1a2bcio8

Sorry I haven't created a proper detail of rules, etc. I started a new job the other day and have had a load of other stuff on so haven't had a good chance to give it attention. I think I have a day off on either Thursday or Friday so it will happen then. Nick has made some good points though. I recommend taking note.

Done also

Sorry chap but that's a cartoon view of politics you're suggesting. Parties are not voted in according to their merits but relative to their various campaigns of manipulation such as the complete misunderstanding most people have about benefits fraud - about 0.7% which is pretty small relative to the perceptions most people hold. The same holds true for the nature of immigration. When you have a corporate media that generally aligns with political power and dissents within such narrow margins as to mostly be useless, leading to a generally uninformed population, you can't maintain that cartoon view. People need to know how inept and ill-intended their governments are in order to decide how best to choose between them but we are not offered that. The only basis for democracy is informed choice. I can refer you to books if you want to properly consider my arguments but if you base your arguments purely on a mainstream view of these matters you're not placed to actually refute them. You need to actually address and respond to my specific points. My intention here has always been to offer an alternative view on matters from which people can actually explore those matters and decide from themselves but, clearly, nobody actually does that. Rather the trend is to rationalize away what's being said without a proper consideration of it. You've glossed over a significant factor of 'austerity' in terms of our being able to afford or not afford welfare and that's corporate tax avoidance, banks, etc. all of which are not properly regulated. We wouldn't have the issues we did if those systems were regulated properly. The amount we lose in those areas dwarfs the costs of maintaining welfare, the NHS, etc. The changes in the NHS are also ascribable, not to the economy, but to vested interests (politicians for example) who gain from the privatization of NHS services. Furthermore, austerity cannot work in a capitalistic system which is based upon consumerism. Yes, big business may save money by squeezing people in their jobs due to a more competitive job market - paying them less, getting more hours from them, etc. - but this will only bring benefits to those businesses in the short term. When you reduce consumption by creating a poorer populace, money moves around that economy less and it stagnates. The deficit has been growing and this form of neo-liberalism simply isn't working. At best, the government are stupidly blinded by ideology and at worst they know that it's causing more problems but the short term gains for big business trumps all else. Why is it that you struggle to imagine that an institute (our government) that was borne elites promoting their interests against the monarchy rather than for the populace can be self-serving and constituted by intelligent idiots? Intelligent in the sense of rhetoric but completely idiotic in the sense of wisdom. The history of human civilization is dictated by elite interests dominating or attempting to dominate all else. Only if you buy into the current myth of well intended elites and perceive modern human society in a vacuum can you come to that sort of conclusion. Obviously it depends on how you define bad but if illegal wars, state terror, etc. resulting in the deaths of millions around the world in the last decade, the scapegoating of vulnerable people for political expediency, channeling wealth from the poor to the rich, etc. is considered to be a bad thing then there's not much debate. Actually I didn't say that co2 killing the earth is not debated but anthropogenic climate change is (not debated); it is established. Scientists do believe that the problems from climate change will not be pretty and will probably be catastrophic. The consensus is essentially that it will probably be very bad. This is up for debate but the debate exists within the range of how bad it will more so than will something bad happen at all. Capitalism hasn't ended by the way... and the banks could easily have been nationalized rather than being given free bailouts, staying not regulated, not prosecuted, etc. Why hasn't that happened? Muel, this stuff is difficult to get your head around because it sits in opposition to the world view we've been constantly offered through watching the television, reading the newspaper, going to school, etc. But it's difficult whenever we approach a new subject. It does get easier and I really struggled with everything myself to begin with. It just depends on the value you hold for it. Without really trying to create a guilt trip but just putting it in matter-of-fact terms, are these things worth caring about? In the sense that if we cared about them more collectively we could do something about them. To the extent that we generally ignore them we can do nothing about them and, in essence, we therefore side with the people who do so much harm. We are complicit if we are not involved in some sense of standing up against what's happening.

