Remember the knitting I took on holiday?
The pattern is in a book I bought recently - full of interesting designs. The first pattern I tried turned out to be so full of errors that I had to unravel the whole thing.
The zigzag top had already been made by lots of people on Ravelry (if you want to know, google), and there was no mention anywhere that I could find of mistakes in this pattern.
Oh yes there is! A simple arithmetic mistake in the decreasing instructions. Now I have lost all confidence in the whole pattern, but as I now understand the shaping (and my yarn/gauge were different anyway), I shall finish the garment to my own working.
I have usually regarded books of knitting patterns as starting points for my own designs; I liked this particular designer's work enough to use her pattern. Not again, though - back to looking at pictures of items I like, then sorting out my own version.
And the publishers of knitting books have lost a customer.
Showing posts with label rant. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rant. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Friday, July 13, 2007
13 July: Customer Service?
Phone bill from BT - it's actually very small, as most of our communication is done by computer or mobile phones.
Now they are charging us £4.50 a quarter to pay by cheque.
I always pay the bill promptly, usually by return of post, and they never have to send us a reminder. But we don't pay by Direct Debit, which they prefer, as they can take what they want when they want. It's our money - we prefer to control it ourselves. And if we pay bills individually, it makes sure we know exactly what we are paying. Old-fashioned, but then being clear of debt is. And do they get the Direct Debit payments anyway when people have no funds in the account?
But now they see a way to penalise us, good quiet customers that we are. So they whack on a charge that is over 10% of our actual bill.
And the argument that chasing bad payers is expensive for them won't wash either - that cost is already built into the charges.
Other utilities we deal with - gas and electricity - give us a small discount for prompt payment. Much better customer service than charging you extra for totally unjustifiable reasons .
If we didn't need the land line for the computer, we would stop dealing with BT straight away.
Now they are charging us £4.50 a quarter to pay by cheque.
I always pay the bill promptly, usually by return of post, and they never have to send us a reminder. But we don't pay by Direct Debit, which they prefer, as they can take what they want when they want. It's our money - we prefer to control it ourselves. And if we pay bills individually, it makes sure we know exactly what we are paying. Old-fashioned, but then being clear of debt is. And do they get the Direct Debit payments anyway when people have no funds in the account?
But now they see a way to penalise us, good quiet customers that we are. So they whack on a charge that is over 10% of our actual bill.
And the argument that chasing bad payers is expensive for them won't wash either - that cost is already built into the charges.
Other utilities we deal with - gas and electricity - give us a small discount for prompt payment. Much better customer service than charging you extra for totally unjustifiable reasons .
If we didn't need the land line for the computer, we would stop dealing with BT straight away.
Friday, May 04, 2007
4 May: Greed, hate and delusion
At last night's meeting of our Guild of Sinners, Divas, and Winos (some members liked the new version of the title), it was agreed by a group of us that the sort of people who stand for elections are exactly the sort of people we don't want to represent us.
In fact it was suggested that expressing willingness to be nominated should disqualify a person from being elected.
That does, of course, leave a bit of a problem as to how any government is chosen. A pin in a list of names and addresses couldn't do a worse job.
Also mentioned - recent willingness of powerful people to lie, apparently totally pointlessly, in a court. Presumably there was something to be gained; like having a holiday at somebody else's expense when you are perfectly well able to pay for your holiday yourself, and not then be in any way indebted to anyone.
What happened to integrity and honesty?
Oh, yes, I remember, a certain female person of great power told us that you can have whatever you want as long as you can pay for it, not necessarily now or in the immediate future; and instantly naked greed became the guiding principle - also adopted enthusiastically by the party formerly known as The Opposition. No longer any need to hide your real motives behind a semblance of public spirit. No longer the best thing for the country as a whole, but what brings the biggest short-term windfall to those in power (and their friends and relatives, of course. The Old Boys' network - another face of power-sharing). And the Devil take the hindmost.
And the media's influence is far, far greater than that of most politicians. If the press and broadcasters keep on about an issue long enough, the government does whatever the media are nagging on about. Who, exactly, decides which issues are "publicly debated"?
But it's true, you pay for what you have - if not straight away, then eventually. It's called the karmic consequence. You most definitely reap what you sow.
Better now, thank you.
(This post has been written in total ignorance of whatever went on in yesterday's local elections.)
In fact it was suggested that expressing willingness to be nominated should disqualify a person from being elected.
That does, of course, leave a bit of a problem as to how any government is chosen. A pin in a list of names and addresses couldn't do a worse job.
Also mentioned - recent willingness of powerful people to lie, apparently totally pointlessly, in a court. Presumably there was something to be gained; like having a holiday at somebody else's expense when you are perfectly well able to pay for your holiday yourself, and not then be in any way indebted to anyone.
What happened to integrity and honesty?
Oh, yes, I remember, a certain female person of great power told us that you can have whatever you want as long as you can pay for it, not necessarily now or in the immediate future; and instantly naked greed became the guiding principle - also adopted enthusiastically by the party formerly known as The Opposition. No longer any need to hide your real motives behind a semblance of public spirit. No longer the best thing for the country as a whole, but what brings the biggest short-term windfall to those in power (and their friends and relatives, of course. The Old Boys' network - another face of power-sharing). And the Devil take the hindmost.
And the media's influence is far, far greater than that of most politicians. If the press and broadcasters keep on about an issue long enough, the government does whatever the media are nagging on about. Who, exactly, decides which issues are "publicly debated"?
But it's true, you pay for what you have - if not straight away, then eventually. It's called the karmic consequence. You most definitely reap what you sow.
Better now, thank you.
(This post has been written in total ignorance of whatever went on in yesterday's local elections.)
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
3 April: Congratulations and comments
Congratulations to the British team, particularly Victoria Pendleton and Chris Hoy, on their wonderful performances at the World Track Cycling Championships! Heroes, every one.
(Google for full information, if you don't know.)
--------------------------------------------------------
Blog-visitors and their comments seem to have been a recent theme on several blogs. Naturally this leads to musings on one's own blog, its visitors, and what everyone wants from a blog.
My StatCounter tells me how many people have come to The String Bag, and what their search (if any) has been for. It tells me where they are, more or less, and also purports to show how long they spend here.
So I know there are a number of visitors from the UK and the US, and one regular from New Zealand, and one I think of as my Spanish stalker*. And the last few days have brought another flurry of visitors, this time from Denmark, looking for information on Fred Knit*le - they must have had the Young@H*art film screened on their TV.
Most of these people don't leave any comment, though there seems no way of connecting the StatCounter information to a specific commenter. There may be nothing in particular they want to say, of course. They may be copying my knitted hats, or avidly following the progress of my garden. They may enjoy the photos of places I've been to, or agree with my occasional rants. Imagining is usually more fun than knowing (think of Christmas presents).
What sort of comment to leave on someone's blog? There's the "me, too", which doesn't take anything further on, though it can be reassuring to have sympathy or whatever. There's the "aren't you wonderful", which gives a short glow, followed by embarrassment. There's a sensible question, or an answer to a question - practical and helpful. And there's the amusing comment, the sideways look at a topic, the pun, the joke between friends.
And that's really how I see the blog, as a sort of conversation in the cyber-pub. You drop in, listen to a few people, have a brief chat with one or two, find out how they are and what's happening with them, you amuse each other, and enjoy the different characters. Sometimes you pop into the cyber-pub down the super-highway, and enjoy a different crowd; you may join in the conversation or not. You may even become a regular.
So, let's go and see who's in the bar today.
*No, I know you aren't really stalking, it's the alliteration....
(Google for full information, if you don't know.)
--------------------------------------------------------
Blog-visitors and their comments seem to have been a recent theme on several blogs. Naturally this leads to musings on one's own blog, its visitors, and what everyone wants from a blog.
My StatCounter tells me how many people have come to The String Bag, and what their search (if any) has been for. It tells me where they are, more or less, and also purports to show how long they spend here.
So I know there are a number of visitors from the UK and the US, and one regular from New Zealand, and one I think of as my Spanish stalker*. And the last few days have brought another flurry of visitors, this time from Denmark, looking for information on Fred Knit*le - they must have had the Young@H*art film screened on their TV.
