Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sauce for the goose – politicalbetting.com

12346»

Comments

  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,857

    SKS inevitable slide continues to 4th of 4 even behind Farage

    SKS FANS PLEASE EXPLAIN

    Net favourability for major party leaders:

    ❌ Keir Starmer -33
    ❌ Kemi Badenoch -20
    ❌ Ed Davey -7
    ❌ Nigel Farage -31

    Via
    @YouGov
    , 8-10 Nov

    The explaining is required of Farage who is massively unpopular but doesn't have to make any hard choices and can provide an infinity of simple solutions to complex problems.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,376

    SKS inevitable slide continues to 4th of 4 even behind Farage

    SKS FANS PLEASE EXPLAIN

    Net favourability for major party leaders:

    ❌ Keir Starmer -33
    ❌ Kemi Badenoch -20
    ❌ Ed Davey -7
    ❌ Nigel Farage -31

    Via
    @YouGov
    , 8-10 Nov

    Wish SKS fans would explain when the heck we're going to get a VI poll from YouGov (and Ipsos and Survation and Savanta and Redfield Whilton) ?
  • algarkirk said:

    kle4 said:

    Omnium said:

    moonshine said:

    According to various reports, part of tomorrow hearings are going to be on USO's - unidentified sea objects - that have been reported as tracking submarines with ballistic missiles on.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/4983516-ufo-hearing-wednesday/

    Elizondo has been unequivocal in his written statement:

    “Let me be clear: UAP are real. Advanced technologies not made by our Government – or any other government – are monitoring sensitive military installations around the globe. Furthermore, the U.S. is in possession of UAP technologies, as are some of our adversaries.”

    So either he’s opening himself up to perjury in front of congress. Or he’s got cover to continue a bizarre pysop against the US public and body politik for “reasons”. Very strange times.

    Edit: or he’s telling the truth and is right of course!
    He sounds like he's giving himself a lot of wriggle room there. How many technologies are made by 'the government' - they are made by private defence contractors.
    The thing is, if you were ET, and had all sorts of amazing tech, what would you look at on Earth? I think it's hardly likely to be military installations. Nature, great concerts, day-to-day. Not General Plank.
    A total eclipse of the sun. Insanely rare even on a galactic scale to have a moon that is almost exactly equal in angular radius to the sun. (Some SF author pointed this out - Adams? Banks?)
    Might have been Asimov - certainly in the later Foundation books it was stated to be very rare for a planet the size of earth to have a single moon of such a proportion as ours.

    (Whether it is all that rare I have no idea, it has only been recently we've been able to detect exoplanets and exomoons would be even harder)
    My personal solution to the fermi paradox is that even with a "Goldilocks" planet, significant tides are really rare. You need a huge moon and the principal planet not to become one-face to the moon. In the solar system only Hyperion is not one-face as a moon. Tides are a wonderful way to speed evolution.
    There is an initial difficulty with the Fermi paradox: There is no naturalistic account in existence of how any sort of reproducing life began in the first place, so there is no data in existence on which to base any assumptions about its frequency.

    Furthermore, since Earth is (let is assume!) a decent and fertile ground for this to occur, obviously, it is actually significant that there is no evidence that it has occurred more than once here.
    Until recently, given our ignorance of other planets, we has a sample of GOLDILOCKS_PLANETS=1, INTELLIGENT_LIFE=1. There was a theory in the 50s? that planets were rare, we've now disproved that. Assuming none of the planets we've observed in the last few years have intelligent life we now have GOLDILOCKS_PLANETS=100?, INTELLIGENT_LIFE=1 and we can estimate the total number of Goldilocks planets in the galaxy as vast. We still ain't seen any other INTELLIGENT_LIFE (pace Leon) so life looks like like it needs more than just a Goldilocks planet. Seems reasonable to consider why Sol-3 is unusual, even among Goldilocks planets.
    Alternatively it's not unusual but FtL travel is impossible and the distances involved in space make extrasolar travel impractical so life exists in pockets within the universe . . . But only in their own pockets in their own solar systems not making contact with those outside.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,053
    Omnium said:

    kle4 said:

    Omnium said:

    moonshine said:

    According to various reports, part of tomorrow hearings are going to be on USO's - unidentified sea objects - that have been reported as tracking submarines with ballistic missiles on.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/4983516-ufo-hearing-wednesday/

    Elizondo has been unequivocal in his written statement:

    “Let me be clear: UAP are real. Advanced technologies not made by our Government – or any other government – are monitoring sensitive military installations around the globe. Furthermore, the U.S. is in possession of UAP technologies, as are some of our adversaries.”

