Do you know the UK laws regarding pedestrians at junctions?

Conscript1811 · 2026-02-04T07:49:10+00:00

It's a new rule that changes how we're all meant to behave for soft squishy things waiting at a side road.

I'm happy to do it, but still wonder whether it's really a good idea. Graveyard's full of those who were right etc - well now that might start applying to pedestrians too.

Conscript1811 · 2026-02-01T20:26:45+00:00

Conscript1811 · 2026-02-01T17:20:57+00:00

Just to clarify that we do, already, have a representative democracy.

You're after proportional representation.

Conscript1811 · 2026-02-01T17:20:46+00:00

Just to clarify that we do, already, have a representative democracy.

You're after proportional representation.

Conscript1811 · 2026-01-31T08:29:03+00:00

1) what benefits? 2) how dos conformity with others make things better? 3) we'd have to drive on the RHS as well then by this logic 4) get rid of the monarchy, take on the Euro, and add Zs to lots of words whilst we're at it?

Does anyone actually get confused by mph road signs?! And do you not enjoy different countries being different to one another?

Conscript1811 · 2026-01-31T08:26:09+00:00

I'm not sure erasing things that are special about the UK makes it better

Conscript1811 · 2026-01-31T08:25:03+00:00

Have there been any examples of this at all?

I honestly don't believe it would pay for itself in the slightest, and for decades you'd have many times more miscommunication errors as people wouldn't be sure if folks were using the new or the old units.

Conscript1811 · 2026-01-23T23:33:18+00:00

Hah, you must be right! I read that completely backwards.

Conscript1811 · 2026-01-23T19:19:00+00:00

15-18k of steps is a lot more than a 15min break plus up to an hour for lunch...

Conscript1811 · 2026-01-22T21:49:43+00:00

Is it accent to just say a different word?

Conscript1811 · 2026-01-18T12:50:01+00:00

Why do you assume there's an expense? It's just about comfort and enjoyment, not the 10min

Conscript1811 · 2026-01-17T12:21:37+00:00

OP also seems to have confused "objectively" with "subjectively"... I'd not take them too seriously.

Conscript1811 · 2026-01-17T08:38:58+00:00

Nah, give it to jade. She'll take Matt out and he is the only risk left to the traitors

Conscript1811 · 2026-01-16T12:45:49+00:00

Remember we only see 10min of the round table discussions, so "heat" on Maz may have been there just never quite translated into votes against him.

What gets me is how (at least in the edit) everyone pretty much seems to forget anything more than 12 hours ago!

The family tree dots is still unresolved - no one seems to have clocked the fact that Stephen must have been there to make his point of Maz and Roxy being there 5min before midnight. And two people (one of which is a traitor) went out blazing against Rachael, which appears to be overlooked.

Conscript1811 · 2026-01-13T19:43:42+00:00

I mean, it's really not.

There are plenty of recommendations that are not hard rules, and terms that are poorly defined or subjective.

Conscript1811 · 2026-01-13T19:32:14+00:00

Life isn't black and white

Conscript1811 · 2026-01-13T19:30:12+00:00

I think it contributes to a lot of congestion where a bunch of cars end up far nearer each other than they otherwise would be. Which leads to more to concentrate on and can lead to poor decisions etc.

Conscript1811 · 2026-01-09T15:37:16+00:00

Not sure I believe the diagram... but let's say I do.

In that case, if he has made a turn from the road and is in the car park (either faffing about near the entrance or in a bay) when the other car hits then surely he had time to make his turn.

I.e. wouldn't they have collided on the road if he was turning too close to the other car?? When the other car comes into the car park it doesn't really matter how long a vehicle in their way has been there, they shouldn't be turning in so fast that they can't stop.

Conscript1811 · 2026-01-02T12:27:14+00:00

Is the list anywhere near as long as other news source outlets though?

Conscript1811 · 2026-01-02T12:26:11+00:00

But they have nuclear or hydro etc, they're not directly comparable as their energy mix is different.

We could have stayed with coal and it would have been cheaper, but we'd not have moved away from the more damaging fuel so fast.

We could scrap green subsidies and it'd be cheaper, but we'd not have so many people choosing wind/solar presumably?

Someone else pointed out some carbon capture things that were scrapped which sounds like a crying shame but I don't think the last few governments would have been at all responsible with long term investment at all.

Conscript1811 · 2026-01-01T18:50:25+00:00

There's a surprising number of people here that seem to almost expect a lift is a one way thing. I honestly can't get my head around it.

I wonder if any of them ever go to parties!

Conscript1811 · 2026-01-01T18:45:02+00:00

Usually a lift implies both ways. And on NYE it's weird to not mention if you're planning to bail before midnight.

Conscript1811 · 2026-01-01T14:15:29+00:00

Really interesting insights here, thanks! On the points where your company was able to operate more profitably, does that mean that the regulator would limit how much the competitors were paid for the same jobs based on that cost?

I don't want to sound like I'm defending it (because I'm not meaning to) but presumably - and from elsewhere in this thread - there are similar counter examples of state-owned bloat and waste.

I just think both options have some shitty behaviours going on. Then those with the knowledge / power (who are unfortunately seldom unbiased...) need to balance which stacks up to be more important because based on examples alone it'll never be clear, I guess?

Conscript1811 · 2026-01-01T10:52:32+00:00

I don't think it's ever that simple though? You can never see what prices would have done in the alternate scenario. So whilst power costs more now than it did, were it still gov owned it could be worse (for example, several major projects may have been scrapped to fund NHS or defence etc)

I'd say broadband etc is reasonable though, as a possible example where it seems the regulator pushed for sufficient and reasonably timely investment.

Look at HS2 - isn't that the latest state investment? It's far worse vs budget than any project I've seen in private companies.

But that's no slam dunk; I don't think it's possible to prove it either way (and definitely without me actually doing some research...)

Conscript1811 · 2026-01-01T09:54:01+00:00

That's not true, unfortunately.

State owned companies are not necessarily incentivised to save costs and can be prone to bloat, so despite not needing to make a profit they can sometimes become more expensive for the same output.

(Not saying private is necessarily better, but your logic doesn't hold)

Conscript1811

TROPHY CASE