1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Welcome to the Amateur Photographer magazine online community.

    Why not create an account and take advantage of this free resource.

What grinds your gears?

Discussion in 'The Lounge' started by retrofit, Nov 20, 2016.

  1. Zou

    Zou Well-Known Member

    As there are possibly only 3 or so socialists in Westminster I think any alleged agent of the Chinese government was doomed to failure.
     
    Catriona likes this.
  2. Catriona

    Catriona Well-Known Member

    Ah! A lot of greedy opportunists though...
     
    WillieJ, Zou and Learning like this.
  3. Learning

    Learning Ethelred the Ill-Named

    On both sides and the middle of the house.
     
    WillieJ and Zou like this.
  4. daft_biker

    daft_biker Action Man!

    The least sustainable games ever? Sustainability has been trending downwards for decades?



    Wonder if the popular media here are willing to highlight these issues or if they are more interested in the viewing numbers.
     
    SqueamishOssifrage likes this.
  5. Zou

    Zou Well-Known Member

    It's in China, so of course there will be criticism, and of a different slant to the criticism had it been in a country more allied to western interests.
     
  6. SqueamishOssifrage

    SqueamishOssifrage Well-Known Member

    Either it's sustainable or not. The presentation was as much about the trend of the games becoming unsustainable over a period of years as it was about these games in particular, and seemed remarkably apolitical to me.

    Personally, I don't see shipping millions of litres of water across the country and using snow-blowers to cover the slopes as particularly environmentally friendly nor GW friendly. I presume you do not agree.
     
  7. Learning

    Learning Ethelred the Ill-Named

    Have the winter sports operators in Scotland ever used snow blowers?
     
    Zou likes this.
  8. daft_biker

    daft_biker Action Man!

  9. Zou

    Zou Well-Known Member

    I think it's a criminally irresponsible act. But also that we hold double standards on such things.
     
  10. Zou

    Zou Well-Known Member

  11. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    If you're so against environmental change, why don't you go after those unicellular organisms which poisoned our pristine Nitrogen atmosphere with that severely corrosive Oxygen rubbish?

    Double standards? Pah! :p
     
  12. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    You mean chlorophyll?
     
  13. Derek W

    Derek W Well-Known Member

  14. Zou

    Zou Well-Known Member

    They boldly assert 2 people died in accidents. The cause(s) of the RTCs and deaths is not yet known to be accidental. The use of the word 'accident' in RTCs trivialises the fact that motor vehicles kill a large number of people every year, making it seem inevitable or somehow unavoidable. In most cases, these deaths are entirely avoidable with better driving skills, better infrastructure and so on.
     
  15. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    Well, I'm fairly sure I don't mean Chloroform. :D
     
  16. gray1720

    gray1720 Well-Known Member

    Which is why the Boys in Blue call them RTCs - Road traffic Collisions - and let the courts sort out the unlikely event of it actually being an accident.
     
    Zou likes this.
  17. RovingMike

    RovingMike Crucifixion's a doddle...

    "Accident" is possibly one of the most misused words in the dictionary. Definitions rely on a chance element, but exactly what level of probability qualifies as "chance" is not definable.
     
    Zou likes this.
  18. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    The opposite of accident is deliberate, very few road traffic incidents are deliberate. The reason for calling them "collisions" was that some bright spark thought the term accident implied that nobody was to blame, it doesn't.

    When the police investigate an form of road traffic incident they are looking for blame, preferably with sufficient evidence for a prosecution. In my opinion accident investigation should determine the cause/s and contributory factors. Blame, if appropriate can come later.
     
  19. RovingMike

    RovingMike Crucifixion's a doddle...

    Defining the causes defines where the blame lies. They are synonymous.
     
  20. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    An accident is an unintended event resulting in harm. Its opposite, if anything, is a “happy accident” an unintended event resulting in a positive outcome.

    Incident investigation is primarily aimed at establishing root cause. Once the cause is known then contributory factors can be taken into account. One of these might be a negligent or purposeful action whereupon liability (“blame”) may be concluded but the process doesn’t start by “looking for blame”.
     
    Zou and WillieJ like this.

Share This Page