goffik
|
Re: Silbury Round One
Nov 26, 2005, 21:23
|
Erm...
As I said, PeterH - you'll get no sense out of SBP...
G x
|
Hob
|
Silbury Schadenfreude? (OT)
Nov 26, 2005, 21:32
|
First off, my apologies for feeding the (mostly) troll.
>I'm amused by the fact that someone appears to have got their take on EH's Report wrong
How surprising that someone with such a delightful online persona should get their jollies in this manner.
Notice I'm being kind here sbp, by assuming you must be a much nicer person in the real. Because you really do come over as a bit of a curmudgeonly wazzock sometimes. Nowt personal y'unnerstan? I'm quite sure you are aware of this and don't give a damn. Do have fun, but don't expect anyone to take your opinions particulary seriously, as you do seem to be 99.99% troll, 0.01% human.
|
smallblueplanet
|
Re: Silbury Round One
Nov 26, 2005, 21:36
|
ahh but HA will say the second I think?
Basically the worry over EH's proposal saying extra tunnelling will be necessary, seems to have been misunderstood.
The report actually says EH want to go into the old tunnels, record the open surfaces and backfill the tunnel with material as close to the original as possible. The only way any additional material would be removed (according to Fachtna McAvoy of EH today) is if for instance they have to disturb material when removing the corroding tunnel supports to safely backfill the tunnel.
|
smallblueplanet
|
Re: Silbury Schadenfreude? (OT)
Nov 26, 2005, 21:40
|
|
thats okay mate - you see I gave up caring about what the cosy little clique on here believed ages ago. No-one takes me seriously, and so I respond in kind, we trolls have to eat you know!! ;-)
|
Hob
|
Re: Silbury Round One
Nov 26, 2005, 21:42
|
Thanks for the info, I have been wondering about how the meeting went.
Hopefully the boxing analogy isn't directly applicable? I had been kinda hoping things would have been nice and amicable, with reasoning rather than ranting. But I'm quite aware this is naive optimism on my behalf, and tbh, I had suspected this meeting would have a high likelihood of having been a PR exercise on EH's behalf, rather than an attempt to genuinely explain the decisions behind the proposals for re-boring.
Mind you, I'm a reet pleb, terribly underinformed, and I divvent unnerstan aal that complkayated stuff anyway :)
|
smallblueplanet
|
Re: Silbury Round One
Nov 26, 2005, 21:45
|
|
I believe it was a relatively pleasant meeting all round.
|
goffik
|
Re: Silbury Schadenfreude? (OT)
Nov 26, 2005, 21:47
|
I also apologise for feeding the troll. I dunno what came over me! In future, I shall only respond when a response is worthy.
Well put, Hob!
G x
|
goffik
|
Re: Silbury Round One
Nov 26, 2005, 21:49
|
Nah - it was good, mate - Nigel made some good points, as did others. It did seem to me that a result was pre-determined though, but it's still good for the public to air their opinions. Shame you couldn't have made it! Would'a bin good to see ya!
G x
|
Hob
|
Re: Silbury Round One
Nov 26, 2005, 21:58
|
Well done sbp. That was a sensible bit of communication. (I know, I know, you don't care what people think etc...).
Having not been at the meeting, I couldn't offer any comment on the amount of Silbury that will be extracted, but (strangely) I would be interested to hear if you think that EH have been saying this all along. Or has there been a change in their plans regarding how much original (non-backfill) material will be extracted during tunnelling?
Links to relevant EH text would be nice, but no pressure, I'll not really give a flying eff if you can't be arsed, (or even if you just don't know!)
|
Hob
|
Re: Silbury Round One
Nov 26, 2005, 22:12
|
Would have loved to have been able to get down. Alas, circumstances dictated otherwise.
I wasn't expecting any great revelations, but it would have been nice to have had the opportunity to hear exactly what the score is, in a situation where feedback is possible, so that jargonesque amnswers could be pitched appropriately to the right level for the audience, if you get my drift.
It's good to hear it didn't descend into any slanging match sillyness. That kind of thing should be saved for internet discussion boards ;)
|
