SPAM random annoying things

[Embattle]

Personally it is evidence how little people pay attention to warnings, I've never seen it worse in many years of travelling the same route on bicycle or motorcycle when it comes to cyclists maintaining a high visibility level and yet it has probably never been cheaper or easier to do so. It is really ironic our dogs are more visible since they actually have a light on them.

Just one of many examples at about 6:55 in the morning, the action camera isn't the best but I've tried to put the cyclist in the best position to be seen so spot the cyclist:

 

[Scouse]

You've an argument about night riding @Embattle - lights are mandatory.

However, you are to expect and check for cycles at junctions in the day. 100%. Lack of high-vis isn't any sort of argument - it's not an issue in Europe and the amount of cyclists that get wiped out with lights and high vis show that paying proper attention when you're in control of a chunk of heavy metal is the important factor.

And the legally mandated one.

 

[Gwadien]

You've an argument about night riding @Embattle - lights are mandatory.

However, you are to expect and check for cycles at junctions in the day. 100%. Lack of high-vis isn't any sort of argument - it's not an issue in Europe and the amount of cyclists that get wiped out with lights and high vis show that paying proper attention when you're in control of a chunk of heavy metal is the important factor.

And the legally mandated one.

This is a far out theory, but it's a theory.

Perhaps the reason why cyclist is more 'accepted' on the continent is because the majority of cycling is city cycling with good lighting and more thought in road design.

I've had a couple of occasions where I've had blind corners and stuff in the two weeks i've been driving where it's probably not favourable for cyclists. (IE you have to pull out slightly onto the path of a cyclist in order to see down the road properly.

 

[dysfunction]

You've an argument about night riding @Embattle - lights are mandatory.

However, you are to expect and check for cycles at junctions in the day. 100%. Lack of high-vis isn't any sort of argument - it's not an issue in Europe and the amount of cyclists that get wiped out with lights and high vis show that paying proper attention when you're in control of a chunk of heavy metal is the important factor.

And the legally mandated one.

So just because it isn't legally mandated it's fine? Oh come on. Just because you wank over bicycles you are arguing just for the sake of it.

So if the same applied to cars and I was driving at night in a black car with no lights and someone crashed into me. Who's fault would that be? Mine that's who.

And Europe have proper cycling lanes separate from other road users not this proxy bike lane shared with busses and cars.

 

[Scouse]

You're whining because you missed a cyclist in the daytime when it's your job to do so @dysfunction.

Now you want to mandate high-vis for all. Maybe insurance? They're all a bunch of cunts anyway. I mean, just look at the totally relevant vid Embattle posted that proves everything.

It was daytime. You missed him You got shouted at. Big deal. Own your mistake instead of complaining that *he* was in the wrong...

 

[Embattle]

Just for completeness here is the cyclist:

 

[dysfunction]

You're whining because you missed a cyclist in the daytime when it's your job to do so @dysfunction.

Now you want to mandate high-vis for all. Maybe insurance? They're all a bunch of cunts anyway. I mean, just look at the totally relevant vid Embattle posted that proves everything.

It was daytime. You missed him You got shouted at. Big deal. Own your mistake instead of complaining that *he* was in the wrong...

It was early morning, dark and raining.
So not really day time. So yes high vis is essential in those conditions.

It wasn't even that close a shave as he was about 2 car lengths away.

Yes I own up I didn't see him at first as my vision was obscured so I went further forward as I said. I would have seen him through the other car if he was illuminated better but the twat was blended into the scenery.

 

[Scouse]

At night. Should have lights @Embattle.

But keep banging on about that eh?

 

[Bodhi]

Riding in the dark without lights or high-vis is just Darwinism in action.

 

[Scouse]

It was early morning, dark and raining.
So not really day time. So yes high vis is essential in those conditions.

It wasn't even that close a shave as he was about 2 car lengths away.

Yes I own up I didn't see him at first as my vision was obscured so I went further forward as I said. I would have seen him through the other car if he was illuminated better but the twat was blended into the scenery.

Agree. No argument there at all. Didn't look like that from your first post tho.

 

[Scouse]

Riding in the dark without lights or high-vis is just Darwinism in action.

Agree. But that wasn't the original position.

 

[caLLous]

HSBC switching from a reference per online transaction to a "company reference" which is tied to the payee and can't be changed per transaction. So, companies I deal with multiple times a year (who give me a unique reference to attach to each transaction) need to be set up as new payees every time. That can't be right.