    So either he’s opening himself up to perjury in front of congress. Or he’s got cover to continue a bizarre pysop against the US public and body politik for “reasons”. Very strange times.

    Edit: or he’s telling the truth and is right of course!
    He sounds like he's giving himself a lot of wriggle room there. How many technologies are made by 'the government' - they are made by private defence contractors.
    The thing is, if you were ET, and had all sorts of amazing tech, what would you look at on Earth? I think it's hardly likely to be military installations. Nature, great concerts, day-to-day. Not General Plank.
    A total eclipse of the sun. Insanely rare even on a galactic scale to have a moon that is almost exactly equal in angular radius to the sun. (Some SF author pointed this out - Adams? Banks?)
    Might have been Asimov - certainly in the later Foundation books it was stated to be very rare for a planet the size of earth to have a single moon of such a proportion as ours.

    (Whether it is all that rare I have no idea, it has only been recently we've been able to detect exoplanets and exomoons would be even harder)
    My personal solution to the fermi paradox is that even with a "Goldilocks" planet, significant tides are really rare. You need a huge moon and the principal planet not to become one-face to the moon. In the solar system only Hyperion is not one-face as a moon. Tides are a wonderful way to speed evolution.
    I quite like this point. However Scotland has big tides.
    Mostly in the Solway Firth. Which is a Tory area.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082
    a

    algarkirk said:

    kle4 said:

    Omnium said:

    moonshine said:

    According to various reports, part of tomorrow hearings are going to be on USO's - unidentified sea objects - that have been reported as tracking submarines with ballistic missiles on.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/4983516-ufo-hearing-wednesday/

    Elizondo has been unequivocal in his written statement:

    “Let me be clear: UAP are real. Advanced technologies not made by our Government – or any other government – are monitoring sensitive military installations around the globe. Furthermore, the U.S. is in possession of UAP technologies, as are some of our adversaries.”

    So either he’s opening himself up to perjury in front of congress. Or he’s got cover to continue a bizarre pysop against the US public and body politik for “reasons”. Very strange times.

    Edit: or he’s telling the truth and is right of course!
    He sounds like he's giving himself a lot of wriggle room there. How many technologies are made by 'the government' - they are made by private defence contractors.
    The thing is, if you were ET, and had all sorts of amazing tech, what would you look at on Earth? I think it's hardly likely to be military installations. Nature, great concerts, day-to-day. Not General Plank.
    A total eclipse of the sun. Insanely rare even on a galactic scale to have a moon that is almost exactly equal in angular radius to the sun. (Some SF author pointed this out - Adams? Banks?)
    Might have been Asimov - certainly in the later Foundation books it was stated to be very rare for a planet the size of earth to have a single moon of such a proportion as ours.

    (Whether it is all that rare I have no idea, it has only been recently we've been able to detect exoplanets and exomoons would be even harder)
    My personal solution to the fermi paradox is that even with a "Goldilocks" planet, significant tides are really rare. You need a huge moon and the principal planet not to become one-face to the moon. In the solar system only Hyperion is not one-face as a moon. Tides are a wonderful way to speed evolution.
    There is an initial difficulty with the Fermi paradox: There is no naturalistic account in existence of how any sort of reproducing life began in the first place, so there is no data in existence on which to base any assumptions about its frequency.

