thaibeachlovers

I never said ALL air travel. Back in the 70s air travel was less about package holidays in overseas countries ( too far away for ship or plane ) and more about getting from A to B for work or business etc. When a 707 was about as big as it got, obviously it wasn't going to feed the cheap holiday abroad monster. That took the Jumbo 747 to start, IMO.

Depends on the immigration officer at the time. They make up stuff that are not in the rules, so could probably ignore rules if they want to. Perhaps an agency can sort it for a price.

From the CNN article "Still, his events haven’t generated the same electricity as Obama’s." LOL. That's stating the flippin' obvious. IMO Biden is as stimulating as watching paint dry, unless one is looking for him to talk to dead people or fall over. "The moment marks a historic anomaly. Former presidents have typically only waded sparingly into daily politics, mostly avoiding direct criticism of the men occupying the office they once held." No wonder they had to get Obama away from his lux waterfront place to get some momentum into the campaign, which IMO is a move out of desperation as they see the house slipping away from them and Biden's agenda along with it.

Sounds good to me, and should sound good to any that believe in man made climate change. If they start blocking planes carrying holiday makers good too. Eliminate frivolous air travel and eliminate a massive amount of high level pollution. It's when they try to destroy priceless world heritage art works that they lose my support.

Wi Fi I'm on isn't able to show me that VDO properly, but it showed me the bit at the start where the guy is carrying a massive phone and battery/ signal receiver. IMO that would be perfect as it would put people off using them and we'd never have such as the IMO awful social media. The good old days!

Great song- I loved it, but the VDO sucked mightily- complete <deleted> IMO. What the heck! The Tears for Fears song went away and was replaced by Tiny Tim. I am NOT referring to Tiny Tim, but to "everybody wants to rule the world".

If one has true love, one is happy to share.

IMO the decrease started in 2016. I could be wrong, but that's my take on it.

Not all religions. The Aztecs liked to sacrifice people to the gods- not exactly user friendly.

I said before I wish the forum would separate world news from the rest so if I was suspended there I could still post on other subforums. That's why i stopped posting on world news for a long time.

It may be but without new posts the forum would lose advertisers and we would lose a "free" forum. It's the price to be paid. It's not like you have to click on threads you know will be boring. There are plenty of subjects I'll never click on as I know what is going to be posted on them.

I just checked and it was closed permanently last year, so as it is now not contravening the rule about competing websites ( as it no longer exists ) I can tell you that it was Thorn Tree on Lonely Planet, where I posted info under the same username as here. It was sold to the BBC which explains why it went woke.

Errrr. Without someone opening new topics the forum would die. If there was never anything new to look at what would be the point of coming on?

Add Crossy to that list. He gave me invaluable advice when I needed it and your comment about Sheryl also applies to him.

Indeed, but you are not walking down the street looking at the screen and expecting everyone else to avoid you walking into them.

He has no need to establish anything about himself! Like any other poster he comes with his own viewpoint on life, and is, within forum rules, free to express them in any way he chooses. Just because you may disagree with him is no reason to be going all school teacher at him.

I recently mentioned a forum that became so devoid of posters that it became irrelevant, precisely because a new owner imposed a woke moderation policy. In the case of A N though, much of the forum is devoted to local affairs with the subforums, so it's not entirely a social media type of forum, though whether they are sufficient alone to sustain the forum as a whole is hard to say. I do know though that the recent removal of world news did seem to cause a big drop in numbers, till they reinstated said subforum. It's still pretty quiet though, IMO.

It's the simplest thing EVER to not have to listen to the "hateful" people- just don't listen to them, don't turn on that channel, don't turn on that station, don't click on that forum. It's probably never been easier to disregard them. On this forum there is a wonderful function that allows me to completely ignore those that are too OTT for even myself to tolerate, and believe me, it's really pleasant not seeing their posts on some of the threads. The danger is, of course, that I might ignore so many it would be rather pointless even clicking on certain threads.

OK I gave it 7 minutes just to be sure and he didn't mention faith even once. Perhaps you regard "emergent" as meaning faith, but the examples he gave are not the full picture of faith as I live it. Yes, part of it, but not all. As I expected, just another non believer trying to reduce God to a scientific theory, and that will never work, because faith comes from within, not imposed from without. We can't "learn" faith, and frankly, unless one has experienced faith, it's not possible to understand it, let alone reduce it to an equation. Given I have no interest in listening to that for another 46 minutes, I'll pass on the rest of it

I almost never look at vdos or links given on this forum. Life is too short to be spending more of it on this forum than I need to. In this case, I don't need anyone on some vdo to tell me what faith is or what to believe, but I'll have a look for 5 minutes now.

In that situation I think I'd move it to the side of the road and leave it where it could be seen if the owners came back for it. It's not like money on the ground, which if small goes in my pocket ( never found more than $5 ) if no one around. If the case was heavy, I'd be thinking drugs, and no wish to be seen taking that.

In my opinion, any social site changing to a "pay to post" platform is in danger of dying from the exodus of posters. Given that a social site is basically pub chat on line, who is going to be so needing to post their opinions that they would pay to do so? An example of well known people that attempted to start a pay to use site vanishing into history would be Bernard Trink. He was extremely popular when he had a page published on a well known Thai newspaper, but after they sacked him, he attempted to start a subscription site, and it didn't last long.

It was more like a community back when I joined and lots of threads about ladyboys and suchlike which got the conversation going. Check out any really popular posts now and likely they will be about bargirls or suchlike. I spent a lot longer on the forum then, but now I might have answered all the threads I was interested in in half an hour, and struggling to find anything new and interesting to read.

If that is referring to the one I think you are, it was busy till it was sold and the new moderators closed down all the interesting posts, so most of the posters that were able to give good information left. Last time I looked it was rather pathetic and not very helpful. When covid started they closed the forum anyway.

Tell me if I'm wrong, but people only get one vote for BOTH POTUS and Vice POTUS. They certainly didn't vote for her in the primaries.