I have to admit that I'm struggling to see how you're not understanding? I don't think these things can be understood perfectly perhaps. They're big situations and they're complex because they have multiple causes that are economic, social, technological, etc. None the less, they can be grasped in a basic sense even it not perfectly. For instance, the scientific consensus is that the increase of co2 in the atmosphere is man made, is heading for unprecedented levels and this will, in all likelihood, be very problematic or even catastrophic for life on earth. I'm pretty sure I've mentioned how governments are doing very little because they serve powerful, minority interests in the short-term such as the established energy industry that makes a lot of money for the continued use of 'dirty' energy. In other areas I've discussed how governments are involved in illegal wars, not based on humanitarian interests but for controlling resources and locations in the world. Over one millions Iraqi's are dead from the 2003 invasion and occupation which our governments have done in our name but which we had the power to stop. They also perform state terror. American, French, British, etc. governments fund terror organisations, death squads, they assassinate people (drone strikes now, for instance) and so on. Our government is currently in the process of spinning lies about the most vulnerable people in our country - most people completely misunderstand the statistical realities on benefits - so that they can dismantle the welfare state as they increase corporate subsidy and tax breaks for the most wealthy. The NHS is being drained of funding and being sold to private companies that MPs own or have relations with in some sense despite the warning by doctors that people's lives are being put at risk because the changes will lead to inadequate services. The system will become two-tier with people that can afford it being offered good services and others, who cannot, being offered insufficient services. These are just a few examples of how we are being exploited that carries the implication that the exploitation is increasing. The constant need to increase profits, power, resources, etc. will mean that the exploitation will not stop and unless you are an elite within this system, it will come to effect you. Ideally the harm toward anyone by the system, foreign or domestic should be enough to bring us to action - not just personal threat. The video I linked above shows, in no uncertain terms, that power resides in the majority and that those who would ignore will of the majority are ultimately subject to it. Protest therefore works and with enough people involved we could force our governments and powerful interests to conform with what's best for us. So I'm offering you ideas and facts that can springboard your understanding and I've said before that this is the initial basis - knowledge - which is something you need to do yourself. You need to check that I'm not just making stuff up. This requires a bit of effort, no doubt. Then we need to organize. There's groups such as the occupy movement, charities like greenpeace, etc. all of whom try to organize protests, boycotting, petitions, etc. that sometimes work but often lack the social involvement that we see in, say, the Brazilian movement that I posted up about. I think if you don't understand what I'm saying, then you're doing so willfully because you don't really want to change how you relate to this sort of thing. I'm sure you do in a sense but the desire to stay comfortable is a strong one even if realistically, it's probably unstable in the sense that you can't hide from these sorts of things completely. It's not easy to understand perfectly and it's not easy to change but it is doable but then a lot of stuff that's worth doing is like that.

That video is a bit vague and, at best, ambivalent. The ambivalence is that, yes, global warming is bad and we should do something but we have this buffering system - oceans - that protects us. It's not specified that this buffering system although better than the atmosphere at dealing with heat has its own limits and will not work forever or even that far into the future. It's suggestions are pretty weak as well. The overall system is a problem which can't be solved by simply using your computer less or cycling to work although those are definitely good things. Our attention and efforts should be toward how our resources are used or impeded to develop better technologies which use cleaner energy. This means our attention and efforts should be toward the powerful interests that drag their feet against the change that interfere with established means of profit. Regarding Matt's video, it's frightening stuff and within the context of other military, corporate and governmental efforts, quite plausible. It's been a common theme within these types of discussion that people believe nothing much can be done about these types of problem. I feel this is a cynical rationalization although I relate to it and feel it often myself. Power ultimately lies with us if we manage the courage to realize and manifest it; otherwise we give it up to people that will do all sorts of atrocious things with it. We're pretty complacent here in the West because life is generally decent in the sense of material wealth although that is not given and is currently being eroded. Anyway, the protests in Brazil which, interestingly, are not even based on a political ideology but just an interest in justice about public services and spending has brought about positive change. Please watch the following video if interested: http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=10386 I can't remember the details of an article I read some time ago but it was about the comparisons between the end of the Roman era and the current state of capitalism having parallels such that capitalism might be nearing its end also. I think we may be a victim or our own success here in the West. We've become so entranced by our material wealth in the form of nice houses, technology, cars, etc. that we've forgotten all else and now, for instance in the UK, we're allowing those things to ruin the planet, our governments to employ methods that worsen the economy for the majority but everyone in the end, damage the ethically developed welfare systems (NHS, benefits, etc.) and most of us do very little about it. The successes of capitalism can spell its end and probably in a rather messy way unless we work out a way to change the current system through the sorts of efforts we can see in Brazil or other areas of Latin America actually. You see a lot of politically engaged populations in those areas which have effected positive change and extracted themselves America's corporate domination.

I will get more details up on the blog this week but, yeah, the deadline will be the 30th September...

Definitely stepped up your control and style, Ian. The rail ride to rockwall was particularly good. I can't wait for more, init

You're missing my point. I'm not saying being constructive is telling somebody they are 'good.' Being constructive is offering them advice in a way that helps them in some sense. For instance, telling somebody that their technique, having noticed it's lacking, can be adjusted in such and such a way in order to improve that technique is constructive. Just telling somebody they aren't particularly good does nothing useful to anyone except fulfil personal need to be unpleasant - unless you want to offer me some reason how being unkind is useful to anyone or motivated by something worthwhile? You're completely entitled to be that way - I'm not telling you that you can't - but don't expect people to not call you up on it. Doing so is constructive criticism if you're interested in having a community of people that are interested in helping one another rather than putting them down for no apparent reason. I think everyone should say what they want but at the same time they shouldn't expect others not to respond against it.

I've given blood before and I may be on the organ donor register. That's a good reminder actually to check if I am. It's good giving blood but, doing as much exercise as I do, I found it a bit problematic. It used to leave me quite tired for several weeks afterwards. That shouldn't really be an excuse though given how important it is.

I think it's your intention that's being questioned. Why bother with that sort of criticism when it isn't constructive but just about putting his riding down? In other words, it appears you're being needlessly unkind. If appreciating other people's riding depended on where they placed on the riding ladder, so to speak, that would make for a pretty cold community. I think it's fair and good to defend against that sort of thing.

I think this is an excellent idea so unless there appears a good argument against it let's adopt it. Rowan, you need to get something sorted this time around. I'm happy to help you film, init The only issue I do foresee is the limits imposed on uploads by Vimeo even with a purchased account. I suppose they could be uploaded but remain private though. Does anyone have any ideas of ways to raise money or sponsorship for the 'pro' category as I cannot afford to contribute and this was the more difficult form of sponsorship to gain.

Indeed, it looks like I got a bit confused there

I was unsure if this was going to happen this year or if something similar might be run by other individuals or groups. However, that doesn't seem to be the case and in the absence of anything else I wanted to make sure people have a video competition for the summer again. It seems to be a good stimulus for the development of people's riding and video making. Anyway, please feel free to start a discussion on the competition's format. Specifically, if you feel something was lacking or inappropriate last year then we can discuss possible improvements. I want the competition, within reason, to be as democratic as possible. It is, after all, about your enjoyment. I haven't really done much in the way of organizing prizes, sponsors, etc. I am in talks with at least one though and I suspect several of those from last year will be interested again. In this regard, it's been decided that shop sponsorship will be excluded from the competition so to allow sponsored riders from both sides of 'that' divide to be involved. Things also seem to have quietened down on that front and I don't want to aggravate it. Not that is says anything more - in fact it says less - but here's a blog update: http://glasseyetrialscreative.blogspot.co.uk

Perhaps I'm not understanding what you mean, Ben but my 500d supports an external mic which I make use of?

Unfortunately not regarding the cross platform possibility. Your license is either Mac or PC. I was hoping I could do this as I have two uses with my Production Premium license and I own both a Mac and PC but I'm stuck with just the PC even though, if I had another PC, I could use it on that also. It's a bit of a shame. The following offer a huge wealth of tutorials: http://tv.adobe.com/ http://www.creativecow.net/