    Furthermore, since Earth is (let is assume!) a decent and fertile ground for this to occur, obviously, it is actually significant that there is no evidence that it has occurred more than once here.
    Until recently, given our ignorance of other planets, we has a sample of GOLDILOCKS_PLANETS=1, INTELLIGENT_LIFE=1. There was a theory in the 50s? that planets were rare, we've now disproved that. Assuming none of the planets we've observed in the last few years have intelligent life we now have GOLDILOCKS_PLANETS=100?, INTELLIGENT_LIFE=1 and we can estimate the total number of Goldilocks planets in the galaxy as vast. We still ain't seen any other INTELLIGENT_LIFE (pace Leon) so life looks like like it needs more than just a Goldilocks planet. Seems reasonable to consider why Sol-3 is unusual, even among Goldilocks planets.
    https://www.spacecentre.nz/resources/tools/drake-equation-calculator.html
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,379
    rcs1000 said:

    Barnesian said:

    Casey (Dem) has just moved within 0.5% of McCormick for the Pennsylvania Senate seat.

    That means a recount is possible.


    You can get 75 on Casey on BF.

    And I Gallegos has been called in Arizona. @viewcode must be very relieved.
    Very. 😃
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,376
    edited November 12
    Talking of polls and sure we did this earlier, but...

    More In Common:

    Luke Tryl
    @LukeTryl
    Our latest voting intention and first since Kemi Badenoch became LOTO finds the Conservatives taking a narrow lead of 2 points.

    🌳CON 29% (+3)
    🌹LAB 27% (-1)
    🔶 LIB DEM 11% ( -3)
    ➡️ REF UK 19% (+1)
    🌍 GREEN 8% (-)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)
  • NEW THREAD

  • On Welby does he now resign from the HOL

    Also 31% are unfavourable to him and 42% not heard of him !!!!!
  • algarkirk said:

    kle4 said:

    Omnium said:

    moonshine said:

    According to various reports, part of tomorrow hearings are going to be on USO's - unidentified sea objects - that have been reported as tracking submarines with ballistic missiles on.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/4983516-ufo-hearing-wednesday/

    Elizondo has been unequivocal in his written statement:

    “Let me be clear: UAP are real. Advanced technologies not made by our Government – or any other government – are monitoring sensitive military installations around the globe. Furthermore, the U.S. is in possession of UAP technologies, as are some of our adversaries.”

    So either he’s opening himself up to perjury in front of congress. Or he’s got cover to continue a bizarre pysop against the US public and body politik for “reasons”. Very strange times.

    Edit: or he’s telling the truth and is right of course!
    He sounds like he's giving himself a lot of wriggle room there. How many technologies are made by 'the government' - they are made by private defence contractors.
    The thing is, if you were ET, and had all sorts of amazing tech, what would you look at on Earth? I think it's hardly likely to be military installations. Nature, great concerts, day-to-day. Not General Plank.
    A total eclipse of the sun. Insanely rare even on a galactic scale to have a moon that is almost exactly equal in angular radius to the sun. (Some SF author pointed this out - Adams? Banks?)
    Might have been Asimov - certainly in the later Foundation books it was stated to be very rare for a planet the size of earth to have a single moon of such a proportion as ours.

    (Whether it is all that rare I have no idea, it has only been recently we've been able to detect exoplanets and exomoons would be even harder)
    My personal solution to the fermi paradox is that even with a "Goldilocks" planet, significant tides are really rare. You need a huge moon and the principal planet not to become one-face to the moon. In the solar system only Hyperion is not one-face as a moon. Tides are a wonderful way to speed evolution.
    There is an initial difficulty with the Fermi paradox: There is no naturalistic account in existence of how any sort of reproducing life began in the first place, so there is no data in existence on which to base any assumptions about its frequency.

