cr0 revolutions

[Garp]

Being serious, surely only the original topic starter should have the right to change the title....not every Tom, Phil and Harry ;D

[Onions]

I don't need to justify anything Phill. You need to justify a one-man crusade against consensus!
Not that I GAF of course

[Peripatetic Phil]

Where is the consensus, DOO ?  Where are the dozens of voices all proclaiming "we believe that recycling previously recycled material is of benefit to forum members" ?

** Phil.

[Peripatetic Phil]

Being serious, surely only the original topic starter should have the right to change the title....not every Tom, Phil and Harry ;D

By the same argument, only the original topic starter should have the right to reply to previous messages in the thread

** Phil.

[Onions]

It was the status quo Phill. The status quo without dozens of voices all proclaiming 'we believe that recycling previously recycled material' is objectionable = consensus.

[Peripatetic Phil]

It was the status quo Phill. The status quo without dozens of voices all proclaiming 'we believe that recycling previously recycled material' is objectionable = consensus.

The silent majority are always silent, by definition, DOO.  Scotland will probably go independent not because the majority want independence, but because those who do will bother to vote (i.e., to attempt to change the status quo), whilst those who do not will simply abstain.  If you really believe that the majority of forum members are happy to waste their time reading infinitely recycled dross to arbitrary depth, why not start a poll to that effect ?  The forum supports such polls.  I spoke out against it because I believe that it is detrimental to the forum and a distraction to the reader; others may agree or not, and I am certainly prepared to hear arguments in its favour -- oddly, though, even its staunchest protagonists such as your good self seem strangely silent when asked why it is a Good Thing^[TM] ...

** Phil.

[Onions]

It doesn't have to be a good thing Phill- it's just there, like the ability to change thread titles. NO-ONE CARES. Including me, as I said above; but I'll only tell you why if you ask. Frankly, your arguments are specious. After all, you could quite as easily start a poll too. Something else the software allows. There are really quite a few aren't there?

BTW, you're wrong in your analysis of the Scottish debate as well

[Garp]

Being serious, surely only the original topic starter should have the right to change the title....not every Tom, Phil and Harry ;D

By the same argument, only the original topic starter should have the right to reply to previous messages in the thread

** Phil.

I usually appreciate your logic, Phil, but on this occasion I think you are wrong. If someone starts a topic under a particular name, asking for feedback or opinions, they can expect replies, but not for the topic name to be changed.

If you invited me round to 'Chez Phil' for a curry, I would expect to be able to make comments on your curries, and possibly the decor of your house. I wouldn't, however, find it acceptable to replace the wooden plaque at the front door with one which said 'Chez Garp'.

[Peripatetic Phil]

If you invited me round to 'Chez Phil' for a curry, I would expect to be able to make comments on your curries, and possibly the decor of your house. I wouldn't, however, find it acceptable to replace the wooden plaque at the front door with one which said 'Chez Garp'.

If you were to agree to take over the mortgage payments, I would be very happy for such a sign to be displayed (so long as I could remain in residence in perpetuity, and you would have to return to Maison Garp, without doggy bag !).

[Peripatetic Phil]

[Y]ou could quite as easily start a poll too. Something else the software allows.

https://curry-recipes.co.uk/curry/index.php/topic,13277.new.html#new