The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
September is coming, so that can only mean one thing. Yes, the Christmas decorations will be out in the big supermarkets and crackers will go on sale.
But don't sigh, it's actually a good time to organise your Christmas holiday. If you're at work and you don't have 'factory' holidays, then you'll want to get your holiday booked before everyone else rushes in.
That's where uncle pb comes in with some handy hints.
Christmas this year is on a Thursday, meaning that it's a good chance to get a 4 day weekend without eating in to your holiday time. Why not book 29th-31st off as well and then 2nd, giving you 11 days holiday for the price of 4?
With New Year falling on a Thursday as well, don't fall in to the trap of spending 2nd January at work. Book the friday off before it's too late!
Alternatively, like most men, you'll probably be Christmas shopping at the last minute. So why not have 22nd to 24th off of work and enjoy the whole week, while beating that rush. It would also give you more freedom should you be invited to an office Christmas party.
But don't worry if you've run out of holiday time already, this year is a good one for just taking the standard holidays off. Even without booking you'll get 4 days at Christmas. You can always phone in sick with food poisoning on 2nd Jan...
But don't sigh, it's actually a good time to organise your Christmas holiday. If you're at work and you don't have 'factory' holidays, then you'll want to get your holiday booked before everyone else rushes in.
That's where uncle pb comes in with some handy hints.
Christmas this year is on a Thursday, meaning that it's a good chance to get a 4 day weekend without eating in to your holiday time. Why not book 29th-31st off as well and then 2nd, giving you 11 days holiday for the price of 4?
With New Year falling on a Thursday as well, don't fall in to the trap of spending 2nd January at work. Book the friday off before it's too late!
Alternatively, like most men, you'll probably be Christmas shopping at the last minute. So why not have 22nd to 24th off of work and enjoy the whole week, while beating that rush. It would also give you more freedom should you be invited to an office Christmas party.
But don't worry if you've run out of holiday time already, this year is a good one for just taking the standard holidays off. Even without booking you'll get 4 days at Christmas. You can always phone in sick with food poisoning on 2nd Jan...
Page:
2002- just a number? wrote:
> Also using incorrect English isn’t something I personally find
> annoying; I'm actually more concerned with responses being
> coherent.
Totally agree, so if we are nitpicking - is this response of yours coherent?
"There was of falling out of sorts with someone and Freeola...":)
> Also using incorrect English isn’t something I personally find
> annoying; I'm actually more concerned with responses being
> coherent.
Totally agree, so if we are nitpicking - is this response of yours coherent?
"There was of falling out of sorts with someone and Freeola...":)
I'm 24 and I'll enjoy Christmas, much more in the thought that.. it's one day of the year. Well, I hope I'll enjoy it, I'm open minded to being depressed and killing myself, I hear that goes on a bit.
Ban adverts ban adverts ban adverts maybe
Ban adverts ban adverts ban adverts maybe
2002- just a number? wrote:
"You obviously have no understanding of how dangerous this attitude is"
I do like discussion, what do you mean by this?
And as for coherency, I think it was understood. After all, you went to the trouble of finding the same mistake twice, and if well, we could take that as proof that Vee spells that word that way, then she's using a logical system to spell that word, albeit incorrectly, so it should be quite understandable to read in her context.
The only thing I'm particular about is giving information to people to learn from, such as symptoms/signs of illness, or descriptions of events, history, or how something works. When it's important for someone to understand, I want to be absolutely clear and modest in approach to the actual happenings, instead of exaggeration (which is a natural habit of mine which I dislike) or 'this is the TRUTH' which I also hate and am trying to get out of. No real knowledge, just modest guesswork on all the stuff that could change at any time or just be messed up in memory. I hope.
I have a distaste for absolutes. It's not a lack of confidence in my opinion, I just ..wait I've written about this before I won't repeat myself!
"You obviously have no understanding of how dangerous this attitude is"
I do like discussion, what do you mean by this?
And as for coherency, I think it was understood. After all, you went to the trouble of finding the same mistake twice, and if well, we could take that as proof that Vee spells that word that way, then she's using a logical system to spell that word, albeit incorrectly, so it should be quite understandable to read in her context.
The only thing I'm particular about is giving information to people to learn from, such as symptoms/signs of illness, or descriptions of events, history, or how something works. When it's important for someone to understand, I want to be absolutely clear and modest in approach to the actual happenings, instead of exaggeration (which is a natural habit of mine which I dislike) or 'this is the TRUTH' which I also hate and am trying to get out of. No real knowledge, just modest guesswork on all the stuff that could change at any time or just be messed up in memory. I hope.
I have a distaste for absolutes. It's not a lack of confidence in my opinion, I just ..wait I've written about this before I won't repeat myself!