    Furthermore, since Earth is (let is assume!) a decent and fertile ground for this to occur, obviously, it is actually significant that there is no evidence that it has occurred more than once here.
    Until recently, given our ignorance of other planets, we has a sample of GOLDILOCKS_PLANETS=1, INTELLIGENT_LIFE=1. There was a theory in the 50s? that planets were rare, we've now disproved that. Assuming none of the planets we've observed in the last few years have intelligent life we now have GOLDILOCKS_PLANETS=100?, INTELLIGENT_LIFE=1 and we can estimate the total number of Goldilocks planets in the galaxy as vast. We still ain't seen any other INTELLIGENT_LIFE (pace Leon) so life looks like like it needs more than just a Goldilocks planet. Seems reasonable to consider why Sol-3 is unusual, even among Goldilocks planets.
    Regrettably one has to inform you, Berberon, that Leon is not an example of intelligent life.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,857

    algarkirk said:

    kle4 said:

    Omnium said:

    moonshine said:

    According to various reports, part of tomorrow hearings are going to be on USO's - unidentified sea objects - that have been reported as tracking submarines with ballistic missiles on.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/4983516-ufo-hearing-wednesday/

    Elizondo has been unequivocal in his written statement:

    “Let me be clear: UAP are real. Advanced technologies not made by our Government – or any other government – are monitoring sensitive military installations around the globe. Furthermore, the U.S. is in possession of UAP technologies, as are some of our adversaries.”

    So either he’s opening himself up to perjury in front of congress. Or he’s got cover to continue a bizarre pysop against the US public and body politik for “reasons”. Very strange times.

    Edit: or he’s telling the truth and is right of course!
    He sounds like he's giving himself a lot of wriggle room there. How many technologies are made by 'the government' - they are made by private defence contractors.
    The thing is, if you were ET, and had all sorts of amazing tech, what would you look at on Earth? I think it's hardly likely to be military installations. Nature, great concerts, day-to-day. Not General Plank.
    A total eclipse of the sun. Insanely rare even on a galactic scale to have a moon that is almost exactly equal in angular radius to the sun. (Some SF author pointed this out - Adams? Banks?)
    Might have been Asimov - certainly in the later Foundation books it was stated to be very rare for a planet the size of earth to have a single moon of such a proportion as ours.

    (Whether it is all that rare I have no idea, it has only been recently we've been able to detect exoplanets and exomoons would be even harder)
    My personal solution to the fermi paradox is that even with a "Goldilocks" planet, significant tides are really rare. You need a huge moon and the principal planet not to become one-face to the moon. In the solar system only Hyperion is not one-face as a moon. Tides are a wonderful way to speed evolution.
    There is an initial difficulty with the Fermi paradox: There is no naturalistic account in existence of how any sort of reproducing life began in the first place, so there is no data in existence on which to base any assumptions about its frequency.

    Furthermore, since Earth is (let is assume!) a decent and fertile ground for this to occur, obviously, it is actually significant that there is no evidence that it has occurred more than once here.
    Until recently, given our ignorance of other planets, we has a sample of GOLDILOCKS_PLANETS=1, INTELLIGENT_LIFE=1. There was a theory in the 50s? that planets were rare, we've now disproved that. Assuming none of the planets we've observed in the last few years have intelligent life we now have GOLDILOCKS_PLANETS=100?, INTELLIGENT_LIFE=1 and we can estimate the total number of Goldilocks planets in the galaxy as vast. We still ain't seen any other INTELLIGENT_LIFE (pace Leon) so life looks like like it needs more than just a Goldilocks planet. Seems reasonable to consider why Sol-3 is unusual, even among Goldilocks planets.
    On the current data I shall continue to adhere to the possibility that life (of any sort) has occurred once in our universe, on planet Earth while keeping an open mind.

    When there is a decent naturalistic account of how it started in the first place, and/or evidence of life elsewhere I shall increase that figure to more one 1. I shall do the old fashioned thing and follow the evidence.

    NB This is not some religious insight; religion, despite its importance, offers nothing interesting on the subject. The person to read is the atheist Thomas Nagel.
  • algarkirk said:

    kle4 said:

    Omnium said:

    moonshine said:

    According to various reports, part of tomorrow hearings are going to be on USO's - unidentified sea objects - that have been reported as tracking submarines with ballistic missiles on.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/4983516-ufo-hearing-wednesday/

    Elizondo has been unequivocal in his written statement:

    “Let me be clear: UAP are real. Advanced technologies not made by our Government – or any other government – are monitoring sensitive military installations around the globe. Furthermore, the U.S. is in possession of UAP technologies, as are some of our adversaries.”

