#351
|
|||
|
|||
The Shed Thread
On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 07:20:36 +0100, Bertie Wooster
wrote: On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 00:21:22 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote: On 06/06/2012 21:52, Bertie Wooster wrote: On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 17:40:10 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote: Wriggling Cwipsins "good explanation" 2: "I charge the same as PoundLand". "Cheap crap" was the explaination I gave - along with a link explaining why Poundland was doing so well during the financial crisis. And you made no comment on the fact that I'm the most expensive handyman in the area - did you? You conveniently left that bit out of your "explaination". Are you really a teacher? So both Wriggling Cwipsins "good explanations" have been shown to be completely and utterly laughable. 2/10 must try harder. Can't wait for Wriggling Cwipsins "good explanation" 3: The class is waiting boy. Give details of your accounts for the past five years, and I will pass judgement. If you're too coy to give figures, express as a percentage of 2000's gross income and net profit. You are a nosey ****. -- Bertie Wooster's real name is Tom Crispin. He uses the name Bertie Wooster so that people involved with Young Lewisham and Greenwich Cyclists and John Ball primary school can't see what a tosser he is. |
Ads |
#352
|
|||
|
|||
The Shed Thread
On 07/06/2012 09:28, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 08:37:50 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote: On 07/06/2012 07:20, Bertie Wooster wrote: On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 00:21:22 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote: On 06/06/2012 21:52, Bertie Wooster wrote: On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 17:40:10 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote: Wriggling Cwipsins "good explanation" 2: "I charge the same as PoundLand". "Cheap crap" was the explaination I gave - along with a link explaining why Poundland was doing so well during the financial crisis. And you made no comment on the fact that I'm the most expensive handyman in the area - did you? You conveniently left that bit out of your "explaination". Are you really a teacher? So both Wriggling Cwipsins "good explanations" have been shown to be completely and utterly laughable. 2/10 must try harder. Can't wait for Wriggling Cwipsins "good explanation" 3: The class is waiting boy. Give details of your accounts for the past five years, and I will pass judgement. If you're too coy to give figures, express as a percentage of 2000's gross income and net profit. This has nothing to do with my accounts, don't change the subject& try to wriggle again. The question remains unanswered; are you are able to explain how I have not only survived, but prospered during the worst recession in living memory, or how I have retained my Trading Standards accreditation? We onlt have your word on this (and we all know how crass your word is). Now put up, or shut up (preferably shut up). Only (or onlt) a complete fool would publish details of his finances online. You would have to be utterly stupid to do so. Oh - you did. This has nothing to do with my accounts, that is simply a diversionary tactic - or wriggle as we know it - because you can't answer. Now answer the question and stop wriggling; are you are able to explain how I have not only survived, but prospered during the worst recession in living memory, or how I have retained my Trading Standards accreditation? -- Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster University |
#353
|
|||
|
|||
Will Wriggling Cwispin ever give a straight answer to a question?
I wonder what happened when Cwispin got married and he had to say "I do"? -- Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster University |
#354
|
|||
|
|||
The Shed Thread
On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 09:35:32 +0100, Judith
wrote: On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 09:05:47 +0100, Bertie Wooster wrote: On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 04:31:36 +0100, jnugent wrote: On 06/06/2012 20:16, Bertie Wooster wrote: On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 17:31:20 +0100, wrote: On 06/06/2012 13:47, Bertie Wooster wrote: On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 12:47:33 +0100, wrote: On 06/06/2012 12:32, thirty-six wrote: On Jun 6, 7:48 am, Bertie wrote: On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 02:11:56 +0100, wrote: On 06/06/2012 00:11, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote: On 05/06/2012 22:10, Bertie Wooster wrote: On Tue, 5 Jun 2012 21:40:19 +0100, wrote: "Bertie Wooster" wrote in message ... On Tue, 5 Jun 2012 18:36:24 +0100, wrote: "Bertie Wooster" wrote in message ... On Tue, 5 Jun 2012 19:52:16 +0300, davethedave wrote: On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 17:35:58 +0100, jnugent wrote: Does a hosepipe ban prevent one from washing a car using a bucket (just like you'd have to with water from a water butt)? What is banned? Clean cars or hosepipes? The use of hosepipes domestically. You can quite happily take it to a man who runs a car washing business and pay him to use a hosepipe on it. Is the wrong answer. Care to explain why? Unless the BBC have got it all wrong, of course: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17615364 Do keep up! The ban is not a blanket ban on the use of hosepipes. The example I gave earlier was of the domestic use of a hosepipe attached to a water butt. So how did that make the previous poster's comment on taking your car to a car wash wrong? You can take your car to a car wash. However, the assertion was made that "The use of hosepipes domestically" are banned. Wriggling like the worm you are again Cwispin. Mr Nugent stated; "You can quite happily take it to a man who runs a car washing business and pay him to use a hosepipe on it". You replied; "Is the wrong answer". You ****ed up again pure& simple and now you are wriggling. Actually, it was not I who wrote: "You can quite happily take it to a man who runs a car washing business and pay him to use a hosepipe on it". I only asked what advantage there in drawing a bucket of water from a butt as opposed to drawing it from the garden tap (or even from the kitchen mixer taps, hotter than body temperature). Neither seems to be illegal unless there is a ban on washing cars (which there isn't). Assuming the bucket is 10L, and you are on a water meter, one advantage is 1.2263 pence for the water and another 0.6473 pence for sewerage. Clare also reckons rainwater (even from a butt) is better for plants than treated water. Grow some lettuce on rainwater then water with tap water and watch it wilt. When it eventually picks up, do a taste comparison. It might help you decide what to stuff down your throat in future. What's the connection with hosepipe bans? A hosepipe connected to the mains can water lettuce with treated water; a hosepipe connected to a water butt can water lettuce with rainwater. But with the hosepipe ban in place you are not allowed to water lettuce with a hosepipe connected to mains water. Perhaps I ought to have been clearer: what's the advantage, with special reference to a hosepipe ban? You can still use a hosepipe connected to a water butt when there's a hosepipe ban in place. Is there a gravity-using technique (eg, raising the height of the butt like a water tower), or is some sort of syphoning system necessary? I raise the butt as high as is safe. In this photo you can see the butt is on a stand which is on a concrete shelf so that the tap is about 18" above patio level http://www.britishschoolofcycling.co.../shed/butt.jpg When full the water level in the butt will be about 4' above patio level and so water will come out of a hose which is below that level. My lawn is about 3" below patio level, and the flower beds are about 1' above patio level. Pressure can be increased with the use of an electric pump, but unless that is powered from a battery charged from solar pannels on the shed roof, the cost benefit of using rainwater over mains water is lost. Indeed - every little helps. I'm sure you've heard the saying, Judith. Save the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves. Unfortunately, a mini 60w solar power station will cost 84,900 pennies: http://www.thesolarcentre.co.uk/prod...60w-600-6.html That's a hell of a lot of pennies to save: about 170,000 urinations with a flush every second pee. |
#355
|
|||
|
|||
The Shed Thread
On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 09:37:01 +0100, Judith
wrote: On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 07:20:36 +0100, Bertie Wooster wrote: On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 00:21:22 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote: On 06/06/2012 21:52, Bertie Wooster wrote: On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 17:40:10 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote: Wriggling Cwipsins "good explanation" 2: "I charge the same as PoundLand". "Cheap crap" was the explaination I gave - along with a link explaining why Poundland was doing so well during the financial crisis. And you made no comment on the fact that I'm the most expensive handyman in the area - did you? You conveniently left that bit out of your "explaination". Are you really a teacher? So both Wriggling Cwipsins "good explanations" have been shown to be completely and utterly laughable. 2/10 must try harder. Can't wait for Wriggling Cwipsins "good explanation" 3: The class is waiting boy. Give details of your accounts for the past five years, and I will pass judgement. If you're too coy to give figures, express as a percentage of 2000's gross income and net profit. You are a nosey ****. I'm note sure that I'd put it in those terms. If Medwit wants me to conduct an analysis of his business model, which he has asked me to do several times, I do need at least some facts and figures. Simply stating that his business is thriving, and that he hardly pays any tax is simply not sufficient for even a cursory analysis. On the other hand, the photos on his website, of presumably his very best work, leaves much cause for concern. One white plank: http://medwayhandyman.co.uk/scotts%20deck3.jpg |
#356
|
|||
|
|||
The Shed Thread
On 07/06/2012 11:04, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 09:37:01 +0100, wrote: On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 07:20:36 +0100, Bertie wrote: On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 00:21:22 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote: On 06/06/2012 21:52, Bertie Wooster wrote: On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 17:40:10 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote: Wriggling Cwipsins "good explanation" 2: "I charge the same as PoundLand". "Cheap crap" was the explaination I gave - along with a link explaining why Poundland was doing so well during the financial crisis. And you made no comment on the fact that I'm the most expensive handyman in the area - did you? You conveniently left that bit out of your "explaination". Are you really a teacher? So both Wriggling Cwipsins "good explanations" have been shown to be completely and utterly laughable. 2/10 must try harder. Can't wait for Wriggling Cwipsins "good explanation" 3: The class is waiting boy. Give details of your accounts for the past five years, and I will pass judgement. If you're too coy to give figures, express as a percentage of 2000's gross income and net profit. You are a nosey ****. I'm note sure that I'd put it in those terms. I would. If Medwit wants me to conduct an analysis of his business model, which he has asked me to do several times, I do need at least some facts and figures. Why would I ask a gibbering idiot like you to "conduct an analysis of my business model"? You can't even add up or spell properly. I've asked you to answer a simple question without wriggling - which you are unable to do. Simply stating that his business is thriving, and that he hardly pays any tax is simply not sufficient for even a cursory analysis. 80% of new start business's fail in the first year. I've been around for over 5 during the worse recession in living memory. On the other hand, the photos on his website, of presumably his very best work, leaves much cause for concern. I've been Trading Standards accredited for over 4 years. One white plank: http://medwayhandyman.co.uk/scotts%20deck3.jpg Displaying your ignorance again idiot boy? That 'white plank' is a board with excess tanalizing treatment - which washes off after the first shower of rain. The next door neighbours asked me to build them a deck. The original deck owners now want a balustrade put around it. Now, back to the question; You have stated on many occasions that my work is all bodged and that I rip people off. You have no evidence to support such a claim, it's simply that you are desperate to score points. The question is; If I'm as incompetent as you claim, how have I survived for over 5 years during the worse recession in living memory and how have I retained my Trading Standards accreditation? I'm sure you can explain. Your previous "good explanations" have been completely discredited and have made you a laughing stock. Now answer the question wriggler. -- Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster University |
#357
|
|||
|
|||
The Shed Thread
On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 21:00:55 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote: http://medwayhandyman.co.uk/scotts%20deck3.jpg Displaying your ignorance again idiot boy? That 'white plank' is a board with excess tanalizing treatment It looks to me like One White Plank. |
#358
|
|||
|
|||
The Shed Thread
On 07/06/2012 21:37, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 21:00:55 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote: http://medwayhandyman.co.uk/scotts%20deck3.jpg Displaying your ignorance again idiot boy? That 'white plank' is a board with excess tanalizing treatment It looks to me like One White Plank. That's because you are an idiot. No answer to the question I see Captain Wriggler? -- Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster University |
#359
|
|||
|
|||
The Shed Thread
On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 21:00:55 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote: snip You have stated on many occasions that my work is all bodged and that I rip people off. You have no evidence to support such a claim, it's simply that you are desperate to score points. The question is; If I'm as incompetent as you claim, how have I survived for over 5 years during the worse recession in living memory and how have I retained my Trading Standards accreditation? I'm sure you can explain. Your previous "good explanations" have been completely discredited and have made you a laughing stock. Now answer the question wriggler. He really is not bright is he? He is lucky that you are not at all litigious. -- Bertie Wooster's real name is Tom Crispin. He uses the name Bertie Wooster so that people involved with Young Lewisham and Greenwich Cyclists and John Ball primary school can't see what a tosser he is. |
#360
|
|||
|
|||
The Shed Thread
On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 17:40:10 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote: A: Over £1,000,000 per year; B: £500,000 to £1,000,000; C: £250,000 to £500,000; D: £100,000 to £250,000; E: £50,000 to £100,000 F: under £50,000 D: Considerably more than a failed, middle aged primary school teacher. At £20 per hour you must have worked between 5000 and 12,500 hours last year to make £100,000 to £250,000. That's working an average of between 100 and 250 hours per week (with 2 weeks' holiday). But hark! There are but 168 hours in a week. That gives an absolute upper limit on your earnings on £168,000, provided the £20 per hour average is about right. Methinks thou dost exaggerate thy earnings somewhat. Verily, there is a whiff of bull**** about thy person. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Shed | Brian G | UK | 31 | August 1st 07 05:39 PM |
Shed got broken into! | Eddbmxdude | Unicycling | 15 | October 14th 06 07:24 PM |
shed humping(bad shed) | the unicycle man(one of many) | Recumbent Biking | 0 | September 2nd 06 06:34 AM |
Every home (or shed) should have one! | cfsmtb | Australia | 30 | September 1st 06 01:40 AM |
My Shed | Just zis Guy, you know? | UK | 17 | July 3rd 04 12:54 PM |