Things that annoy you beyond reason...? [Vol 3]
Discussion
Hackney said:
The hideous Saturday night game shows where the contestants must be coached to talk their logic in order to take up as much time as possible so the 15 minute show can last 45 minutes. But these people are imbeciles so they have no logic and they get to the wrong answer in such a convoluted, idiotic fashion. ARRRRGGGGGGHHHHHHH
Yes, especially when they've started off by saying "I've got no idea", then take a wild stab in the dark at an answer and have to justify how they got to it. "I guessed, Dale" never seems to be acceptable.That said, this doesn't annoy me beyond reason any more as it must be years since I've watched one of these shows. The endless parade of trashy ways of extending the lottery draws from the couple of minutes it actually takes to a whole hour of entertainment finally broke me.
JonRB said:
LiamB said:
WD39 said:
rohrl said:
iva cosworth said:
Drivers who hoot back after being hooted at,even when it wasn't me who hooted.
It's quite funny when occasionally everyone starts hooting.I started off with basic tunes like football chants to see if I got any response, it then turned into an all out war..
There are some real curmudgeons on this thread.
Presumably not a matinee?
Things that annoy me beyond reason: thoughtless
s who beep their horns late at night. It's actually illegal after 11:30 and almost certainly not necessary at other times.highway code said:
112
The horn. Use only while your vehicle is moving and you need to warn other road users of your presence. Never sound your horn aggressively. You MUST NOT use your horn
while stationary on the road
when driving in a built-up area between the hours of 11.30 pm and 7.00 am
except when another road user poses a danger.
And fThe horn. Use only while your vehicle is moving and you need to warn other road users of your presence. Never sound your horn aggressively. You MUST NOT use your horn
while stationary on the road
when driving in a built-up area between the hours of 11.30 pm and 7.00 am
except when another road user poses a danger.
k you if you call me a curmudgeon!OpulentBob said:
Unpopular reply alert.
Then it's the wkers who are driving at 30+ that you should be angry with. You can always pick a route that hasn't been surface dressed for a fortnight if you're that worried about your paint.
Do you drive down roads that are flooded, then complain that you've got a water-locked engine, or do you find another route?
Surface dressing is a st load cheaper and quicker than resurfacing and if it means a Road has to be passed carefully for a couple of weeks then so be it. They wouldn't do it if it was useless.
Comparing resurfacing with a flooded road? But the powers that be don't flood a road in order to make it dry in two weeks do they? Then it's the w
kers who are driving at 30+ that you should be angry with. You can always pick a route that hasn't been surface dressed for a fortnight if you're that worried about your paint. Do you drive down roads that are flooded, then complain that you've got a water-locked engine, or do you find another route?
Surface dressing is a s
t load cheaper and quicker than resurfacing and if it means a Road has to be passed carefully for a couple of weeks then so be it. They wouldn't do it if it was useless. Surface dressing is papering over the cracks - which makes it cheap - while the underlying problems remain. It's a cheap, temporarily very bad, then just bad temporary solution to a long term problem. They do it because they're cheap and they're useless.
Hackney said:
OpulentBob said:
Unpopular reply alert.
Then it's the wkers who are driving at 30+ that you should be angry with. You can always pick a route that hasn't been surface dressed for a fortnight if you're that worried about your paint.
Do you drive down roads that are flooded, then complain that you've got a water-locked engine, or do you find another route?
Surface dressing is a st load cheaper and quicker than resurfacing and if it means a Road has to be passed carefully for a couple of weeks then so be it. They wouldn't do it if it was useless.
Comparing resurfacing with a flooded road? But the powers that be don't flood a road in order to make it dry in two weeks do they? Then it's the w
kers who are driving at 30+ that you should be angry with. You can always pick a route that hasn't been surface dressed for a fortnight if you're that worried about your paint. Do you drive down roads that are flooded, then complain that you've got a water-locked engine, or do you find another route?
Surface dressing is a s
t load cheaper and quicker than resurfacing and if it means a Road has to be passed carefully for a couple of weeks then so be it. They wouldn't do it if it was useless. Surface dressing is papering over the cracks - which makes it cheap - while the underlying problems remain. It's a cheap, temporarily very bad, then just bad temporary solution to a long term problem. They do it because they're cheap and they're useless.