    So either he’s opening himself up to perjury in front of congress. Or he’s got cover to continue a bizarre pysop against the US public and body politik for “reasons”. Very strange times.

    Edit: or he’s telling the truth and is right of course!
    He sounds like he's giving himself a lot of wriggle room there. How many technologies are made by 'the government' - they are made by private defence contractors.
    The thing is, if you were ET, and had all sorts of amazing tech, what would you look at on Earth? I think it's hardly likely to be military installations. Nature, great concerts, day-to-day. Not General Plank.
    A total eclipse of the sun. Insanely rare even on a galactic scale to have a moon that is almost exactly equal in angular radius to the sun. (Some SF author pointed this out - Adams? Banks?)
    Might have been Asimov - certainly in the later Foundation books it was stated to be very rare for a planet the size of earth to have a single moon of such a proportion as ours.

    (Whether it is all that rare I have no idea, it has only been recently we've been able to detect exoplanets and exomoons would be even harder)
    My personal solution to the fermi paradox is that even with a "Goldilocks" planet, significant tides are really rare. You need a huge moon and the principal planet not to become one-face to the moon. In the solar system only Hyperion is not one-face as a moon. Tides are a wonderful way to speed evolution.
    There is an initial difficulty with the Fermi paradox: There is no naturalistic account in existence of how any sort of reproducing life began in the first place, so there is no data in existence on which to base any assumptions about its frequency.

    Furthermore, since Earth is (let is assume!) a decent and fertile ground for this to occur, obviously, it is actually significant that there is no evidence that it has occurred more than once here.
    Until recently, given our ignorance of other planets, we has a sample of GOLDILOCKS_PLANETS=1, INTELLIGENT_LIFE=1. There was a theory in the 50s? that planets were rare, we've now disproved that. Assuming none of the planets we've observed in the last few years have intelligent life we now have GOLDILOCKS_PLANETS=100?, INTELLIGENT_LIFE=1 and we can estimate the total number of Goldilocks planets in the galaxy as vast. We still ain't seen any other INTELLIGENT_LIFE (pace Leon) so life looks like like it needs more than just a Goldilocks planet. Seems reasonable to consider why Sol-3 is unusual, even among Goldilocks planets.
    The chances of us seeing intelligent life on any other planet from our own planet at present is so vanishingly small as to be effectively zero. That in no way implies that life is not there. Simply that we have been in a position to actually detect it for such a tiny amount of time that we would be unbelieveably lucky to do that in the next thousand years.

    It is also hugely unikely that any other intelligent life would detect us if they are at our level of technology or maybe a few hundreds years in advance of us.

    For reference so far we have found about 5000 exoplanets and of that about 20 are in the Goldilocks Zone. Whilst a few of these are 40 or so lightyears away, the vast majority are between 500 and 1000 light years away. So we have at least 380 years as a minimum before there would be any chance of a signal from earth reaching them - and even that is almost imposiible because of disipation of the signal in transit.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,864
    GIN1138 said:

    Talking of polls and sure we did this earlier, but...

    More In Common:

    Luke Tryl
    @LukeTryl
    Our latest voting intention and first since Kemi Badenoch became LOTO finds the Conservatives taking a narrow lead of 2 points.

    🌳CON 29% (+3)
    🌹LAB 27% (-1)
    🔶 LIB DEM 11% ( -3)
    ➡️ REF UK 19% (+1)
    🌍 GREEN 8% (-)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Encouraging but still gives Labour most seats with 293 to 246 for the Tories, 59 LDs and 8 Reform

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=N&CON=29&LAB=27&LIB=11&Reform=19&Green=8&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTReform=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2024
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,032
    Omnium said:

    MaxPB said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Can any of PB's financial whizz's explain why the banks are putting interest rates up when only last week BoE cut the base rate?

    Interest rate expectations have gone up, banks price rates based on what they think the base rate will be in the future. This is reflected in UK government bond yields which rise when future expectations for interest rates rise and fall when markets believe interest rates will fall.