 

[dysfunction]

Switch bank.

 

[DaGaffer]

HSBC switching from a reference per online transaction to a "company reference" which is tied to the payee and can't be changed per transaction. So, companies I deal with multiple times a year (who give me a unique reference to attach to each transaction) need to be set up as new payees every time. That can't be right.

Doesn't sound right at all, especially in a PSD2 context (which is supposed to contain payee and transaction info).

 

[Scouse]

HSBC switching from a reference per online transaction to a "company reference" which is tied to the payee and can't be changed per transaction. So, companies I deal with multiple times a year (who give me a unique reference to attach to each transaction) need to be set up as new payees every time. That can't be right.

Tweet 'em. They're responsive to social media. Maybe there's been a fuck up?

 

[caLLous]

Doesn't sound right at all, especially in a PSD2 context (which is supposed to contain payee and transaction info).

Yeah, I didn't think so. It's changed since I last did it.



The Company reference is where the normal transaction reference would've been and isn't selectable or alterable (as it says below).

 

[DaGaffer]

Yeah, I didn't think so. It's changed since I last did it.

View attachment 39515

The Company reference is where the normal transaction reference would've been and isn't selectable or alterable (as it says below).

When you've made the payment what does the payment ref say?

 

[fettoken]

(Huge rant incoming)

There's been something that's been gnawing at me for some time. I'm not pedantic when it comes to cleanliness, but do like shiny surfaces, try to remove spots and keep the floors clean of crumbles and the like.

Some people just doesn't notice that. Eats in bed. Never uses a plate. Lean their hands against white painted surfaces and leave grease-spots (do they never wash their hands?!), never uses the handles which are attached to cabinet doors but instead uses the whole hand to open it leaving greasy fingerprints everywhere. Never uses coasters.

These peoples homes also look like shit, those that doesn't seem to have any training in cleanliness. I'm beginning to think that i want to remove them from my life completely (about two of em)

Am i being unreasonable when I notice this stuff. I've been pointing out some things as "use a coaster for f*ck sake" but that's about it.

 

[caLLous]

When you've made the payment what does the payment ref say?

Looks normal tbh. Normal as in the reference (today's one) appears under the payee on the statement overview.



The payee's (presumably automated) system has accepted the payment so it's worked, it's just weird that it doesn't seem to allow me to do a unique references for a transaction without re-adding the payee.

 

[Scouse]

I'm beginning to think that i want to remove them from my life completely (about two of em)

Get yer own place ffs.

 

[DaGaffer]

Looks normal tbh. Normal as in the reference (today's one) appears under the payee on the statement overview.

View attachment 39516

The payee's (presumably automated) system has accepted the payment so it's worked, it's just weird that it doesn't seem to allow me to do a unique references for a transaction without re-adding the payee.

Yeah, that's what doesn't make much sense, under PSD2 every transaction needs to be trackable at the individual level.

 

[fettoken]

Get yer own place ffs.

I do have my own place. It's just a general feeling and I'm starting to wonder if i'm being unreasonable.

 

[Scouse]

I do have my own place. It's just a general feeling and I'm starting to wonder if i'm being unreasonable.

So lodgers?

It does seem extreme cutting people out of your life completely because of fingerprints and eating in (their) bed. Unless you don't particularly like them. At the end of the day I don't have lodgers because I like sitting about naked and shagging in the kitchen - maybe you're just getting to the point in life which most people reach where you don't want to live with other people.

 

[Job]

I think he might be complaining for a 'friend'.

 

[Scouse]

So. Last week the bird noticed that my passport runs out in March.

"Oh. Do I need to get a new passport to go on holiday to thailand?"

"No"

"Are you sure"

"Yes, it's fine"

"OK."


Wake up this morning. Flying tomorrow. She says I need six months. Can't book an appointment to get a new passport at such short notice.

I guess I'll just get on the flight and see what happens. But I'm fucking fuming.

 

[caLLous]

That's soooooo Tammy.

 

[Embattle]

Social Media Influencers

 

[Scouse]

08:30 Peterborough passport office, Monday. Going to change the flights (to much more inconvenient and expensive London).

Would have been nice and easy to book a passport appointment today. But idiot.

 

[Scouse]

I guess at least I get to watch the match :\

 

[Embattle]

You are now going to lose, it'll be all your fault