Stive Pesley

That's a pretty wild pivot - you seem to have incredibly strong feelings that only kick in when a person's biological age ticks past 18 years old?! Up until then you are strongly against them making a personal decision? If it's because they are minors, surely it's their legal guardian's freedom of choice you should be defending. It's absolutely none of your business
 
The funniest thing for me is seeing people so adamantly believing that "the government" or "the system" has a nefarious agenda in wanting people to get vaccinated, yet seem to have a huge blindspot when it comes to seeing the blatant agendas of those pushing the opposing message. For example, let's remind ourselves that the Icke family's media platform makes hundreds of thousands of pounds per year pushing the buttons of conspiracy theorists. And TalkRadio is owned by the Murdoch family's NewsCorp - Ker-ching all around
 
 

That's a pretty wild pivot - you seem to have incredibly strong feelings that only kick in when a person's biological age ticks past 18 years old?! Up until then you are strongly against them making a personal decision? If it's because they are minors, surely it's their legal guardian's freedom of choice you should be defending. It's absolutely none of your business
 
The funniest thing for me is seeing people so adamantly believing that "the government" or "the system" has a nefarious agenda in wanting people to get vaccinated, yet seem to have a huge blindspot when it comes to seeing the blatant agendas of those pushing the opposing message. For example, let's remind ourselves that the Icke family's media platform makes hundreds of thousands of pounds per year pushing the buttons of conspiracy theorists. And TalkRadio is owned by the Murdoch family's NewsCorp - Ker-ching all around
 
 

Google bought Waze a while ago and are slowly integrating the features into Google maps

This thread as the years continue to roll on by...
 
 

NO WE DON'T!

NO WE DON'T!

NO WE DON'T!

We have to argue about something, they closed the politics thread!

Derby Arena Vaccination Centre has now closed. Thank you to every volunteer, nurse, administrator etc who did an incredible job getting them thousands of people through the doors and being so quick and efficient. You've done Derby and Derbyshire so proud. Much love from a proud Derby man ❤

Fair enough - just saw his lengthy back-pedalling, and well...what can I say. Nothing that wouldn't get deleted in this thread anyway!
 

The issue is there aren't any "EFL regulations" about amortization.  There are accounting standards (FRS102) that the EFL regs say we must abide by, that's it.  We believed were abiding by them, our accountants did, the auditors of our accounts did, the accountant on the disciplinary commission thought we did too.  But here we are anyway...
In terms of why we did it, it may well be that we thought it would give us an edge by deferring some of the amortization until we were already promoted (Ahem...), but if you look at it from a purely football perspective, the model we tried to use does match real-life values a lot better.  Does anyone actually believe Ivan Toney is now 'worth' a fifth less than he was a year ago?  Or is it the case that he's got a bit of wear and tear after a year in the championship, but is basically worth pretty much what Brentford paid for him a year ago (or more...)?
There are obviously questions about how accurately you can model/calculate player values, and whether that lack of accuracy means you ultimately shouldn't bother.  But the basic facts are, we were at least trying to use a model that better reflects how we consume those assets.  It's not like we were doing some super-crazy accountancy nonsense that bears no relation to real life.

Ok - that's where we differ then.
I think we should let all individuals (judged clinically capable of adult thought) choose what medical procedures and interventions they take
You want to deny that individual freedom and impose your will on them instead - just because you think you know what is best
 

I get what you are saying re the public interest angle. There is also the Internet speculation angle which we saw recently with an Everton player that was arrested for an under age offence who was not named publicly but was widely named on social media.
I’m unaware of the Tory MP you refer to but wouldn’t be surprised if that was the case, some people have friends in higher places than others.
It’s a difficult one alright and I’m in no way attempting to defend this man, I would just feel more comfortable if he (and all others accused of this kind of crime) remained anonymous until the legal procedure has taken it’s due course and has determined his/their innocence or guilt.

But I still think that 1 & 2 are factually misrepresented. It's not a new plan that has been drawn-up. The NHS guidelines have allowed children 12 to 15 to be receive ANY medical procedure without parental consent for a long time. But the key point being missed is that, in order for it to happen, the child in question has to convince a medical professional that they fully understand everything about the procedure, including the risks, and have an ability to clearly explain their rationale. There are clear and strict guidelines to follow, and even the slightest cause for doubt is enough to deny the child's request. Essentially the child has to prove themselves mature enough to show adult thinking - for 12-15 yr olds, that's pretty rare
So the number of 12-15 year olds who may end up getting the covid vaccine without parental consent is very very low - and would only apply in cases where the child is able to prove themselves Gillick competent (ie capable of adult thinking)
Therefore it's not "shocking" - in actual fact, you are denying someone their freedom of choice if you are against it. And that's far worse
You surprise me actually @maxjambecause you're normally pro-freedom. I know from previous conversations that we both have older kids who have decided against taking the vaccine, and we're both OK with that being their choice, because we fundamentally believe people should be able to choose
I'm wondering if you feel it's shocking simply because that's what the sensationalist media want you to feel?
 
 

If he is guilty, by all means it should be made public but what if he is innocent ? Should his name have been put in the public domain ? I’m not sure. It’s not shoplifting we’re addressing here, it’s one of the most serious crimes a man can be accused of and so I wonder if anonymity should be the name of the game until proven guilty, that’s all.

Gillick competence tests are a robust, well thought-out and necessary part of all medical processes for children 12-15, and I don't see the Covid vaccine as causing too much trouble here (in real life at least - i do expect to see a lot of ill-informed hot air from antivaxxers and Talk Radio listeners about )
Think about the scenarios and outcomes here - which one is bad? 
 
 

But I still think that 1 & 2 are factually misrepresented. It's not a new plan that has been drawn-up. The NHS guidelines have allowed children 12 to 15 to be receive ANY medical procedure without parental consent for a long time. But the key point being missed is that, in order for it to happen, the child in question has to convince a medical professional that they fully understand everything about the procedure, including the risks, and have an ability to clearly explain their rationale. There are clear and strict guidelines to follow, and even the slightest cause for doubt is enough to deny the child's request. Essentially the child has to prove themselves mature enough to show adult thinking - for 12-15 yr olds, that's pretty rare
So the number of 12-15 year olds who may end up getting the covid vaccine without parental consent is very very low - and would only apply in cases where the child is able to prove themselves Gillick competent (ie capable of adult thinking)
Therefore it's not "shocking" - in actual fact, you are denying someone their freedom of choice if you are against it. And that's far worse
You surprise me actually @maxjambecause you're normally pro-freedom. I know from previous conversations that we both have older kids who have decided against taking the vaccine, and we're both OK with that being their choice, because we fundamentally believe people should be able to choose
I'm wondering if you feel it's shocking simply because that's what the sensationalist media want you to feel?
 
 

But I still think that 1 & 2 are factually misrepresented. It's not a new plan that has been drawn-up. The NHS guidelines have allowed children 12 to 15 to be receive ANY medical procedure without parental consent for a long time. But the key point being missed is that, in order for it to happen, the child in question has to convince a medical professional that they fully understand everything about the procedure, including the risks, and have an ability to clearly explain their rationale. There are clear and strict guidelines to follow, and even the slightest cause for doubt is enough to deny the child's request. Essentially the child has to prove themselves mature enough to show adult thinking - for 12-15 yr olds, that's pretty rare
So the number of 12-15 year olds who may end up getting the covid vaccine without parental consent is very very low - and would only apply in cases where the child is able to prove themselves Gillick competent (ie capable of adult thinking)
Therefore it's not "shocking" - in actual fact, you are denying someone their freedom of choice if you are against it. And that's far worse
You surprise me actually @maxjambecause you're normally pro-freedom. I know from previous conversations that we both have older kids who have decided against taking the vaccine, and we're both OK with that being their choice, because we fundamentally believe people should be able to choose
I'm wondering if you feel it's shocking simply because that's what the sensationalist media want you to feel?
 
 

I agree with that. Of course.
That's what I said. It's being considered, though, along with loads of other options and the clickbait media just latched onto the most controversial option as usual and tried to create a storm (and advertising revenue) from it.

Gillick competence tests are a robust, well thought-out and necessary part of all medical processes for children 12-15, and I don't see the Covid vaccine as causing too much trouble here (in real life at least - i do expect to see a lot of ill-informed hot air from antivaxxers and Talk Radio listeners about )
Think about the scenarios and outcomes here - which one is bad? 
 
 

Still no comment whatsoever from "the top"
@David when are you going to put the minutes up from the meeting ?
 

That doesn’t say anything about not needing consent.

?‍♂️ think ive been the victim of mistaken identity ??

Alarmist & sensationalist clickbait rubbish. No offence to you.

I don't think anyone has mentioned this for weeks now. Fortunately the vaccine is keeping hospitslisations and deaths down, so we've been able to remove the measures that you disagreed with. By using a vaccine you also seem to disagree with ?‍♂️?‍♂️?‍♂️
Whilst you aren't intending to be insensitive, I often cringe reading your posts and hope know one who has lost loved ones is reading them. They probably are though.
In terms of 2 tiers, I imagine most pro-lockdown people would also want all people supported with furlough, as it's how Covid was suppressed. It's pretty difficult to follow your opinions really as many of then are contradictory.