Posts by FletcherB
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
My father's Australian 1935 birth certificate doesn't have a space for mother's occupation, but my Nanna's 1915 New Zealand marriage certificate has a space for bride's occupation.
This is all perfectly logical....
Women are allowed to have jobs until they get married and have babies, right?
Mind you, its a wonder they bother letting you write in an occupation when you could just have tick-boxes. Teacher, nurse, shop-staff and clerical were the only options, huh?
:D
-
I suspect he'd rather strongly object to them being claimed as "Green issues"
Well, if you swap the capital G for a small one.... they are all environmental issues to one degree or another...
-
- Like Powershop, they're offering a $50 credit by way of an inducement.
So, how do I, as an existing Mercury customer, get this $50 credit? They'll just credit my (and everyone elses) account? Yeah Right!
Phone them up and tell them I'm thinking about switching? -
"Given that TVNZ pays the taxpayer a dividend, isn't Russell funding the taxpayer, rather than the other way?"
Well, that all depends...
Where does the dividend come from? Its advertisng revenue, isnt it?
Whether any show was paying a dividend or not would depend on what the show cost the network (whether they make it themselves or pay a production house) versus the ad revenue from the ads shown within that program.... and TVNZ 7 doesnt show any commercial adverts... so I think Media 7 is definitely publicly fundED rather than public fundING. -
minor grumble...
The three podcast sections of last-nights Media7 are all only 30 secs long...
Can you let whoever's in charge of such things know?
-
Completely off topic...
Poneke's back...
http://poneke.wordpress.com/ is viewable by the public again.
I mention it only because I know quite a few who read and post here, also did so there in the past...
-
And why didn't this happen in the first instance of this one?Seems it should have been the first port of call.
It couldnt have been. If you recall.... it was a news article BEFORE it was even reported to the police.
I have no doubt that if the complaint was made when it all happened, name suppression would indeed have been sought.
-
Surely if someone is considered innocent until guilty name suppression should always be applied.
I too have considered this, and it seems mostly to have merit,
But then I think about cases where someone in a position of trust (eg. doctor, clergy, teacher, scoutmaster, etc.) has violated people in their care... It often happens over many years to many individuals, all too scared to complain.... but with the publicity of one person going to the police, many more come out of the wood-work... Which then helps prove the case, or at least dispel the false/malicious complaint defense that you can use against a single complainant.
-
I guess we should ask Holmes.... seeing as Sunday night is off limits, what times is it better to schedule a fight for a breakfast jock ?
-
I wonder how much time was spent, and at what the pay rate of the person spending it was, to save them $1.20?
Also, if they edit your story, do you get payed based on how many words you wrote, or how many they print? :)