It is indeed not as good as resurfacing. See my later post for further clarification.
Useless? Bit offensive. I'll wager you couldn't do better for the money.
My point is proven. Anyone with a driving license thinks they can tell me how to do my job better...
What do you do for a living, Hackney?
Edited by OpulentBob on Tuesday 28th July 14:53
Edited by OpulentBob on Tuesday 28th July 14:57
The complete waste of time and moneys spent on Cycle lanes around Surrey that no Cyclist use, they prefer just to stay on the main roads!
Im currently working in the Epsom area near Horton Park, this new housing development and surrounding roads put in big wide cycle lanes yet still they remain empty and cyclists use the road. then this morning saw a bunch of kids on bikes, only one of them using the cycle path the rest on the footpath!
Seriously, is there really any point in laying tarmac they have no wish to use, must have cost hundreds of thousands of wasted cash!
Same with cycle lanes along the Dorking by pass at the bottom of box hill, miles of wasted tarmac.
(only thing they were good for was parking tanks on prior to D-Day)
Im currently working in the Epsom area near Horton Park, this new housing development and surrounding roads put in big wide cycle lanes yet still they remain empty and cyclists use the road. then this morning saw a bunch of kids on bikes, only one of them using the cycle path the rest on the footpath!
Seriously, is there really any point in laying tarmac they have no wish to use, must have cost hundreds of thousands of wasted cash!
Same with cycle lanes along the Dorking by pass at the bottom of box hill, miles of wasted tarmac.
(only thing they were good for was parking tanks on prior to D-Day)
Edited by fatboy18 on Tuesday 28th July 22:35
Telling us we should be in the EU.....Just f
It's not a fStudio117 said:
The only pools which offer this are a) tiny and/or b) want to relieve me of excessive membership costs.
Or - more annoyingly - organise "women only" night at the time most people who work 9-5 jobs would want to use the pool. They don't commensurately reduce men's membership fee to take account of restricted availability though - funny that.
Local takeaways who insist on posting menus through my door almost on a weekly basis. It doesn't make me want to buy anything whether i get one menu or ten menus.
I live in a street with a mix of council owned, and privately owned ex council houses. A local council "green policy" seen all the council owned houses get external wall insulation. The rest of us who own our houses had to endure weeks of disruption dust and mess, access to driveway issues, not to mention scaffolding on neighbouring houses while this was carried out. Now 3 months after the work was completed and the place tidied up, the council in their wisdom have now extended the scheme to homeowners! Given how messy the work was, surely it would have been better to do all the houses that wanted it at once? Council organisation at its best.
I live in a street with a mix of council owned, and privately owned ex council houses. A local council "green policy" seen all the council owned houses get external wall insulation. The rest of us who own our houses had to endure weeks of disruption dust and mess, access to driveway issues, not to mention scaffolding on neighbouring houses while this was carried out. Now 3 months after the work was completed and the place tidied up, the council in their wisdom have now extended the scheme to homeowners! Given how messy the work was, surely it would have been better to do all the houses that wanted it at once? Council organisation at its best.
well no one would have known about a lion in Africa called cecil, unless that was your thing I guess.
shows the power of social media and moronbook though.
the dentists livelihood is finished........ he may well face no charges, but his days of paying $50k to hunt stuff are over.
apparently it limped on wounded for 40 hrs before it was actually killed. now that I find sad.
so on a related subject: Americans and their attitude towards gun ownership.
Americans IMO are not bright enough to own guns. Owning a gun to protect you from someone else who owns a gun is not a logical argument. start with the pretext of neither of you owning a gun.
shows the power of social media and moronbook though.
the dentists livelihood is finished........ he may well face no charges, but his days of paying $50k to hunt stuff are over.
apparently it limped on wounded for 40 hrs before it was actually killed. now that I find sad.
so on a related subject: Americans and their attitude towards gun ownership.
Americans IMO are not bright enough to own guns. Owning a gun to protect you from someone else who owns a gun is not a logical argument. start with the pretext of neither of you owning a gun.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff