Roll Deep

Wont help his confidence though. Always so close, yet so far.

In my opinion the reason behind Big Brother failing to really grip its viewers, was the core notion that everyone involved in the whole sham was fundamentaly aware of. Safety. The contestants, viewers and those responsible for the show all knew that the 'guinea pigs' would come to no serious harm. This core repetition of policy was what really ruined it for most. We never saw them at their most desperate. I'm not for one second suggesting that any sort of harmful menace be introduced to the house, be it a virus or dangerous animal. Just that the people who designed the house and the staff behind the mirrors excercised a bit of imagination when it came to manipulating the stresses and moral of these strangers who were living in such close proximity to each other. For example... Some of the main doors such as the ones that allow access to the bedrooms should've been able to lock. Not to facilitate any privacy for any amorous housemates, but to initiate what alot of viewers really wanted. Anxiety followed by mental and emotional torment. When all the housemates were safely tucked up in bed the Big Brother staff could lock the doors and subtly wake them. They would notice that in the communal area the lights were on and would proceed to investigate 'knowing' the doors would open. Upon finding the doors don't open they would become perplexed and wonder why they don't open. Then their attention should be drawn to the figures in the inaccessible comunnal area wearing Hazmat suits looking under cushions and carrying out tests on the drinking water. All knowledge of this nocturnal activity would be flatly denied by the Big Brother team. Other methods of mental breakdown would be to cut off communication with their Big Brother custodians. Again, after a week normality would return and any hiccup would be flatly denied. Turn off the drinking water for a week. Imply that a housemate may have been hoarding the valuable resource. So there you have it. Nothing that would invite litigation upon the release of the tortured souls, but enough to ensure the audience nibbles through their Hobnobs faster than usual. That's all.

You're right. Although changing a contract in a workplace where it is known to some or someone who may be complicit in any theft from the premises that will draw attention to any searches that the employer wants to carry out will surely complicate matters further. Although on a positive note, the thief may simply wish to leave their job.

Better in Pixelated format, eh?

SteveT Wrote: Remember the two women arguing, it was probably over the unequal shares. I get the impression that the OP's grievance is that small change and valuables are going missing. Not Bearer bonds.

For an employer to carry out spot checks on staff i.e - searching their pockets and belongings, the employee must be made aware of this occurance in their contract. I'm pretty sure you can't just walk up to an employee and demand they turn out their pockets.

Modern music has let us down. Really? I had the chance to meet a charming and well versed young artist who will surely make an impact in both camps of opinion. Judge for yourselves...

The only diary I ever have read, and ever will read. http://www.saltwoodcastle.com/Picture7.jpg

Thanks, I'll keep an eye out for them.

Put a dog turd in one of the targeted pockets. That should see their profit margin shrink. And fingers stink.

computedshorty Wrote: British Rubber gave you, if you wanted it something for the weekend. An inflatable companion?

The modern day Muck Shop favoured by today's youth. http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1019/1203753019_1812da7e32_m.jpg

Many fellows of literature in my scrabble club have commented on the distastful and inconsiderate use of the hallowed asterisk being used as a header for a following physical description that serves to bolster the translation of an ambiguous message that could be misread leading to confusion or offense without the aid of a descriptive sidenote. However... An even bigger mistake is at foot in this erroneous casualty of a thread. The punctuation under discussion is not an Asterisk. Its called an 'Arabic star' that usually has six teardrops but is sometimes encountered with eight. For this casual indifference to detail, all of you should ideally be subject to transportation. Or lines.

An Icehouse was what pre-industrialized bourgeoise homeowners would use to store ice, hence - an Icehouse. Much like the post-industrialized locale bourgeoise using a fashionably re-branded cupboard.

I've only just discovered this masterpiece drawn from Mankell's Kurt Wallander novels but unfortunatly I've stumbled across the 2nd series on the Beeb and I can't find any links to any downloads of the first series. I've checked Iplayer but no such luck. Anyone know where I can pick up the trail?

Fridge? Surely you mean 'Ice house'.

Wagner?

You've probably indulged in one too many warm Stella's Sue, but you're right, it was very pretentious. The sort of thing you'd expect from someone who has an Aga, I imagine.

Yeah, a pretty cool 'dawg' as well. http://www.artlevine.com/images/bach_shades.jpg But surely the only true contender is Beethoven.

Then read again.

Dearest Dog Forgive my inexcusable lack of required insight concerning the transitional regeneration of old iron into new fad. I was merely hoping to draw a parrallel with the 'larder/Aga' scenario, so as to highlight the escalation - in price as well as trend - of 19th century designs and their function, in todays east dulwich. Such as the old steam kettle I saw on sale for ?80 on Lordship lane which before Laura Ashley said so, was a fiver down the nearest boot-fare. It just seems that the people of east dulwich are once again displaying a little too much haste in trying too hard, again. Although not all. Technically you're right. A Larder is a non electrified item. But technically these days the only purpose they serve is another trophy cabinet of so-called 'unused items'. Know what I mean?

Her surname wasn't Litmus, was it?

Michael Palaeologus Wrote: Amazing that a lady of East Dulwich would participate in such a practice, if perchance it was not a life saving procedure. Indeed Michael. And I'm sure the lady in question looked down her nose at the oikish intrusion with most disdain. With a little flaring of the nostrils as well which is so en-vogue amongst the MTV collective.

I've no problem with adventurous couples - or contractors and clients - putting a stationary vehicle through it's paces. Although admittedly, I thought that's what happend during an M.O.T. I just think it would be more considerate if they kept it to the Rugby club carpark.

Although if todays misguided FHM readers had their way, the offending discretion will form part of the new 'Guyway code'.