He's an intelligent and reasonable chap despite his otherwise manic and, out of control, comedic persona. I agree with his points. And in relation to this topic in a variety of ways that can be drawn out: http://blogs.channel4.com/alex-thomsons-view/poll-shows-public-odds-reality-iraq-war/4968 http://www.zcommunications.org/poll-shows-that-uk-public-drastically-under-estimates-iraqi-war-deaths-by-joe-emersberger This sort on information has been readily available if one looks beyond profit-driven or government sanctioned forms of media that generate the worst kinds of bias. It's from outlets that aren't based upon those fundamentals that we are more likely to find a clearer picture of what's happening within the world. People motivated by compassion and an interest in serving others, rather than greedy self-interested people, are better placed for truth telling - that's just basic fact. Which isn't to give credence to conspiracy nuts and all forms of media outside of the mainstream but is to recognise that given a proper investigation should reveal certain outlets can be deemed more reliable. Much like certain people can be deemed more truthful due to the type of motivations they hold. At least that's what my experience suggests. People aren't aware just how much we've harmed to the Iraqis regarding both the current occupation, the UN sanctions prior to that or the first gulf war. Millions of people have died and Iraq is a place none of us would want live. Another 'liberated' country, Libya, is little different. That's the fault of a dominating media entrenched in powerful interests that does its best to avoid harming those interests. Resting the justification on the removal of tyrants such as Sadam or Gaddafi makes no sense when the harm they caused is so small in comparison. Also, this isn't to say that the mainstream media, as a whole, is completely unable to function in a truth-telling capacity but that, in the main, it will not. There are many fine dissidents within the mainstream media but they are a significant minority.

It's true that popular opinion was against the war and rightly so but that being the case didn't have to be on the basis of knowing most or all of the most important evidence and facts. I'll admit to having been one of those people. Well, at first I was ambivalent but then I was against the war but, at that time, I didn't know a lot of what I know now that I could have also known then and which would have made my views against the war much, much easier. This was before I started really exploring alternate forms of media. We are continually misled by the mainstream media such that, if it is our primary source of information, the bias will be grounded in governmental and corporate interests. Appreciating your point though, I guess this is just one way in which we are either uninformed or have the appearance of being such. The fact remains though that I've often told people about the sorts of things our government does of which they were totally unaware despite their gravity. I've experienced it in myself regarding the period between when I used to rely on corporate and mainstream forms of media for my view of the world relative to the picture that is painted by NGOs, Academics, not-for-profit media, etc. I do feel that there are also people that aren't willing to face up to what has been done in our name. I even have a friend, who's one of the most intelligent people I personally know, who has changed his politics for career purposes denying the sorts of things we're talking about here despite having a strong recognition of them before. Human beings are masters of self-deception. I don't want to reduce everything to single causes. I appreciate things are complex with various causes. That being said, my view is that part of the problem is that a significant segment of society is unaware of what's happening in the world and/or unwilling to face it, for one reason or another, and, therefore, I want to point this out. I also have a strong belief in the genuine goodness of most people. It's just that goodness is spoilt by disinformation, emotional manipulation and so on (basically propaganda). Countering those with a better picture of world affairs, I feel, can open up that goodness. I know you feel like building a strong social knowledge base doesn't amount to a great deal but I think it's a beginning - in fact, the only beginning. I don't necessarily have answers beyond that at present and I may be wrong but I don't think you can really argue against the possibility of anything ever changing without being predicated by appropriate knowledge. That's why I emphasise it.

Just because something is creative or novel doesn't mean it has universal worth. Different individuals appreciate different things. I like creativity but only to the extent it retains fluidity. The chap in the video above is kind of interesting to me but doesn't inspire me to try and be really novel. His movements aren't particularly fluid; I don't find his efforts pleasing to the eye. I respect that what he's doing probably makes sense to him and brings satisfaction though. Personally I just enjoy trying to be smooth and learning new moves so I can experience the sensation of them. Sometimes that includes creating a novel combination or move but mostly not. I'm happy with the direction I take my riding and that's as far as I need to think about it.

It would indeed be interesting to know if this sort of information/difference of view is getting very far into the mainstream consciousness. Sometimes it feels like it isn't but who knows. I suspect a lot of people ignore it because, in a sense, it's quite painful and frightening understanding just how much suffering we're causing around the world. Although that's all tied up to suffering here in the UK as well. Regarding your article I think it's awful that that poor man's death if being capitalised on. Politicians always play with our perception of soldiers to intensify anger at official 'enemies' but also they are made out to be fundamentally heroic such that there's no way they could be fighting in illegal and imperialistic wars

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/26/iraqis-cant-turn-backs-on-deadly-legacy?INTCMP=SRCH

I put a 70mm stem on it yesterday and the difference for bar spins was very significant. I'm looking forward to getting right into them when I'm better!

So f**king bored from being pretty much stuck in bed for 4 days...

They're prototype forks

http://johnhilley.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/woolwich-killing-asking-hard-human.html