Most of these people don't leave any comment, though there seems no way of connecting the StatCounter information to a specific commenter. There may be nothing in particular they want to say, of course. They may be copying my knitted hats, or avidly following the progress of my garden. They may enjoy the photos of places I've been to, or agree with my occasional rants. Imagining is usually more fun than knowing (think of Christmas presents).
What sort of comment to leave on someone's blog? There's the "me, too", which doesn't take anything further on, though it can be reassuring to have sympathy or whatever. There's the "aren't you wonderful", which gives a short glow, followed by embarrassment. There's a sensible question, or an answer to a question - practical and helpful. And there's the amusing comment, the sideways look at a topic, the pun, the joke between friends.
And that's really how I see the blog, as a sort of conversation in the cyber-pub. You drop in, listen to a few people, have a brief chat with one or two, find out how they are and what's happening with them, you amuse each other, and enjoy the different characters. Sometimes you pop into the cyber-pub down the super-highway, and enjoy a different crowd; you may join in the conversation or not. You may even become a regular.
So, let's go and see who's in the bar today.
*No, I know you aren't really stalking, it's the alliteration....
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
13 February: It must be true...
Sunday's posting was contributed by Time Lords, or Al Zheimer, it certainly wasn't evidence that I don't know what day it is!
Mumble, mumble, OAP, dribble, dribble, OAP, shuffle, shuffle.....
........
Anyway, when DH came home yesterday (which was, I think, Monday), he told me that people had been evacuated from houses very near our home, because of a gas leak.
There's possibly a certain former JCB driver going to sign on this morning, after smashing through a large gas main - aren't the mains coloured bright yellow so that you can see them in the ground?
Ceefax had a report that the road was closed; the local TV news programmes had live, on-the-spot reports from a frozen guy (who used to wear surprising red socks when he used to do court reports, as I recall) standing beside a pitch dark road in the wind (very exposed bit of road, that) looking very serious and telling everyone that the gas supply to thousands of houses in a wide area was off. The last of his reports I saw contained the promise that if you still had gas, it would be going off very soon, and might be off for days.
Funny - we haven't had any interruption at all to the gas supply yet, and Ceefax now tells us that the main was repaired early this morning. There do seem to be houses without a gas supply today, but it seems that the problem has been nowhere near as dramatic or widespread as advertised.
Why must the media try to make things sound so much worse than they might really be? Over-the-top drama belongs in the soaps.
Perhaps the media needs making healthier by the addition of a large dose of salt.
Bird flu? Looks like the slaughter of those thousands of turkeys stopped it before it spread to every corner shop in the land. David Cameron's drug-taking? Looks like it might have been just a bit of a schoolboy experiment. And let's not start on WMD...
Mumble, mumble, OAP, dribble, dribble, OAP, shuffle, shuffle.....
........
Anyway, when DH came home yesterday (which was, I think, Monday), he told me that people had been evacuated from houses very near our home, because of a gas leak.
There's possibly a certain former JCB driver going to sign on this morning, after smashing through a large gas main - aren't the mains coloured bright yellow so that you can see them in the ground?
Ceefax had a report that the road was closed; the local TV news programmes had live, on-the-spot reports from a frozen guy (who used to wear surprising red socks when he used to do court reports, as I recall) standing beside a pitch dark road in the wind (very exposed bit of road, that) looking very serious and telling everyone that the gas supply to thousands of houses in a wide area was off. The last of his reports I saw contained the promise that if you still had gas, it would be going off very soon, and might be off for days.
Funny - we haven't had any interruption at all to the gas supply yet, and Ceefax now tells us that the main was repaired early this morning. There do seem to be houses without a gas supply today, but it seems that the problem has been nowhere near as dramatic or widespread as advertised.
Why must the media try to make things sound so much worse than they might really be? Over-the-top drama belongs in the soaps.
Perhaps the media needs making healthier by the addition of a large dose of salt.
Bird flu? Looks like the slaughter of those thousands of turkeys stopped it before it spread to every corner shop in the land. David Cameron's drug-taking? Looks like it might have been just a bit of a schoolboy experiment. And let's not start on WMD...
Wednesday, February 07, 2007
7 February: Huh?
Is it me?
Bird flu in Suffolk - now we don't want to spread it around, do we?