    The budget put plus Trump tariffs put the UK on a path for prolonged higher interest rates, there was a lot of hope that the base rate would fall to 2.75-3.00% by the end of next year. I'd be surprised if they now fall below 4% given businesses are going to absorb £20bn in new taxes from April with price rises.
    "banks price rates based on what they think the base rate will be in the future"

    This isn't really true.
    It's indirectly true, the market prices are based on future expectations and the banks follow the prices set by yields, give or take a few basis points.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,807
    One of the funniest but sadly least appreciated posts on PB

    Seashanty:
    Fun fact: while new Premier Susan Holt affirmed her support for LBGT New Brunswickers in her victory speech tonight, her husband stood behind her . . . wearing a large rainbow flag belt-buckle.

    LG1983:
    Let's hope he wears a little more in future.


    Just a hilarious conjouring up of the image of some daft Canadian Prime Minister (is New Brunswick in Canada?) with her husband in tow, proudly supporting the LBGT community by wearing nothing except a strategically placed rainbow belt buckle.

    Comedy GOLD.

    ZERO LIKES.

    Personally I blame the febrile PB atmosphere surrounding the US election, where any fun-poking at the forces of progressivism was probably seen as a treacherous attack on PB morale. A bit like launching a speed dating service during Covid.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,443
    Omnium said:

    MaxPB said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Can any of PB's financial whizz's explain why the banks are putting interest rates up when only last week BoE cut the base rate?

    Interest rate expectations have gone up, banks price rates based on what they think the base rate will be in the future. This is reflected in UK government bond yields which rise when future expectations for interest rates rise and fall when markets believe interest rates will fall.

    The budget put plus Trump tariffs put the UK on a path for prolonged higher interest rates, there was a lot of hope that the base rate would fall to 2.75-3.00% by the end of next year. I'd be surprised if they now fall below 4% given businesses are going to absorb £20bn in new taxes from April with price rises.
    "banks price rates based on what they think the base rate will be in the future"

    This isn't really true.
    They price it based on what they can borrow in the market plus a spread for credit risk and profit margin

    The market price is dependent on expectations on current and future rates (the yield curve)
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,882
    edited November 13

    Incidentally, on the Smyth scandal:

    "A report detailing his "horrific" beatings of teenaged boys was presented to some Church leaders in 1982. But the recipients of that report "participated in an active cover-up" to prevent its findings, including that crimes had been committed, coming to light, the Makin review said."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5y5l7116g1o

    Tale care with that. Our media are fishing for juicy nuggets without giving a complete picture, and their concern is named people hanging on media gibbets, plus sensational stories. It always is. Concern for victims, and prevention of future repeat events, which should be first, always comes second.

    "Church leaders" in that quote is enticingly vague. In 1982 afaics can see from the sections of the Makin Report I have studied, it was a few leaders in one parish, and a couple of trustees in an independent trust ("Iwerne Trust") which existed purely to organise said holiday camps. The independence of the trust made it easier for Smyth to isolate his abuse once he was established inside the network.

    With reporting like that there will be various groups trying to make hay using it to smear over all sorts of other people who omitted to do things they could have done.

    Just the practice of such reporting will incentive those who know to forget that they heard and keep their eyes shut, for fear of being "scooped". That's how media exposure works - a newspaper writes a story making an allegation, and you start getting (up to death) threats and emails to your employer.

    We learnt that when the tabloids were running "who is your local paedophile" front pages in the late 1990s, and when they got it wrong innocent people were driven out of their homes.

    In this case, for general awareness I'd suggest reading the timeline section of the report. Start at section 11.3 on page 34 and keep going as long as you can stand.

    https://www.churchofengland.org/sites/default/files/2024-11/independent-learning-lessons-review-john-smyth-qc-november-2024.pdf

    The thing that shouts to me is how ordinary he was. Targeting particular people as THEY did THAT, whether the perp or the people who are deemed to have taken no action when they could have done so, misses the important point that the next one could be your or my colleague, neighbour or partner - or maybe ourselves. After all, we have just had a member of PB who got semi-drunk or drunk at normal drinks receptions, lost his inhibitions, then started touching up a female staff member because at the time he thought it was an OK thing to do.
This discussion has been closed.