This is super duper advice if ever I saw it!
Dragonlance wrote:
> Totally agree, so if we are nitpicking - is this response of
> yours coherent?
> "There was of falling out of sorts with someone and
> Freeola...":)
Firstly I wasn’t aware I was nitpicking, as it was a repeated, fundamental error that in a different situation would make someone look like a real idiot. Secondly your example is a statement where I didn’t know all of the facts, as it was only mentioned by someone else, so sorry I’m not here a lot more forming personal attachments (as you seem to).
Grix Thraves wrote:
> 2002- just a number? wrote:
> "You obviously have no understanding of how dangerous this
> attitude is"
>
> I do like discussion, what do you mean by this?
It’s just a personal thing, having always been told not to speak up, when it normally is helpful and if you look back throughout history there has always been someone saying the unpopular stuff (which then turns out to be correct).
> And as for coherency, I think it was understood. After all, you
> went to the trouble of finding the same mistake twice, and if
> well, we could take that as proof that Vee spells that word that
> way, then she's using a logical system to spell that word, albeit
> incorrectly, so it should be quite understandable to read in her
> context.
It wasn’t any trouble, just a glaring mistake that jumped out at me. I know when writing your CV you’re meant to be consistent (coherency again), but this wasn’t open to interpretation, as it’s the sort of thing that's normally sorted out in primary school.
> I have a distaste for absolutes. It's not a lack of confidence
> in my opinion, I just ..wait I've written about this before I
> won't repeat myself!
Well there are no absolutes. A guy in one of my maths lectures got a talking to by the lecturer for suggesting something to the contrary (which was fairly enjoyable as it was one of the few concepts I understood). Anyway the only alternative would be to never post constructive comments, which would result in a drop of activity, which may well answer the thread I was quoted from.
> Totally agree, so if we are nitpicking - is this response of
> yours coherent?
> "There was of falling out of sorts with someone and
> Freeola...":)
Firstly I wasn’t aware I was nitpicking, as it was a repeated, fundamental error that in a different situation would make someone look like a real idiot. Secondly your example is a statement where I didn’t know all of the facts, as it was only mentioned by someone else, so sorry I’m not here a lot more forming personal attachments (as you seem to).
Grix Thraves wrote:
> 2002- just a number? wrote:
> "You obviously have no understanding of how dangerous this
> attitude is"
>
> I do like discussion, what do you mean by this?
It’s just a personal thing, having always been told not to speak up, when it normally is helpful and if you look back throughout history there has always been someone saying the unpopular stuff (which then turns out to be correct).
> And as for coherency, I think it was understood. After all, you
> went to the trouble of finding the same mistake twice, and if
> well, we could take that as proof that Vee spells that word that
> way, then she's using a logical system to spell that word, albeit
> incorrectly, so it should be quite understandable to read in her
> context.
It wasn’t any trouble, just a glaring mistake that jumped out at me. I know when writing your CV you’re meant to be consistent (coherency again), but this wasn’t open to interpretation, as it’s the sort of thing that's normally sorted out in primary school.
> I have a distaste for absolutes. It's not a lack of confidence
> in my opinion, I just ..wait I've written about this before I
> won't repeat myself!
Well there are no absolutes. A guy in one of my maths lectures got a talking to by the lecturer for suggesting something to the contrary (which was fairly enjoyable as it was one of the few concepts I understood). Anyway the only alternative would be to never post constructive comments, which would result in a drop of activity, which may well answer the thread I was quoted from.
2002- just a number? wrote:
> Dragonlance wrote:
> Totally agree, so if we are nitpicking - is this response of
> yours coherent?
> "There was of falling out of sorts with someone and
> Freeola...":)
>
> Secondly your example is a statement where I didn’t know all of > the facts, as it was only mentioned by someone else, so sorry >I’m not here a lot more forming personal attachments (as you seem to).
First and foremost you are nitpicking now. The quote was meant to highlight the fact that your comment was incorrect as OF should have been A, as in "There was A falling out..." So we are all guilty of writing what we think we are writing and not re-reading the post.
Secondly, I do object to your direct suggestion that I'm here to form 'personal attachments'. I'm very sorry young man, but I will always stand up for those that seem to need support and 'friendship' in any situation. This is a 'friendly forum' and a lot of its members do actually know each other personally - this is obvious throughout each thread. It may be infectious, but it is what helps to make this forum a welcoming place to be, to converse, to discuss and to be a member of.
> Dragonlance wrote:
> Totally agree, so if we are nitpicking - is this response of
> yours coherent?
> "There was of falling out of sorts with someone and
> Freeola...":)
>
> Secondly your example is a statement where I didn’t know all of > the facts, as it was only mentioned by someone else, so sorry >I’m not here a lot more forming personal attachments (as you seem to).