So let's take all the infected birds up to Staffordshire to incinerate them.
Then let's take the poorly vet up to a hospital in Nottinghamshire.
And let's have all the press in, milling around, then returning to their offices and homes.
Oh, and we're not actually sure how this is spread.
Is it me?
Bird flu in Suffolk - now we don't want to spread it around, do we?
So let's take all the infected birds up to Staffordshire to incinerate them.
Then let's take the poorly vet up to a hospital in Nottinghamshire.
And let's have all the press in, milling around, then returning to their offices and homes.
Oh, and we're not actually sure how this is spread.
Is it me?
Thursday, February 01, 2007
1 February: Television
This evening, to accompany my mitten knitting, I was watching TV.
The news irritated me - there's recently been a tendency to oppose *British* and *Muslim*, as if they were mutually exclusive.
No, no ; *British* describes nationality, and *Muslim* describes religion. People can be British, French, Chinese, Indian, etc. and at the same time Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, or whatever, in any sort of combination of nationality and religion. Because people have non-white skins, they are NOT automatically non-Christian, just as white skins are NOT automatically containing Christians. Some white skins, including mine, conceal Buddhists; others contain Jews, Zoroastrians, or Muslims. Lots of Britons have no particular religion - the same probably applies to people of other nationalities too.
I would have expected better from the BBC.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Also this evening I watched a programme purporting to give the truth about food. It concerned dieting, and I was interested as currently I would like to lose large lumps of fat from where my waist used to be. DH would also like his belt to go round his stomach, not under it.
Some of what was being shown was not relevant to vegetarians, but much stuff could be translated into Veggie quite easily. DH was delighted that one of the suggestions was Soup, as he is very fond of soup. I can cope with soup, as long as it has no salt, but plenty of lentils.
Enter a Soup Dragon, left.
The news irritated me - there's recently been a tendency to oppose *British* and *Muslim*, as if they were mutually exclusive.
No, no ; *British* describes nationality, and *Muslim* describes religion. People can be British, French, Chinese, Indian, etc. and at the same time Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, or whatever, in any sort of combination of nationality and religion. Because people have non-white skins, they are NOT automatically non-Christian, just as white skins are NOT automatically containing Christians. Some white skins, including mine, conceal Buddhists; others contain Jews, Zoroastrians, or Muslims. Lots of Britons have no particular religion - the same probably applies to people of other nationalities too.
I would have expected better from the BBC.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Also this evening I watched a programme purporting to give the truth about food. It concerned dieting, and I was interested as currently I would like to lose large lumps of fat from where my waist used to be. DH would also like his belt to go round his stomach, not under it.
Some of what was being shown was not relevant to vegetarians, but much stuff could be translated into Veggie quite easily. DH was delighted that one of the suggestions was Soup, as he is very fond of soup. I can cope with soup, as long as it has no salt, but plenty of lentils.
Enter a Soup Dragon, left.
Sunday, September 03, 2006
3 September: Scraps
Is it possible to watch BBC News 24 for more than 10 minutes? By that time, they've been through the 3 news items at least 4 times, repeating apparently endlessly - one report from their correspondent, followed immediately by "going live" to the same person, who repeats what they just said on tape, then a brief interview with somebody who doesn't have a clue what's going on (or who knows only too well, and isn't saying!), and then a short piece of film looped so that it repeats and repeats the same (usually harrowing) scene.
------------------------------------------------------
A comment from kaz on NOT DEAD YET! reminds me that one of the things I have thought about doing when I retire (less than 16 weeks now, not that I'm counting) is to dye my hair the sort of colour that's totally inappropriate for work - purple or green.
I mentioned this at a Growing Old Disgracefully meeting once, and it was pointed out that it costs some people a small fortune to keep their hair the colour that mine is naturally, so I should be grateful I don't NEED to colour it.
Any ideas about this?
------------------------------------------------------
And at last the Muppets are getting a major exhibition in London - HERE.
------------------------------------------------------
A comment from kaz on NOT DEAD YET! reminds me that one of the things I have thought about doing when I retire (less than 16 weeks now, not that I'm counting) is to dye my hair the sort of colour that's totally inappropriate for work - purple or green.
