1949threepence

Skilled though Rosen is, I still don't think there is any realistic comparison between UK 2023 and Germany in the 1930's, and that such comparisons are extremely unfair. Just to show, this is a picture showing the flight of Jewish people from Germany between 1933 and 1939. The polar opposite to this country, where the argument is about the desperation to get in.

Thanks, but again, that's slightly confusing as they always used to. The time given clearly indicated 20:16, with no seconds shown (or 8:16pm) The clock weirdness is way more than broadband connection issues. Again, it would never have done anything like that before. Sorry, something is radically wrong.

Not 100% sure. As you say there is definitely a bump to the right of the top of the 4. But the rest is slightly unclear. I do actually have an EF version of the 1854/3, which I bought from LCA in Dec 22. There is even a trace of lustre. The classic features of a 4/3 are present with protruberances both sides of the top of the 4, and a thin line extending from the end of the left base serif to the left crossbar of the 4. There is more hair detail than is usual for a 4/3 on mine, but nothing like as good as the one you show above Jerry. It's example 13 on Richard's rare penny list - ex Steven Clegg Can't rule out yours being a 4/3, but I'm not sufficiently qualified to give a definitive yea or nay. Cope & Rayner have the 1854/3 as being of very high rarity in the upper grades.

I have managed to get this though, from the bidder's list. It clearly shows that the auction was supposed to finish at dead on 20:16. But the late bids, including mine, clearly prove that bids were made and accepted after the deadline. I made my bid as soon as the clock started going in the other direction, and the details show it was actually made post 20:16.

Well I've just bid on a coin, and the clock was clearly massively out of order. When it got down to about 10 seconds, it literally started going the other way. Just bizarre. I did win the coin, but there is a major major issue, which I'm filming next time and posting on here as well as sending to e bay. Got a screenshot which shows that I'm the high bidder, but also that the auction had ended................ Useless, they're wise to that and have obviously put some sort of block on screenshots as it's just come out with the e bay image.

Well you say that, but it should be noted that asylum seekers are being fast tracked into housing via a dream offer to private landlords, made by the government, via SERCO. See the link. This is at the expense of many people already here, who are suffering because of the severe shortage of private rental opportunities these days. SERCO link

I'm sorry to say it is when it comes to comparisons of such absurdity, they are too farcical to even laugh at. So then he should say precisely what the comparison is - something he didn't do even when tackled about it. Until that's done, then I don't accept there is any meaningful comparison. Moreover, let's not forget one overarching point. So many want to come to the UK in the 2020's. So many wanted to leave nazi Germany in the 1930's. That one FACTUAL comparison should tell you all you need to know about comparative nazi rhetoric.

Still waiting for a 1930's pronouncement from a German official, with which to compare. I also asked this question on a political forum and nobody can answer. Hence I assume they don't have a clue what was actually said or by whom, back then. I wonder if Gary knows? Do you? Have you looked? Pre 1933 is relevant as Lineker never drew any distinction between the separate parts of the 1930's.

I don't think they do, or at any rate did. But now they realise the public mood they're taking it a lot more seriously, and putting it ahead of the sentiments of their globalist mates. There might be votes in it ! Incidentally, I don't like Sunak and consider him a slimy backstabber, BUT, to his credit, he does appear to be slowly and surely getting on top of the negative situations we find ourselves in. If he carries on in the same vein, there is a possibility that they will begin to look slightly less like the shuffling shambles they were a few months ago. His organisational ability, memory and attention to detail is vastly superior to Johnson's. Not to mention the fact that he is less likely to alienate and annoy other leaders on the world stage.

No, but by natural implication that's what he meant. By 1930's Germany he wasn't referring to the period 1930 to 32 when the old Kaiser was in charge. I disagree with you that there is the remotest comparison between what has been said by the "tory" government and what was said against the Jews in the period 1933 to 1934. If there is, then give an example comparing two pronouncements, one from then and one from now.

I think if he'd just said that he felt the government lacked compassion on the issue, he'd probably have got away with it, and nothing else would have been said. But the left now have this absurd habit of conflating things the government propose regarding immigration, with nazi Germany. Any - even lightweight - student of history knows there is no comparison, and that to do so is an intensely insulting trivialisation of the events back then, to those affected and their successors.

Ask the left - they're the ones I got the working example from.

Absolutely. Assertions are made as though they are fact and not personal opinion. I'm surprised that more people haven't been sued for defamation of character, given what they've stated about various individuals. eg: "what you say might be interpreted as racist" (correct) "you're a bigoted racist" (incorrect)

You're never going to stop individuals having opinions, and some are so strongly held that they will be expressed in a frank and forthright way. It's pointless trying to shut people up, and it will never work. I don't personally agree with a lot that Gary comes out with, politically....but, it's his view. We all have them. As a person, he is a likeable guy. I can't help thinking that much of the blame lies with the BBC with a very weak, confused and inconsistent policy.

That's two nice VIGTORIA'S you've now got Richard !!!

Thinking about it, there's probably a very easy way round all this which would have squared the circle and avoided all the subsequent drama. The BBC just issues a statement which says that "The views expressed on twitter by Mr Lineker reflect his own personal opinion and are in no way associated with the BBC, which is, and remains, an impartial organisation". Providing opinions are expressed privately on platforms other than the BBC itself, that might be the most positive and harmonious way forward.

On a similar vein how about "The Bletchley Circle", white, female......and not so stale.

It won't be Ian Wright, who, as a Lineker supporter, has ruled himself out. More likely Jermaine Jenas. Also, Gary did not go of his own accord. He was pushed. Nana Akua on GB News has said she used to work, also as a freelance journalist, for the BBC, and was told "in no uncertain terms" that she wasn't able to state personal views that breached the impartiality guidelines, having done so, and that there is rule convergence between all types of journalists, be they sports, news or anything else. Same rules apply according to Tim Davie. Nana was surprised that Gary has been given so many chances, and that "different rules seem to apply depending on who you are". That's why she left, which was the honourable thing to do.

It's been reported that Gary Lineker will no longer present match of the day until, and if, agreement has been reached on his future social media use. Don't know who will take his place. Possibly Ian Wright.

Technically Gary is freelance and therefore not bound by impartiality criteria. But the problem is that he is very closely associated with the BBC through MOTD. Consequently by saying what he has, it does make the BBC appear, once again, not impartial. Why is it so important for the BBC to be strictly impartial? It all comes down to licence payers who represent an entire spectrum of political views from far left to far right, and all points in between. ergo: it's very unreasonable to not be impartial as you are then essentially trashing the views of those who still have to pay for you. The licence fee goes towards the BBC, and on pain of criminal prosecution, each TV viewer has to pay the licence fee if they are to legally watch any other channel live. Even if they don't watch the BBC. Most people were happy to put up with this while the BBC came across as impartial, but I'm afraid they no longer do. As far as what Gary said, I personally wouldn't give a crap if he worked for anywhere else than the BBC. He's entitled to his own views and is as free as the rest of us to spout them, however ludicrous his nazi analogy may be. But as a high profile representative of the BBC, he should at least show some respect to those who have to pay his gigantic wage bill, and keep his trap shut until he leaves, apart from football. Having said all that I do think he handled that situation of a few weeks ago, where somebody set off a phone with sex noises on it during a live match, extremely well, with aplomb and humour. That was really well played.

Whilst I appreciate that a fair few contributors on here have already retired, I do believe that most people (retired or otherwise) have a view on this topic. Also, hopefully there are others who do or have work from home for an employer. Where I work, at the start of the pandemic in mid March 2020, those staff who fell into a vulnerable category, such as asthma, auto immune diseases, obesity and over age 70, were compelled to work from home. In some cases this even meant setting them up with a wifi connection. Then in February 2021 it was extended, as an offer, to those over 60, then a few weeks after that, they decided that anybody who wanted it could have it. Of course, not everybody did, and quite a few continued to work in the office, either because they didn't like the idea, or for whatever reason, it just wasn't practicable for them to work from home. So having now worked from home for just over two years, one year 100% from home, and the following year hybrid 60/40 home/office, these are my views of the pros and cons. Pros 1/ Get far far more work cleared at home than ever I would in the office. Many fewer interruptions, and able to concentrate more intensely. 2/ Absence of irritating colleagues and office politics. They become wholly irrelevant. Also, far fewer pointless time consuming meetings. 3/ 100% removal of commuting time, and for those reliant on public transport, no risk of contracting covid from fellow travellers on buses and trains. Also, for us all, no risk of contracting covid in the office. Not nearly so much of an issue now, I know, but back in early 2021, it was highly relevant. 4/ Able to log on and do work such as e learning and other bits, at any time, whereas 100% in the office you are confined to office hours only. 5/ Can get up later, dress more casually, and in Summer go straight out into the garden with a cold drink on warm sunny day, after logging off. Cons 1/ Can't just turn to someone and ask verbally for advice on a technical issue. If you e mail or MS Teams message them, as often as not you get ignored, or just a curt unhelpful response. Although I have always gone out of my way to help colleagues who've contacted me. 2/ Managers often mysteriously unavailable for hours on end - showing as red on their profiles. 3/ If you attend an MS Teams meeting (or Zoom, whatever) you have to be very careful what you say (be bland, technical and boring) as the meetings can be recorded and could be used against you. Hasn't happened where I work, but I have heard of instances. Also make sure you are fully attired. Especially important in hot weather. Don't switch your camera on until you are certain there is nothing that can embarrass you. I don't include pets in that as cats and dogs photobombing the camera, seems to go down well. 4/ If you complete your work on any given day, it's easy to get bored and literally fall asleep. That would never happen in the office. 5/ Mouse "jigglers" are available from Amazon and the like. These shake the mouse every two minutes to make it appear as though you are always on line and working (shown as green). This is doing a real number on your employer, and not a lot they can do about it. Dishonest and wrong on every level. WFH has received a very bad press in some parts of the media, but it does have some extremely good points. Although medium to long term, offices will shrink and some will be sold off, as it obviously won't be cost effective to keep them open when they're half empty. In fact that's already happening.

Just doesn't look right for a proof does it - the breasts look worn away for a start, and really nothing to distinguish even an impaired proof of this date, from a currency strike, as far as I know. I still maintain that NGC are just taking the grading applicant's word and not checking them out independently. The Noonan's missing leaf F24 description is laughable. As you say they put reverse D instead of F and didn't even bother at all with a Freeman No ! As for the 1858 large rose "small date", the date is misattributed so often.

£3,200 hammer - not a surprise as it's a superior specimen. link

Very pleased with this 1874 penny - F65 in top UNC grade with probably 90% lustre, ever so lightly toning. Just £250 as a BIN. These are obviously not desperately rare, but they don't turn up every 5 minutes, and definitely not in this grade. Looking back at other sales of similar grade, the price compares very favourably.