First and foremost you are nitpicking now. The quote was meant to highlight the fact that your comment was incorrect as OF should have been A, as in "There was A falling out..." So we are all guilty of writing what we think we are writing and not re-reading the post.
Secondly, I do object to your direct suggestion that I'm here to form 'personal attachments'. I'm very sorry young man, but I will always stand up for those that seem to need support and 'friendship' in any situation. This is a 'friendly forum' and a lot of its members do actually know each other personally - this is obvious throughout each thread. It may be infectious, but it is what helps to make this forum a welcoming place to be, to converse, to discuss and to be a member of.
Dragonlance wrote:
> First and foremost you are nitpicking now. The quote was meant
> to highlight the fact that your comment was incorrect as OF
> should have been A, as in "There was A falling out..."
> So we are all guilty of writing what we think we are writing and
> not re-reading the post.
Isn’t that an isolated error though, which isn’t the case with what we’re talking about. Also do you consider it grown up to re-accuse someone of an insinuation you originally made? I only ask this as below you refer to age, which I’m hoping is a flippant remark, inspired by Enfield and Whitehouse being back on the box but I very much doubt it. If you want to go down this route then fine, but people actually grow down as they become older, becoming less trustful and more judgemental etc.
> Secondly, I do object to your direct suggestion that I'm here to
> form 'personal attachments'. I'm very sorry young man, but I will
> always stand up for those that seem to need support and
> 'friendship' in any situation. This is a 'friendly forum' and a
> lot of its members do actually know each other personally - this
> is obvious throughout each thread. It may be infectious, but it
> is what helps to make this forum a welcoming place to be, to
> converse, to discuss and to be a member of.
Why do you object if it’s the case, that those who engage in pleasantries, whilst choosing to share personal details about themselves (which I find slightly dubious in this information age) have a better time on forums. Personally I just see the internet as a vast encyclopaedia, which is being polluted by users continually sharing hearsay and guesswork in the margins. An impartial forum is a valuable place, being able to draw on the experience of others, although that does seem to be as rare here as any other place.
> First and foremost you are nitpicking now. The quote was meant
> to highlight the fact that your comment was incorrect as OF
> should have been A, as in "There was A falling out..."
> So we are all guilty of writing what we think we are writing and
> not re-reading the post.
Isn’t that an isolated error though, which isn’t the case with what we’re talking about. Also do you consider it grown up to re-accuse someone of an insinuation you originally made? I only ask this as below you refer to age, which I’m hoping is a flippant remark, inspired by Enfield and Whitehouse being back on the box but I very much doubt it. If you want to go down this route then fine, but people actually grow down as they become older, becoming less trustful and more judgemental etc.
> Secondly, I do object to your direct suggestion that I'm here to
> form 'personal attachments'. I'm very sorry young man, but I will
> always stand up for those that seem to need support and
> 'friendship' in any situation. This is a 'friendly forum' and a
> lot of its members do actually know each other personally - this
> is obvious throughout each thread. It may be infectious, but it
> is what helps to make this forum a welcoming place to be, to
> converse, to discuss and to be a member of.
Why do you object if it’s the case, that those who engage in pleasantries, whilst choosing to share personal details about themselves (which I find slightly dubious in this information age) have a better time on forums. Personally I just see the internet as a vast encyclopaedia, which is being polluted by users continually sharing hearsay and guesswork in the margins. An impartial forum is a valuable place, being able to draw on the experience of others, although that does seem to be as rare here as any other place.
Think you're digging a deeper hole:)
Dragonlance wrote:
> Think you're digging a deeper hole:)
Shouldn't that be:
I think... :¬P
runs
Search Freeola Chat
> Think you're digging a deeper hole:)
Shouldn't that be:
I think... :¬P
runs
Search Freeola Chat
Hmmm... wrote:
> Dragonlance wrote:
> Think you're digging a deeper hole:)
>
>
> Shouldn't that be:
> I think... :¬P
>
>
> runs
>
>
> Search Freeola
> Chat
Ha ha Hmmm, I stand corrected - Mrs Dragonlance is celebrating her 53rd birthday today and I was alternating between 'posting' and 'cooking' - many apologies...ps she's enjoyed her birthday so far:)
> Dragonlance wrote:
> Think you're digging a deeper hole:)
>
>
> Shouldn't that be:
> I think... :¬P
>
>
> runs
>
>
> Search Freeola
> Chat
Ha ha Hmmm, I stand corrected - Mrs Dragonlance is celebrating her 53rd birthday today and I was alternating between 'posting' and 'cooking' - many apologies...ps she's enjoyed her birthday so far:)
Page: