kle4 said:

DavidL said:

kle4 said:

rcs1000 said:

kle4 said:

Sean_F said:

ydoethur said:

kle4 said:

When I was at Longleat House a few weeks ago one of the rooms had a virginal in it - one was referenced in Terry Pratchett's The Truth but I had no idea they were real.

One of Pratchett's finest lines:

'They were called virginals. So called because they were meant for ----ing young women.'

'My word, were they?' asked one of the chairs. 'I thought they were just a kind of early piano.'

I loved the conversation from Making Money that began "Isn't the fornication here wonderful?"

There were times I laughed out loud, reading that book.

Going Postal and Making Money were both superb - a shame about Raising Steam, which could have been so good but was very much not.

Going Postal might well be his finest work.

That whole first chapter - a work of genius. RIP Sir Terry, we shall miss ye.

Isn't there to be a Good Omens TV show out soon? It will probably be terrible, I don't know how well much of his work does when not on paper.

Going Postal is brilliant but for me Mascarade was his pinnacle. I have read it so many times and I still find myself laughing uncontrollably.

Night Watch is my favourite I think, but I go back and forth on that.

Andy_Cooke said:

Cyclefree said:

If one were developing a country from scratch I would not choose a monarchy. But that is the point: we’re not starting from a blank sheet of paper. I can see no good reason to remove the monarchy from Britain. On the whole it works well. There are plenty of things wrong that need fixing which are way more important.

And I am instinctively wary of those groups who want to rip everything up and start again. In politics that has usually resulted in a lot of destruction and misery and very little constructive achievement to show for it.

Chesterton's fence is a rather important thing to bear in mind:
http://www.theconceptsproject.com/chestertons-fence/#.WwBhX-ko-f0

Chesterton's Fence says, in short, that you should never let someone reform something (a rule, an institution) if he tells you that the thing doesn't serve any purpose. The philosopher G.K. Chesterton vividly illustrated his idea by asking us to imagine a fence strung up across a road, representing any kind of law or institution that we might find odd or inexplicable. There's a certain type of reformer, says Chesterton, who

...goes gaily up to [the fence] and says, “I don’t see the use of this; let us clear it away.” To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: “If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it."

Chesterton's Fence is a claim that every rule or institution you encounter probably exists for a reason. It might be a bad reason, an outdated reason, or even an evil reason, but the fence didn't just appear out of nowhere. As Chesterton put it,

[The] fence did not grow there. It was not set up by somnambulists who built it in their sleep. It is highly improbable that it was put there by escaped lunatics who were for some reason loose in the street.

Richard_Tyndall said:

Andy_Cooke said:

Cyclefree said:

Chesterton's fence is a rather important thing to bear in mind:
http://www.theconceptsproject.com/chestertons-fence/#.WwBhX-ko-f0

Chesterton's Fence says, in short, that you should never let someone reform something (a rule, an institution) if he tells you that the thing doesn't serve any purpose. The philosopher G.K. Chesterton vividly illustrated his idea by asking us to imagine a fence strung up across a road, representing any kind of law or institution that we might find odd or inexplicable. There's a certain type of reformer, says Chesterton, who

...goes gaily up to [the fence] and says, “I don’t see the use of this; let us clear it away.” To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: “If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it."

Chesterton's Fence is a claim that every rule or institution you encounter probably exists for a reason. It might be a bad reason, an outdated reason, or even an evil reason, but the fence didn't just appear out of nowhere. As Chesterton put it,

[The] fence did not grow there. It was not set up by somnambulists who built it in their sleep. It is highly improbable that it was put there by escaped lunatics who were for some reason loose in the street.

The great playwrite Robert Bolt in A Man for All Seasons puts similar sentiments regarding the law. When Will Roper wants to see the law ignored

“William Roper: “So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!”

Sir Thomas More: “Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?”

William Roper: “Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!”

Sir Thomas More: “Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!”

surby said:

Best known American women today:

Meghan Markle, Oprah Winfrey, Michelle Obama, Serena Williams...........

DavidL said:

United could still be playing now after Chelsea had left the field to collect the Cup and they wouldn’t have scored. Pogba really has to go. Herera too. And Mourinho. We are never going to win anything with such an overly cautious and defensive mindset.

FrancisUrquhart said:

HYUFD said:

I see Theresa May, Vince Cable, even Nicola Sturgeon all managed to send tweets of congratulation to Harry and Meghan today.

Yet not one from Jeremy Corbyn

He has been really busy....all that jam won't make itself.

DavidL said:

United could still be playing now after Chelsea had left the field to collect the Cup and they wouldn’t have scored. Pogba really has to go. Herera too. And Mourinho. We are never going to win anything with such an overly cautious and defensive mindset.

Jonathan said:

Markle 2020.

DavidL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Andy_Cooke said:

Cyclefree said:

Chesterton's fence is a rather important thing to bear in mind:
http://www.theconceptsproject.com/chestertons-fence/#.WwBhX-ko-f0

Chesterton's Fence says, in short, that you should never let someone reform something (a rule, an institution) if he tells you that the thing doesn't serve any purpose. The philosopher G.K. Chesterton vividly illustrated his idea by asking us to imagine a fence strung up across a road, representing any kind of law or institution that we might find odd or inexplicable. There's a certain type of reformer, says Chesterton, who

...goes gaily up to [the fence] and says, “I don’t see the use of this; let us clear it away.” To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: “If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it."

Chesterton's Fence is a claim that every rule or institution you encounter probably exists for a reason. It might be a bad reason, an outdated reason, or even an evil reason, but the fence didn't just appear out of nowhere. As Chesterton put it,

[The] fence did not grow there. It was not set up by somnambulists who built it in their sleep. It is highly improbable that it was put there by escaped lunatics who were for some reason loose in the street.

The great playwrite Robert Bolt in A Man for All Seasons puts similar sentiments regarding the law. When Will Roper wants to see the law ignored

“William Roper: “So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!”

Sir Thomas More: “Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?”

William Roper: “Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!”

Sir Thomas More: “Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!”

Not just that scene but certainly that in part persuaded me to be a lawyer. Just a brilliant play.

HYUFD said:

FrankBooth said:

MTimT said:

HYUFD said:

MTimT said:

RoyalBlue said:

Our former charges may exceed us in power and might, but they will never exceed us in majesty.

Such comments always embarrass me somewhat and make me more than a little sad for the UK.

The main reason this is true is that we care about majesty and pageantry and the US - for all their oohing and aahing when seeing others do it - does not. It's easy to win a race when the other party does not care. Its sad to see someone vaunting winning when others are not competing.

To me, to read that the US may have power, but we have pomp does not indicate pride, but diminished sense of self worth. Sure, enjoy the pomp, but find something worthwhile to be proud about. There is much the UK should rightfully boast.

I guess this is why royal weddings bring out the republican in me.

'We don't care about majesty and pageantry'? Pull the other one! Have you ever seen the US Presidential motorcade compared to the British PM's? Or the Presidential inaugration? Or funerals of former Presidents? Or the President's State of the Union Address to Congress? Or even the Super bowl?

In any case this was not a US v British thing so much as Meghan is herself American.

I did not say that the US does not enjoy or do pomp, just that they don't really care about it. When did you last hear an American boast about the pomp of an inaugural, a nomination acceptance, a funeral or a wedding? To them, it is stage management towards a greater goal, not an end in itself.

When I first moved here, I received one of many cultural shocks. When talking about the UK's contribution to history, a good friend interrupted me and said "I don't care about what your country did, what is it doing now?" That is the mindset. Our pomp is mostly historical and nostalgic. It is what we did, not what we can do. It is us saying, look how great we once were. Which I find sad.

Cameron endorsed that sad mindset when he made that silly speech after the Russian insult at an international conference. What he failed to realise (not unusual for him) was that he was ENDORSING the notion that we no longer matter. I suppose the past provides consolation for those who have given up on the future but most people want more.

We may not be a superpower anymore like the US, China and perhaps Russia but we are still at the top of the second tier along with France, Germany, Japan and India

FrancisUrquhart said:

Wonder what the after wedding do is like? Did Dave's mobile disco get the gig and Queenie after a few G&Ts leading the conga?

tlg86 said:

If by some miracle we make it as far as the Germans in the World Cup, Vardy is a must. If Jones looked awful against Hazard today, Hummels has the pace of an oil tanker.

JackW said:

Jonathan said:

Markle 2020.

The Duchess of Sussex will be a British citizen within the year and ineligible for POTUS.

not_on_fire said:

JackW said:

Jonathan said:

Markle 2020.

The Duchess of Sussex will be a British citizen within the year and ineligible for POTUS.

Surely her British citizenship be sorted immediately (or perhaps already has been)?

Or will she have to apply for a visa and prove Harry makes at least £18k per year?

not_on_fire said:

JackW said:

Jonathan said:

Markle 2020.

The Duchess of Sussex will be a British citizen within the year and ineligible for POTUS.

Surely her British citizenship be sorted immediately (or perhaps already has been)?

Or will she have to apply for a visa and prove Harry makes at least £18k per year?

