General Chat

GP. I said both had married women and both had had children.

So you and me technically are same as them :-D Would love to meet her :-D I have only one daughter but she could teach you a thing or two ;-)

GP pmsl

JOHN - You earlier compared me with Elton John an Paul O'grady in the girlfriend stakes and the children they have. Well John I have two daughters and one is a Psychiatrist and if you would like to meet her I could make an appointment. I have told her all about you and she would love to meet you.

GP

John I think your account must have been hacked because someone posing as you (complete with dubious hat) stated recently on a thread that since the beginning of December they had the right to say what people could or could not say.
If that was not you then maybe you need to look into it.

You are correct about OP and contributions. But I am saying that in practice there are certain people who are really good at "managing" a thread. They do it in the background and do it quite naturally. I notice these things as, many years ago, I was in quite senior management positions. And, also, I have watched a lot of very clever politicians over the years and seen how they chair things.

As far as your question about policing threads is concerned, I think you are confusing me with the Genes personnel who police these threads. I am just a simple member.

John are you not now getting off topic ever so slightly?
When somebody posts a thread they are not the "owner" but merely posting something that people may then wish to discuss and interact with in whatever way they seem fit - it is a democracy.
Instead of saying Ann should delete, why not merely ignore the thread if you do not like it or feel uncomfortable if some of your opinions and/or beliefs are called into question?
Again, I am puzzled as to why you have been appointed as chairman of the board police and would like to know how that came about although as usual you choose to ignore direct questions.

aivlyS Not being literal. He is not posting OP's presently - so it is an expression.

What bench is Eldrick on ?

Some of the best OPs on here (and I think I can name if praising) are Shaun, SueMaid, SueCrutch, Rambling Rose, Hayley, Dizzi and Eldrick (yes, know he is on the bench).

There are others who are very good also, but those are the ones that stick out for me after my 6 months here.

It works that way in practice. I have watched how several posters operate and some of them are briliiant at directing a thread. It is a skill like being Chair of the Flower Club in the village. Some are naturals, others struggle.

I am certainly no good myself at it. I like to be a follower on these threads and contribute if I can. But don't like being OP - not easy at all.

For goodness sake Ann, get a grip :-D :-D :-D

If everyone deleted untidy threads then there wouldn't be many left.

I'm not sure why you think Ann has to get a grip on the thread. That's not the way GR works. never has been, never will be.

You post and the thread immediately belongs to everyone.

Quite right, Carol. But AnnC was going to delete thread if I kept on reporting aivlyS.

Well, I felt that aivlyS was not contributing at all but was simply trying to be nasty to me and abusive. So I reported her posts and Genes have decided whether to uphold or dismiss my report.

My reason for suggesting AnnC deleted was different. There are a couple of interesting threads emerging imho. One about the religious side of marriage (not part of these proposals in current Bill). The other thread was about legalities.

I just thought it was getting a bit untidy to see who was conrtibuting to what subject. No other reason. Plus I don't thing AnnC has got a grip on the thread and the only time she has commented is to have a bit of a go. I had to ask her to clarify what she meant in her OP on about Page 8!!!!! Think that is not so appropriate when you are OP.

Edit The Welsh Archdruid thread of SueC was just as "warm" and varied, yet SueC seemed to come in at all the right moments and not really take sides. Don't feel this has happened here.

We will, and are allowed to have, our own ideas about just how or where gay couples should be able to commit themselves to each other for life.

At the time I remarried, divorcees could not remarry in church. (but as my oh is an atheist was not what was wanted anyway.)
The Church of England is only now getting their head round marrying divorcees, some vicars still deny them the right.
One step at a time, the synod have this month agreed to allow women into their meetings & it is about 80 years since women were given equal voting rights as men.

Getting back to these gay couples who just want to have the same rights as a heterosexual couple in a registry office (civil marriage). Why should they have a problem doing so? It is no longer illegal to be a gay couple, so in my opinion their is no difference.

:-S was it not Ann who said she was going to delete? Must read back as I was sure she did.

I certainly won't delete it - well not at John's behest anyway - as Jude says, deleting aggravating posters would be better

Holds hands up ....it was me that brought chruches back in to the thread, because as I have said before I have found this thread very informative and interesting and do get so confused at times... :-D

I get exasperated when folk ask for the removal of a fast moving and interesting thread...surely if you feel it's run it's course. DON'T READ IT ANYMORE :-S

Im not sure who brought 'religion' into this discussion, but John, I have seen your posts and they are indoctrinated (not even subliminal) with religion

Ann' thread is about same sex marriage, which I am all for..sorry Ann

It was an intereseting thread a couple of days ago!

I was not aware of an "I don't like religion" bandwagon. John if you do not appreciate others' views then stick your fingers in your ears and go laa laa laa!

The church may well deal with issues in private but why should that mean the subject can not be discussed - it forms a very important part of the whole debate.

And yes, there are far reaching implications for the church and its attitude towards gay couples and marriage - just as discussed in parliament.

Where is this bandwagon? I can't see it.