Leg Iron, I hope you do not mind me making the following post which is a copy of one I have made on Taking Liberties - it is off topic, but interesting...
""Simon,
I hope that you do not mind me using this thread to issue a plea for help. I’ll be as quick as poss. In these pages (I think), some 3 months ago, someone mentioned that the BMJ had started a blog asking for new words with which to attack Big Tobacco. I had a look at this blog. I decided to have some fun, and submitted a list of really horrible words (like diarrhoea). Needless to say, my contribution was not published. Being up for a challenge, I decided to make several comments which seemed reasonable, but were in fact rather over the top. Clearly, tongue in cheek if one read between the lines. I noticed Pat Nurse had a go there too.
Believe it or not, they have accepted one of my ideas as one of the best six!!!! They have now published it to be voted upon, and, I suppose, I might just win the prize (a subscription to the Tobacco Control journal)!
What would happen if I won??? Should we try to help my comment to win so that I can disown the whole thing in due course? So far there have been 111 votes. If one votes, one is taken to a page which shows the breakdown of votes to date. Mine has 17% so far; the leader has 40%. The leader wants newspapers etc to stop using the word 'smoker' because it implies 'a right'.
Anybody got any ideas? Oh, my name is James Watson, so it is easy to work out which comments are mine. (One of my comments has the first letter of each sentence spelling out the word ‘propaganda’ – which amused me and has not been noticed).
I hope that Rollo Tommasi does not see this, but I doubt that he would be interested in Forest Eireann.
I think we should all get behind Junican. I think it's a scream.
We've got a horse in this race. If it wins, its author disowns it, and screws up their competition. If it doesn't, the author disowns it anyway, and we all shout Fix! Our horse was nobbled!
How about calling on our readers to go cheer our horse towards the winning post?
We're only up against 111 votes in the whole of last week and some of them were for our guy anyway. We can break this, individually, within a day or less.
You know, what really annoyed me about this BMJ blog was the astounding cheek of these people. They invite people, blatantly and in public, to find words, phrases, expressions and ideas with which to attack the tobacco industry. (NB. I have no interest in the tobacco industry. I do not even own a single share). They do not give a toss that the science might be flawed; nor that jobs may be lost and economies damaged; nor that 15 million people in the UK will ‘suffer’. They are totally blinkered – so much so that they cannot even see that the mickey is being taken.
The mickey-taking in the post from which my ‘recommendation’ is taken is a bit subtle. You need to look back a couple of sentences to where I mention Obama’s condemnation of BP. When I wrote the post, it was fairly obvious that BP were not directly to blame. I was implying that Obama was ‘out of order’ in jumping to conclusions. By implication, I was showing that my assumptions that ‘the profit’ leaves the country while ‘the costs’ remain, was bullshit. But they have somehow managed to turn my comment into an international battle between GOOD (tobacco control) and EVIL (the tobacco companies).
The whole thing is so bloody silly, it’s not true. Let’s see how it goes.
13 comments:
My favourite was always this one;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlPAVm8Gl6M
Not got any spare Owls have you?
Added to "old tv stuff" playlist, ta again.
Thanks for the post! LOL
John Cleese is always a delight as well!
Simply wonderful
Leg Iron, I hope you do not mind me making the following post which is a copy of one I have made on Taking Liberties - it is off topic, but interesting...
""Simon,
I hope that you do not mind me using this thread to issue a plea for help. I’ll be as quick as poss.
In these pages (I think), some 3 months ago, someone mentioned that the BMJ had started a blog asking for new words with which to attack Big Tobacco. I had a look at this blog.
I decided to have some fun, and submitted a list of really horrible words (like diarrhoea). Needless to say, my contribution was not published.
Being up for a challenge, I decided to make several comments which seemed reasonable, but were in fact rather over the top. Clearly, tongue in cheek if one read between the lines. I noticed Pat Nurse had a go there too.
Believe it or not, they have accepted one of my ideas as one of the best six!!!! They have now published it to be voted upon, and, I suppose, I might just win the prize (a subscription to the Tobacco Control journal)!
Here is the URL for the original BMJ blog:
http://blogs.bmj.com/tc/2010/07/30/word-wars-and-tobacco-control/comment-page-1/#comment-70
And the new blog for voting:
http://blogs.bmj.com/tc/2010/10/27/word-wars-and-tobacco-control-choose-the-winner/
DP has made a comment on that blog.
My problem now is-
What would happen if I won??? Should we try to help my comment to win so that I can disown the whole thing in due course? So far there have been 111 votes. If one votes, one is taken to a page which shows the breakdown of votes to date. Mine has 17% so far; the leader has 40%. The leader wants newspapers etc to stop using the word 'smoker' because it implies 'a right'.
Anybody got any ideas? Oh, my name is James Watson, so it is easy to work out which comments are mine. (One of my comments has the first letter of each sentence spelling out the word ‘propaganda’ – which amused me and has not been noticed).
I hope that Rollo Tommasi does not see this, but I doubt that he would be interested in Forest Eireann.
I am going to copy this post to others.......""
I have copied straight to yourself, Leg Iron, Frank D and Subrosa as it stands for quickness (as I will do with this).
Damn, should have read "DP" Frank D, Subrosa....
I think we should all get behind Junican. I think it's a scream.
We've got a horse in this race. If it wins, its author disowns it, and screws up their competition. If it doesn't, the author disowns it anyway, and we all shout Fix! Our horse was nobbled!
How about calling on our readers to go cheer our horse towards the winning post?
Frank
Junican, Frank - they have 112 votes in total since October 27th.
We can break this in one night.
I'd almost completed a rambling new post, so I've tacked on the end a call to my 300 or so readers per day to go vote for Jwatso.
I think DP is away in Hungary or something, and not posting right now. And Sub Rosa is probably fast asleep.
Frank - I don't think subrosa ever sleeps.
We're only up against 111 votes in the whole of last week and some of them were for our guy anyway. We can break this, individually, within a day or less.
Together we can do it by tomorrow morning.
I'll be surprised if we haven't.
Bill Sticker - the owls are otherwise occupied these days.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8el_P4yvfc
Especially with X factor running.
You know, what really annoyed me about this BMJ blog was the astounding cheek of these people. They invite people, blatantly and in public, to find words, phrases, expressions and ideas with which to attack the tobacco industry. (NB. I have no interest in the tobacco industry. I do not even own a single share). They do not give a toss that the science might be flawed; nor that jobs may be lost and economies damaged; nor that 15 million people in the UK will ‘suffer’. They are totally blinkered – so much so that they cannot even see that the mickey is being taken.
The mickey-taking in the post from which my ‘recommendation’ is taken is a bit subtle. You need to look back a couple of sentences to where I mention Obama’s condemnation of BP. When I wrote the post, it was fairly obvious that BP were not directly to blame. I was implying that Obama was ‘out of order’ in jumping to conclusions. By implication, I was showing that my assumptions that ‘the profit’ leaves the country while ‘the costs’ remain, was bullshit. But they have somehow managed to turn my comment into an international battle between GOOD (tobacco control) and EVIL (the tobacco companies).
The whole thing is so bloody silly, it’s not true. Let’s see how it goes.
Post a Comment