AndyJS said:

HYUFD said:

New Opinium poll

Tories 43%
Labour 39%
LDs 6%
UKIP 4%

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/19/tories-take-four-point-lead-over-labour-in-latest-survey

In line with YouGov.

tlg86 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

tlg86 said:

If by some miracle we make it as far as the Germans in the World Cup, Vardy is a must. If Jones looked awful against Hazard today, Hummels has the pace of an oil tanker.

Sterling isn't exactly a slow coach...

I was thinking in place of Kane. I wonder if Southgate has the balls to do that? The second Frankfurt goal tonight came from a simple ball over the top. Hummels was favourite to get it but he was easily outpaced by the forward.

JackW said:

Sean_F said:

DavidL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Andy_Cooke said:

Cyclefree said:

Chesterton's fence is a rather important thing to bear in mind:
http://www.theconceptsproject.com/chestertons-fence/#.WwBhX-ko-f0

Chesterton's Fence says, in short, that you should never let someone reform something (a rule, an institution) if he tells you that the thing doesn't serve any purpose. The philosopher G.K. Chesterton vividly illustrated his idea by asking us to imagine a fence strung up across a road, representing any kind of law or institution that we might find odd or inexplicable. There's a certain type of reformer, says Chesterton, who

...goes gaily up to [the fence] and says, “I don’t see the use of this; let us clear it away.” To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: “If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it."

Chesterton's Fence is a claim that every rule or institution you encounter probably exists for a reason. It might be a bad reason, an outdated reason, or even an evil reason, but the fence didn't just appear out of nowhere. As Chesterton put it,

[The] fence did not grow there. It was not set up by somnambulists who built it in their sleep. It is highly improbable that it was put there by escaped lunatics who were for some reason loose in the street.

The great playwrite Robert Bolt in A Man for All Seasons puts similar sentiments regarding the law. When Will Roper wants to see the law ignored

“William Roper: “So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!”

Sir Thomas More: “Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?”

William Roper: “Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!”

Sir Thomas More: “Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!”

Not just that scene but certainly that in part persuaded me to be a lawyer. Just a brilliant play.

Ironically, the real Sir Thomas More would have cut a road through the law to go after the Devil.

But, it is a brilliant play.

The film is excellent too. Schofield's performance was well worth the Oscar among the six overall wins for the film.

Barnesian said:

HYUFD said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

HYUFD said:

New Opinium poll

Tories 43%
Labour 39%
LDs 6%
UKIP 4%

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/19/tories-take-four-point-lead-over-labour-in-latest-survey

Seems like the trend is real, Tories now have a small lead.

Yes and enough for a small Tory majority on this poll

On the EMA (exponential moving average), the Tories are still 12 short of a majority.

Con 314
Lab 260
LD 16

AndyJS said:

HYUFD said:

AndyJS said:

HYUFD said:

New Opinium poll

Tories 43%
Labour 39%
LDs 6%
UKIP 4%

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/19/tories-take-four-point-lead-over-labour-in-latest-survey

In line with YouGov.

Yes and even Survation now has the Tories ahead, albeit only just

13 polls in a row without a Labour lead and only one in the last 21.

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

JosiasJessop said:

I fear this will be as popular as saying I like pineapple on my pizza whilst listening to Radiohead's Greatest Hits, but I never really *got* Pratchett. Yes, he could make some good one-liners, and he certainly had an excellent turn of phrase. But his writing never connected with me.

On the other hand, Douglas Adams' writing did. Both were undoubtedly brilliant writers, but one was for me, the other not. We have a friend who says the reverse, whilst Mrs J is a massive fan of both.

Having said that, I did go to a really good amateur play of Mort in Romsey ten or so years ago.

It certainly makes you less popular with me! In addition to consistent hilarity, Pratchett's work connected me with deep themes far more successfully than many authors for whom that is the primary intent, and far from just one liners his characterisation and plotting could be superb.

But I'll be charitable and forgive you...

HYUFD said:

I see Theresa May, Vince Cable, Arlene Foster, even Nicola Sturgeon all managed to send tweets of congratulation to Harry and Meghan today.

Yet not one from Jeremy Corbyn

So what? That is something I really won't criticise Corbyn before - in any case no doubt his spinners should be taking care of such things for him.

So what? He is Leader of the Opposition and the potential next PM of this country. Whatever his private republican sympathies he could have at least given one tweet of congratulation to the newly weds which virtually every other political leader in the UK managed to do but him

AndyJS said:

Barnesian said:

HYUFD said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

HYUFD said:

New Opinium poll

Tories 43%
Labour 39%
LDs 6%
UKIP 4%

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/19/tories-take-four-point-lead-over-labour-in-latest-survey

Seems like the trend is real, Tories now have a small lead.

Yes and enough for a small Tory majority on this poll

On the EMA (exponential moving average), the Tories are still 12 short of a majority.

Con 314
Lab 260
LD 16

How many polls does it take into account?

Barnesian said:

AndyJS said:

Barnesian said:

HYUFD said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

HYUFD said:

New Opinium poll

Tories 43%
Labour 39%
LDs 6%
UKIP 4%

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/19/tories-take-four-point-lead-over-labour-in-latest-survey

Seems like the trend is real, Tories now have a small lead.

Yes and enough for a small Tory majority on this poll

On the EMA (exponential moving average), the Tories are still 12 short of a majority.

Con 314
Lab 260
LD 16

How many polls does it take into account?

In theory all of them. I have the last 340 polls in my model.

But it is exponentially weighted by 10% per poll.

Latest poll 10% weight
2nd latest 9%
3rd latest 8.1%
4th Latest 7.29%
5th latest 6.56%
6th latest 5.90%
340th latest 0.00000000000000003%

The weighting add up to 100%. 10%*(1/(1-0.9))



EPA is used in smoothing time series without arbitrary cut-off points on number of polls but giving greater weight to more recent polls.

HYUFD said:

Barnesian said:

HYUFD said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

HYUFD said:

New Opinium poll

Tories 43%
Labour 39%
LDs 6%
UKIP 4%

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/19/tories-take-four-point-lead-over-labour-in-latest-survey

Seems like the trend is real, Tories now have a small lead.

Yes and enough for a small Tory majority on this poll

On the EMA (exponential moving average), the Tories are still 12 short of a majority.

Con 314
Lab 260
LD 16

On this new Opinium it is a 1% swing from Labour to the Tories since the last general election which would see the Tories pick up 15 seats from Labour (including that of Ms Dent Coad) for an overall Tory majority of about 14

http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/conservative

Benpointer said:

Barnesian said:

AndyJS said:

Barnesian said:

HYUFD said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

HYUFD said:

New Opinium poll

Tories 43%
Labour 39%
LDs 6%
UKIP 4%

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/19/tories-take-four-point-lead-over-labour-in-latest-survey

Seems like the trend is real, Tories now have a small lead.

Yes and enough for a small Tory majority on this poll

On the EMA (exponential moving average), the Tories are still 12 short of a majority.

Con 314
Lab 260
LD 16

How many polls does it take into account?

In theory all of them. I have the last 340 polls in my model.

But it is exponentially weighted by 10% per poll.

Latest poll 10% weight
2nd latest 9%
3rd latest 8.1%
4th Latest 7.29%
5th latest 6.56%
6th latest 5.90%
340th latest 0.00000000000000003%

The weighting add up to 100%. 10%*(1/(1-0.9))



EPA is used in smoothing time series without arbitrary cut-off points on number of polls but giving greater weight to more recent polls.

Is that 'all of them' since the last GE?

justin124 said:

HYUFD said:

Barnesian said:

HYUFD said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

HYUFD said:

New Opinium poll

Tories 43%
Labour 39%
LDs 6%
UKIP 4%

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/19/tories-take-four-point-lead-over-labour-in-latest-survey

Seems like the trend is real, Tories now have a small lead.

Yes and enough for a small Tory majority on this poll

On the EMA (exponential moving average), the Tories are still 12 short of a majority.

Con 314
Lab 260
LD 16

On this new Opinium it is a 1% swing from Labour to the Tories since the last general election which would see the Tories pick up 15 seats from Labour (including that of Ms Dent Coad) for an overall Tory majority of about 14

http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/conservative

The swing is actually 0.75% from June 2017.
Opinium's final poll then gave the Tories a 7% lead.

justin124 said:

HYUFD said:

AndyJS said:

HYUFD said:

New Opinium poll

Tories 43%
Labour 39%
LDs 6%
UKIP 4%

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/19/tories-take-four-point-lead-over-labour-in-latest-survey

In line with YouGov.

Yes and even Survation now has the Tories ahead, albeit only just

Opinium has put the Tories 3% ahead before - as far back as last Autumn
On the other hand, BMG had the Tories 3 % ahead last summer - yet their most recent poll has the parties level pegging.

TheScreamingEagles said:

The polling suggests opinion is shifting in favour of the UK staying in the single market, a position strongly opposed by most Tories.

Corbyn has also refused to back staying in the single market, saying its membership could threaten many of the economic policies Labour wishes to implement if and when it comes to power. In January 2017, only 32% of voters said staying in the single market should be prioritised over ending freedom of movement. Now 40% take that view