Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
And now it’s back
Reseated the – er – seatpost, tightened up the saddle clamp (actually replaced the saddle). And it’s still bloomin’ creaking…Are you SURE that it’s not your knees?
Just bought a new battery so hopefully that resolves my issue fingers crossed£160 for my new battery
Ouch!
Presumably the problem being “…until it doesn’t”?50% of the time it works 100% of the time
.Wish I’d done the same.
.
£2.5K down the swanee.
.
Yeah, but it goes *click* *whirrrr*
I’ve had similar issues
I’ve had similar issues happen though not whilst actually riding. My fix was kind of forced on me as the battery started to discharge quickly until it could lose a whole charge overnight – new battery required which fixed the issue.
I reckon it’s the battery which is unfortunately quite expensive (somewhere around 130 quid the last time I looked)
There’s a version to start ’em young here!(IIRC you were server-side but there’s a blog here on how this was developed using a functional language which might interest? I liked the line on the pathfinding algorithm “Sometimes the cars choose to just enjoy a short drive with no destination” – sounds like a lifelike simulation!).
Yeah, I don’t get involved in front end stuff at all. Most of my programming is done in BASH which I’d describe as a dysfunctional language
chrisonabike wrote:
Hmm… perhaps the Evil Cycling Lobby should have issued its own: I pledge to: – be “all over the road” including “in the middle of the road” – appear out of nowhere – be garishly clad in hi-vis and lycra, while being invisible – go far too fast – slow everybody down – demand “space for cycling” in an entitled manner while simultaneously using the roads – which are for motor traffic – abolish road tax for cyclistsI think we should get all drivers to curtsey whenever a cyclist goes past them.
Also, cake should feature somewhere
Ultimately, FPTP favours the larger parties but also has the effect of making parliament more effective by providing larger/more majorities.Depends what you mean by ‘effective’. It allows governments to do more stuff, but that’s not necessarily a good thing, especially when it’s driven by dogma. Arguably, Parliament is often more effective when it’s doing less.
I suppose it depends on whether they’re working for themselves and their mates or for the people and country.
Rich_cb wrote:
Unfair to the supporters of smaller parties. How many Green votes did it take to elect each MP? All votes should be equal in an ideal democracy. FPTP makes a mockery of that aspiration.I kind of agree with both you and Sriracha on this.
I’m not a fan of FPTP, but I do think that the ideas/policies are more important than the implementers of those ideas.
There’s also technical difficulties with trying to balance the “value” of votes which would lead to MPs being elected to areas that hadn’t voted for them i.e. balancing out the number of green votes to the number of MPs.
Ultimately, FPTP favours the larger parties but also has the effect of making parliament more effective by providing larger/more majorities.
Rich_cb wrote:
Firstly, kudos for the quote. People do vote for a party based on the leader but that doesn’t change the way the system actually works. Whilst I think it is technically possible to have an unelected Prime Minister we haven’t had one in a rather long time.Arguably, we’ve only ever had unelected Prime Ministers though they were elected MPs.
The major issue I had with the last couple of PMs was that the general public had no say in their promotions and there was no suggestion at the previous general election that they would be handed the keys of power. Well, that and their abysmal performances and general evilness.
At least with Johnson, a lot of people voted with the belief that he would be a better choice for Prime Minister than Corbyn (not something that I agree with, but I don’t often hold popular opinions).
Rich_cb wrote:
We don’t elect Prime Ministers.You’re technically correct (the best kind of correct).
People do vote for Prime Ministers and/or parties though.
Sriracha wrote:
I think you’re right. Major parties have to look over their shoulder and steal the ideas of up and coming parties, and weave them into the compromise they present to the voters. Smaller parties complain that they never get any representation under FPTP, but as long as their ideas advance on their merits, regardless of who advances them, then democracy is served. The system exists not for the benefit of the parties, but for the electorate.I agree. Here in Bristol, a lot of us are voting Green not necessarily because we think that they’ll become our MP (congrats to Bristol Centre voters though for achieving just that), but in order to send a message to whoever is in power. I prefer voting for ideas/policies rather than personalities.
Sriracha wrote:
You seem to be confusing ours for a presidential system. The only people who voted for Starmer were the good people of Holborn and St PancrasIt’s a darn sight better than having two unelected prime ministers that weren’t even mentioned in the manifestos…
In a general election, a lot of people vote for the party that they want in power rather than just specifically for their local MP, although the ballot sheet does only list MPs.
Rich_cb wrote:
The problem arises when policies are enacted that weren’t even mentioned in the manifestos. Labour’s manifesto was notoriously light on detail this time round so nobody really knows what Starmer has in store. I’m secretly hopeful for significant NHS reform but given Labour’s position on private education I don’t think I’m going to get anything that I might actually be able to support. Time will tell though.It’s a darn sight better than having two unelected prime ministers that weren’t even mentioned in the manifestos…
Funny how right whingers now want electoral reform.In his defence, he has mentioned it before
Reseated the – er – seatpost, tightened up the saddle clamp (actually replaced the saddle). And it’s still bloomin’ creaking…