Ban them from pubs

[mightyroar]

no. dont ban them from pubs.

but ban lazy posters who cant even be bothered to read the other posts on exactly this matter that

are all on page one of the lounge. it's just so rude!

i am all for new forumites and new posters but ffs at least read some of the other threads first.

[falcao]

Just joined forum so you will have to forgive me if it's been posted before. Is your advice that I trawl through all postings made on forum before I post anything else myself in future? Well read my next posting. There is absolutely no way anyone will have posted it before.

[KalamityKel]

Falc hun ignore them, u go ahead and say wot ever u want (as long as ur following the forums code of conduct thingy)

[mightyroar]

ok, my post was a bit grumpy.

It's because I disagree so oompletely and each time someone starts another thread about it i have to disagree again.

I think i'll go back to lurking until i can think of something nice to say.

[citizenED]

On this thread and on that other one about the same issue there is some pretty lazy thinking going on. I'm sure I don't always think things through properly before posting but lets be a little objective here. Lets be a bit more philosophical. We should all know that stereotypically catagorising groups of people is sloppy at the best of times. We should not judge any people by their outward appearance. Better to judge by types of behaviour. In the initial post on this thread the writer comments "my heart sinks when I go into a pub for a nice quiet pint with my newspaper only to be confronted with screaming and howling kids". I think everyone's heart sinks when that happens just as it would when you go into a pub and find screaming, howling adults or lecherous, yobbish youth. It's the behaviour that should be focused on, not the type of person exhibiting the behaviour. From the fact that there are some screaming, howling kids should not lead you to conclude that all kids do that. Simple.

I hate to do this, but if, in the initial post on this thread, you were to substitute the word children for any other group of people, say, women/gays/asians, well that would not be very nice.

[KalamityKel]

Mayb there should b a place outside the pub for the screamers and norty creatures to go? Just like the smokers :))

[SeanMacGabhann]

CitizenEd, as ever I'm in agreement with you apart from that statement. you can't just subsititue children for any group of adults and say they should be treated the same. That's why we have film and video certification for example

But as for the rest I'm with you. I'm quite happy to go to places like the PLough of an afternoon and see parents with children. But it IS nice to be able to avoid them if so desired as well, no?

[Brendan]

citizenED Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> just as it would when you go into a

> pub and find screaming, howling adults

You mean like at the monthly forum booze-ups?

[mightyroar]

I'm bringing all my kids and a few others to the next one, just for a laugh. I plan to drop them off wherever it is then pop out for a fag or two, back by closing. The forum 'our community' can have collective responsibility. Alright?

[citizenED]

Sean, naturally, children are to be treated differently in some circumstances - like for example I think it's entirely right that kids should not be allowed to drive cars. But being in a room with soft furnishings is something that most kids can handle very ably. So spending an afternoon in a pub with a responsible adult is not an issue. If they are behaving badly, then that is another matter. The behaviour should be dealt with.

[annaj]

After reading this and all the previous threads on this topic I think you could sum it up like this...

1. A small number of people believe that children should not be seen out in public and are a general nuisance.

2. A small number of people believe that children should be welcomed everywhere and anywhere and that anyone who disagrees is a child-hater.

3. The majority of people believe that children are generally speaking a good thing, but that there are certain times and places that are not appropriate for children. Also, that when children are out in public they should be suitably supervised for their own safety and the comfort of those around them.

4. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and all opinions are valid.

There. Now we can all get on a talk about something else.

[SeanMacGabhann]

well surmised annaj - but here is something for you to ponder (and maybe others on here can back me up)

you have not only made several posts of significant length on here today, but you have also started a thread of your own. This marks a significant step-up in activity for you compared with previously

Coupled with your appearance at recent forum drinks, I can only conclude...

You have moved to STAGE 3 of forumitis!

[Jah Lush]

Hoorah! for Annaj.

[Brendan]

There are stages?

[SeanMacGabhann]

My research was slow Brendan - by the time I found out it was too late for us

Current conclusions indicate that there are 7 stages - no-one has made it to stage 7 yet but in an echo of Logan's Run, those who make it to 10000 posts are "retired"

How many people on here with more than 10000 posts? exactly!!!

[lozzyloz]

How many stages before reaching gang status?

[annaj]

Damn, you noticed. I thought I could just sneak in and start posting more and no-one would spot me.

There are two reasons behind my sudden forum presence. Firstly, I've started working for a new trust that completely blocks Yahoo, so I can't e-mail on my breaks at work, but I can access the forum. Secondly, I'm going on to nights tonight and before nights I always treat myself to a day of sitting aournd not being very constructive. The forum provides the perfect place to do that!

[SeanMacGabhann]

"gang" isn't a status as such - it appears as markings in subjects at all stages

The main reason behond the virulence of the forum appears to be it's invisibility to corporate firewalls...

[annaj]

So, what should I be looking out for as signs of stage 4?

[SeanMacGabhann]

erm........

[Brendan]

annaj Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So, what should I be looking out for as signs of

> stage 4?

It is normally marked by the onset of RSI

[annaj]

Right, that's it. I'm logging off and going outside before it's too late....

[Floating Onion]

Have you looked outside today? I don't think you're missing much.

[KalamityKel]

is it still wet in ED?

[citizenED]

"There are stages?"

Yep - apparently *Bob* should be on one.