Johnny Bognor

Do Sesame Street themed eggs count?

You missed out on the 10,000th post. Go on WestStand, just one more to grab your 2000th post and it is all yours for the taking. So many milestones in one afternoon.

No it shouldn't. It should be "Please may I have" as "Shall I get" implies that you think the waitress is crap and you would be better off getting it yourself and thus depriving the poor waitress of a well earned tip.

It is, but it does sound crap. One that gets me is "Can I get...?" when asking for something in a shop or restaurant. It makes my blood boil. I was out for dinner last night with friends and one of the ladies said "can I get a filter coffee?". I said, "Don't worry, it's not a self service restaurant, so the waitress will bring it over for you". True story.

Not sure I agree with this. Right now I feel good, so if someone asks.....why would I say 'well'? Unless I was recovering from being unwell, in which case your point is valid. It gets my goat when people say "not too bad", to which my response is "so just a little bit bad then"?. Why don't they say "not too well" as they should do according to you? Saying "I'm good" is more positive than saying "not too bad". Perhaps if there was more positivity in the world, it would be a better place. James Brown's famous song wouldn't sound the same if you had your way - "I feel well, da da da da da da". Doesn't quite have the same ring to it, does it?

Technically you are still under contract and so it depends on the terms of your contract. If your contract precludes you from being employed elsewhere, then you could be in breach of contract and they could dismiss you and you could forfeit your pay. Having said that, they would have to find out and prove it. The chances are that by the time they find out (as you are only talking about 3 days), you will have already left and have already been paid. They are unlikely to come after you, unless you are going to a competitor where they could try and enact some revenge. If you don't want to take the risk of getting found out (which is probably low), then I would explain the situation to your new employer and if they are reasonable I am sure they would understand. Then enjoy the 3 days off and get yourself ready for your new job.

I was thinking of having a whip round to fly a plane over the stadium on the 13th with a banner saying "Bye bye pompey, pompey bye bye". I think this will show that when it comes to **** taking we have more class and more style.

I think that it does not matter on an internet forum as long as the point being made is understood and is not misconstrued by anyone. However, on a job application, I would filter out applicants with poor spelling and grammar on the basis that it shows a lack of attention to detail. This is even more important if the role requires dotting the i's and crossing the t's. As an aside, I have been interviewing recently and was astounded at the number of people who hadn't checked out our company before the interview stage. When I was young (pre-internet) and was applying fo a job, I would research the company as much as possible. This would be done by requesting company brochures, annual reports and such like. Nowadays, an applicant simply has to find and view a website. In my opinion, there is no excuse for not checking out a company before an interview especially as information is readily available to people. For those that hadn't bothered to look at our website, the interview was terminated toute suite, on the basis of why should I bother to read their CV and ask them questions, when they couldn't be bothered to find out about the company they were applying to join.

Perhaps for the same reason we loaned out John, Rasiak and Saga last season when we struggled for goals?

The idea hit me like a Puncheon the nose.

Welcome to the Punch eon Jaidi show........ That's the way to do it!

Brilliant news Hamster. Yours Truly Johnny B

********, I had already started earning some brownie points for giving up Valentine's day....oh well, I suppose I can bank them.

Could be relevant as a potential buyer of skate could look at Palace as a London club for less money and less risk.

Alan?

Can't say I'm with you on that one. Spreadsheet software was the killer application that made the PC viable, without it, we would still all be using word processors and typewriters. Aside from email (and only until recently), spreadsheet software is/was the most important of all business software. It represents the hammer, saw and screwdriver of the modern business professional - as in any profession, a bad work man always blames his tools.

What about the fat fella that used to appear in the MOTD credits....? Is he still around or has he lost weight?

Can't argue with that as that is the absolute solution...I was only trying to keep it simple.

Hey, I'm on a diet. You won't recognise me on saturday. Johnny Bognor Serving the Public Sector since 2010

If using Excel 2007, then highlight C1 and click on Conditional Formatting / Highlight Cell Rules / A date occuring (on the Home tab) Then select "next month" from the drop down menu. This will apply the formatting to cell C1 if the date occurs within the next month as per my previous post. If pink is not your colour, you can change it. If you have 2003, give me a little while as dinner is waiting, I'm starving and the Mrs is getting ****ed off that I'm offering technical support to some stranger on the internet

If you have Excel 2007, then you don't need TODAY(). If we have: A1 = Hamster B1 = 25/02/09 C1 = "=B1+365" Then highlight C1 and click on Home / Conditional Formatting / Highlight Cell Rules / A date occuring Then select next month from the drop down menu. This will apply the formatting to cell C1 if the date occurs within the next month If using 2003, then you will need to do a bit more work. BTW Hamster, my formula is technically correct, see below:

If the name is "Hamster" in column A and "25/01/2010" is in column B, then you need to add 365 days to column B. Therefore in column C, you should have "=B1+365" If you copy this formula down, it will work off the dates in column B. Cheers JB AKA Mr Macro PS Yes, the more difficult bit is conditional formatting. As you work for the public sector, does it mean that those people won't get their pay review if I don't tell you how to do it? If so, I could save the taxpayer a few quid.

Good, as long as it is taught that extreme left wing idealogies are as undesirable as extreme right wing idealogies. Back to the point though...the EDL are not the BNP. The BNP are a legitimate political party, whilst the EDL are a load of footie casuals who don't fancy getting banged up for a tear up. They can now mob up without fear of the treatment that they get on any given saturday. In the pictures of the Stoke meet, the amount of stone island, CP, HL, Lacoste and Prada on show looked like the lads on an average home game outside the Plume. If you're all worried about violence, I guess there will be more chance of serious disorder on Feb the 14th.

I have to say, it does make you wonder. I hope in the interests of balance that you also teach your kids about the dangers of communism. From memory I believe Stalin was responsible for over 20 million deaths, whilst quite recently 3000 chinese students were butchered in Tianamen Square..... . I could go on, but you're the history teacher so I am sure you could find plenty of examples of suffering under communism.

...and that kind of illustrates what I am trying to say. In law, it changes from self defence, but under extreme provocation, one may not act rationally and hence become a law breaker through no fault of their own. The problem is (a point which Richard Madely made on QT last night) is that if someone is in your property in the dead of night, you have to assume the worst...that they may try and kill you. Therefore you have to act accordingly, so if it turns out that the intruder wasn't armed and you stabbed him with a kitchen knife and he subsequently dies, this will not be deemed as reasonable force. Unfortunately, you don't have time to check what the intruder is carrying, perform a full on risk assessment and sit down with the wife to discuss what force should be applied. You act on intinct, simple as that. Therefore, "reasonable force" needs to be changed. Another point made by an ex-squaddie on QT, was that they go through days of training and understanding the rules of engagement..... and they get it wrong sometimes. So what chance does a homeowner stand with such a vague definition? The law tries to protect everyone, however it is mis-used by the guilty whilst the innocent have to go whistle.