Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi,


I must admit that I have never been in the TCC. From outside it does not appeal to me. Perhaps we will try it one day. We used to go to Mr. Lui's on Lordship Lane but recently have been advised that they do not have food warmers! You order a banquet and expect the food to be kept warm. We have been unhappy on the last three occasions, on the last visit I had a meal accidentally poured down my back. I felt so sorry for the young girl serving.


On the subject of food... We like to go out on a Sunday night for a indian buffet, all restaurants in Lordship Lane advertise 21 items of food for this buffet meal, The Pistachio restaurant is the worst so far only making available to you 14 items, the best is the Surma who had 22 items and then brought to me Spinach and fresh prawns pan fried completely free.


Good Eh.


Regards,


Libra Carr.

Can I request that adults who post, stop using the word 'tummy', it's silly, not to say slightly creepy.


I don't usually explain why I edit, but I thought on reflection my original post could be construed as being at the very least mean-spirited, if not downright offensive.

HonaloochieB Wrote:

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

> Can I request that adults who post, stop using the

> word 'tummy', it's silly, not to say slightly

> creepy.

>

> I don't usually explain why I edit, but I thought

> on reflection my original post could be construed

> as being at the very least mean-spirited, if not

> downright offensive.


xxxxxx


Eh? Have I missed something here?


Has anyone else spotted the use of the word "tummy"?


:-S

Sue Wrote:

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

> HonaloochieB Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Can I request that adults who post, stop using

> the

> > word 'tummy', it's silly, not to say slightly

> > creepy.

> >

> > I don't usually explain why I edit, but I

> thought

> > on reflection my original post could be

> construed

> > as being at the very least mean-spirited, if

> not

> > downright offensive.

>

> xxxxxx

>

> Eh? Have I missed something here?

>

> Has anyone else spotted the use of the word

> "tummy"?

>

> :-S


Twice on this page. Two times too many as far as I'm concerned.

Michael Palaeologus Wrote:

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

> Makes my tummy have the colley-wobbles such is my

> angst


Colley-wobbles. Thanks for that one Michael. Another phrase that has no place in the adult lexicon.

I don't know what I'd do without you good people sometimes.

Moos Wrote:

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

> HB, could you please advise whether we are still

> allowed to use the words 'dummy', 'scummy',

> 'slummy', 'scrummy' and 'yummy'?

>

> Many thanks

> Moos

>

> P.S. Also please confirm status of 'crummy'


Not to mention 'mummy'

Moos Wrote:

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

> HB, could you please advise whether we are still

> allowed to use the words 'dummy', 'scummy',

> 'slummy', 'scrummy' and 'yummy'?

>

> Many thanks

> Moos

>

> P.S. Also please confirm status of 'crummy'


Yes, yes, yes, definitely no and you must be joking.


Crummy? There's no such word. Crumby though is perfectly acceptable.


You're welcome.

Hmm.


Merriam-Webster has 'crumby' as a variant on the usual spelling, and also gives the etymology as ME 'crumme' so think I will stick with crummy.


As for the now-deleted scrummy and yummy I fear their absence may have an injurious effect on the many amateur restaurant reviewers of ED. But thus it is written, and so shall it be.


Thank you, HonaloochieB, Deus Ex Machina.

Moos Wrote:

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

> Hmm.

>

> Merriam-Webster has 'crumby' as a variant on the

> usual spelling, and also gives the etymology as ME

> 'crumme' so think I will stick with crummy.

>

> As for the now-deleted scrummy and yummy I fear

> their absence may have an injurious effect on the

> many amateur restaurant reviewers of ED. But thus

> it is written, and so shall it be.

>

> Thank you, HonaloochieB, Deus Ex Machina.



You're welcome Moos. My own humble suggestions to replace the words we've decided, with good reason, to get rid of are 'endroolable' and 'lunchy'. Go on, give them a try.


Deus Ex Machina, eh? Terribly flaterring but I'm barely Greek and for the most part not a tragedy.


Love and best wishes.

HonaloochieB, I may have to remove your winged sandals - endroolable? And imagine the confusion were someone to find his lunch insufficiently lunchy. God's bodkin, have you thought this through?


Were it not for your long and credible history of gravely informed statesmanlike pronouncements on this Forum I'd suspect you were jesting, and at our expense too.

Moos Wrote:

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

> Miquel Frothalotforus, take the beam out of your

> own eye.


I know. What's he like?

See, now you've me quoting Ainsley Harrison.

Are there no shallows to which I will not stoop?

Honestly, I'm just a fool for your loving and no mistake.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Good advice Kipper!  The 1.0 early Ecoboost and 1.2 Puretech engines have wet cam belts that fail and failure with a cam belt invariably result in catastrophic  damage to valves and pistons. Later ones were changed to chains. Avoid at all costs!
    • Sorry. Link wasn't working on my phone, but it is now, and I couldn't delete the post.
    • Sent you a pm
    • I think there's a fair number of "participating" sub offices that do passports or, at least, play the "check and send" game (£16 for glancing at your form), so some degree of cherry-picking seems to be permitted. Though it does look as if Post Offices "Indentity Services" are where it things the future lies, and "Right to Rent" (though it's more an eligibility check) looks a bit of an earner, along with DBS checks and the Age Verification services that, if the government gets its way, we'll all need to subscribe to before we're allowed on mumsnet. Those services, incidentally, seem mostly outsourced to an outfit called "Yoti", a privately-owned, loss-making "identity platform" with debts of £150m, a tardy approach to filings, and a finger in a bunch of questionable pies ("Passive Facial Liveness Recognition" sounds gloriously sinister) so what the Post Office gets out of the arrangement isn't clear, but I'm sure they think it worthwhile. That said, they once thought the same of funeral plans which, for some peculiar reason, failed to set fire to the shuffling queues, even metaphorically. For most, it seems, Post Office work is mostly a dead loss, and even the parcel-juggling is more nuisance than blessing. As a nonchalant retailer of other people's services the organisation can only survive now on the back of subsidies, and we're not even sure what they are. The taxpayer-funded subsidies from government (a £136m hand-out to keep Horizon going, £1bn for its compensation scheme, around £50m for the network, and perhaps a loan or two) are clearish, but the cross-subsidies provided by other retail activities in branches are murkier. As are the "phantom shortfalls" created by the Horizon system, which secretly lined Post Office's coffers as postmasters balanced the books with contributions from their own pockets. Those never showed up in the accounts though - because Horizon *was* the accounting system - so we can't tell how much of a subsidy that was. We might get an idea of the scale, however, from Post Office's belated Horizon Shortfall Scheme, which is handing £75k to every branch that's complained, though it's anyone's guess if that's fair or not. Still, that's all supposed to be behind us now, and Post Office's CEO-of-the-week recently promised an "extra" £250m a year for the branches (roughly enough to cover a minimum wage worker in each), which might make it worth the candle for some. Though he didn't expect that would happen before 2030 (we can only wonder when his pension will mature) and then it'd be "subject to government funding", so it might have to be a very short candle as it doesn't look like a promise that he can make. Still, I wouldn't want to discourage anyone from applying for a franchise, and it's possible that, this time, Post Office will be telling the truth. And, you never know, we might all be back in the Post Office soon, and eagerly buying stamps, if only for existence permits, rather than for our letters.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...