliche, I know, but - you caused one of those painful drink-down-nose moments.
Chapeau.


#15

Sowwy…