I mentioned this at a Growing Old Disgracefully meeting once, and it was pointed out that it costs some people a small fortune to keep their hair the colour that mine is naturally, so I should be grateful I don't NEED to colour it.
Any ideas about this?
------------------------------------------------------
And at last the Muppets are getting a major exhibition in London - HERE.
Tuesday, April 04, 2006
Party politics
It was reported on the news this morning that Tony Blair and David Cameron were going to have a discussion about how political parties will be funded in the future.
Pardon me? Shouldn't that be the voters deciding how political parties should be funded?
Imagine the opportunity for election costs to spiral upwards at several times the rate of inflation (or at least several dozen times the rate of increase in civil service pay, or pensions), the army of paid party officials they will "need" to administer the money, and the possibilities for funds to "go missing".
As long as political parties are funded by their own supporters, they still have a reason to work at attracting support. And why shouldn't people be able to CHOOSE who they support?
Perhaps you wouldn't mind paying the wages of the party machines of the Tory, Labour and LibDem parties; but how about Sinn Fein, Respect, UKIP, the British National Party?
The electorate need to be consulted. If ever there was an issue to put to a referendum, this is it.
This government is really getting up my nose.
Pardon me? Shouldn't that be the voters deciding how political parties should be funded?
Imagine the opportunity for election costs to spiral upwards at several times the rate of inflation (or at least several dozen times the rate of increase in civil service pay, or pensions), the army of paid party officials they will "need" to administer the money, and the possibilities for funds to "go missing".
As long as political parties are funded by their own supporters, they still have a reason to work at attracting support. And why shouldn't people be able to CHOOSE who they support?
Perhaps you wouldn't mind paying the wages of the party machines of the Tory, Labour and LibDem parties; but how about Sinn Fein, Respect, UKIP, the British National Party?
The electorate need to be consulted. If ever there was an issue to put to a referendum, this is it.
This government is really getting up my nose.
Thursday, March 30, 2006
Concert - and a little bit of politics.
Yesterday evening I accompanied DH to a concert at the Sage, Gateshead - our first visit. The performers were Remember Shakti. In case you don't, they are guitarist John McLaughlin, drummer Zakir Hussain, percussionist V. Selvaganesh, mandolin player U. Shrinivas and singer Shakar Mahadevan. I enjoyed the jazz/Indian fusion music more than I expected, and particularly liked the singer, who drew the tune in the air with his hand as he sang.
As many of the audience were wearing traditional Indian clothes, I was also able to enjoy seeing more square yards of beautiful silk than I have seen for a long time, some of it enhanced with amazing embroidery.
And a bit of politics -
Loans = peerages:
The treasurer of the Labour party said he didn't know about these loans, so who EXACTLY were they paid to, and how EXACTLY were they going to be repaid?
And historically, peerages have been given to people who help or do favours (sexual and otherwise) for the Crown (now the Government), so what EXACTLY is new here anyway?
ID cards:
Even if the government can find a company who can produce them (and "government computer project" has acquired its own expectations!), then so can anyone who wants to forge them.
It follows from this that there must be another reason for the imposition of ID cards by our ever-more controlling and centralising government; yet another encroachment on free speech and civil liberties.
Now - will Big Brother (and not the one on TV) require me to stop blogging, or will MI5 open a file on me? Assuming they can find out who I am, of course.
As many of the audience were wearing traditional Indian clothes, I was also able to enjoy seeing more square yards of beautiful silk than I have seen for a long time, some of it enhanced with amazing embroidery.
And a bit of politics -
Loans = peerages:
The treasurer of the Labour party said he didn't know about these loans, so who EXACTLY were they paid to, and how EXACTLY were they going to be repaid?
And historically, peerages have been given to people who help or do favours (sexual and otherwise) for the Crown (now the Government), so what EXACTLY is new here anyway?
ID cards:
Even if the government can find a company who can produce them (and "government computer project" has acquired its own expectations!), then so can anyone who wants to forge them.
It follows from this that there must be another reason for the imposition of ID cards by our ever-more controlling and centralising government; yet another encroachment on free speech and civil liberties.
Now - will Big Brother (and not the one on TV) require me to stop blogging, or will MI5 open a file on me? Assuming they can find out who I am, of course.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)