Comedic "things you would ban": minor things that irritate you

[Sun Chariot]

People blocking off the ‘reduced to clear’ section of supermarkets with their trolley, presumably to prevent anyone else getting to ‘their’ bargains

Exactly that! Often self-entitled sorts. In my town, they act like a baying flash mob - and quite a few of them look as if they'd benefit from a few days  away from the food shelves.

 

[Calthrop]

What's the French for: "they come out of a hen's bum"? (Sorry -- couldn't resist.) -- Response to @Gloster 's post -- "ninja'd".

 

[Brent Goose]

Exactly that! Often self-entitled sorts. In my town, they act like a baying flash mob - and quite a few of them look as if they'd benefit from a few days  away from the food shelves.

The needs for 10p doughnuts at Gosport Asda almost ended in a fight the other week.

Perhaps not unexpected given this story from a while back

https://metro.co.uk/2014/07/15/mayo...banned-from-all-of-the-towns-36-pubs-4799645/

 

[Sun Chariot]

The needs for 10p doughnuts at Gosport Asda almost ended in a fight the other week.

If it's any consolidation, Havant Asda is on par with that...

 

[daveo]

"class" restaurants (in their own eyes at least) serving food or logs of wood, roof slates or still in a pan. What do they think plates were invented for????

 

[Sun Chariot]

Currants.
Raisins and sultanas, I will allow.

Having had all three shrivelled grape types forced upon my 1970s childhood, I wish many ills upon the despised tough-chewy currant. Hateful thing.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

The BBC deliberately mispronouncing the name of the planet Uranus as "Urinous"on news stories such as the current one about being able to see seven planets in the night sky.

Seven planets align in UK skies this week for last time until 2040

The best chance to see as many as possible will be after sunset on Wednesday and Thursday.

www.bbc.com

Yes, I know it sounds a bit rude but the correct pronunciation of Uranus does sound a bit like "Your anus". Grow up, BBC!

 

[dangie]

The BBC deliberately mispronouncing the name of the planet Uranus as "Urinous"on news stories such as the current one about being able to see seven planets in the night sky.

Seven planets align in UK skies this week for last time until 2040

The best chance to see as many as possible will be after sunset on Wednesday and Thursday.

www.bbc.com

Yes, I know it sounds a bit rude but the correct pronunciation of Uranus does sound a bit like "Your anus". Grow up, BBC!

The BBC are making this out to be a fantastic once in a generation spectacle we should all be looking out for, while in reality the chances of seeing it are somewhere between none and nil.

 

[52290]

The BBC deliberately mispronouncing the name of the planet Uranus as "Urinous"on news stories such as the current one about being able to see seven planets in the night sky.

Seven planets align in UK skies this week for last time until 2040

The best chance to see as many as possible will be after sunset on Wednesday and Thursday.

www.bbc.com

Yes, I know it sounds a bit rude but the correct pronunciation of Uranus does sound a bit like "Your anus". Grow up, BBC!

I think when they play the Planets suite by Holst on radio 3 they still use the bottom line!

 

[athro]

The BBC deliberately mispronouncing the name of the planet Uranus as "Urinous"on news stories such as the current one about being able to see seven planets in the night sky.

Seven planets align in UK skies this week for last time until 2040

The best chance to see as many as possible will be after sunset on Wednesday and Thursday.

www.bbc.com

Yes, I know it sounds a bit rude but the correct pronunciation of Uranus does sound a bit like "Your anus". Grow up, BBC!

I think the BBC are correct.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

I think the BBC are correct.

View attachment 175405

Which brings to mind a classic Spitting Image sketch from the 1980s....

[VIDEO]

 

[Calthrop]

I tend to get very annoyed by ubiquitous cheapjack-journalistic lazy-and-easy, grossly over-used, metaphors; enthusiastically adopted in turn, by legions of ordinary folk commenting on issues of the day. One of such is on my mind at present: the use of which I would definitely ban -- is the adjective "leafy" -- "shorthand" for, at least relatively affluent and well-behaved residential areas. Admittedly, most often used -- generally, in a context of concern and compassion -- as a contrast to deprived and crime-ridden, usually urban, hell-holes with their unfortunate denizens. One can see where the idea comes from: "good" neighbourhoods are likely to be better-endowed with trees -- a characteristic of which is, as we know, their production of leaves -- than "bad" ones. It's just that this verbal "conceit" has been, for a good many years now, so grossly over-used -- almost as much so, as the "-gate" suffix (child of Watergate) for all and any instances of political or administrative skulduggery -- that I've come to find it nauseating; and to think perversely, "not really sense-making -- even the nastiest ghettoes will contain the odd tree or two". I've not so much of a problem with the initial idea -- just, with its becoming a seemingly everlasting and all-pervading cliche. Commenters: I would instruct you, on pain of severe punishment, to scrap this one; and think up something new and alternative, in which to couch your opinions on this issue. Please -- retire "leafy" to a neutral role, just referring to somewhere with lots of trees / leaves !

 

[Gloster]

People who think that you have considerately pulled something forward from the back of a supermarket shelf or brought it down from the top for them, even though you were already doing so before they came round the corner. Particularly if they then take it and walk off, even if they say ‘Thank you’. Hoicked something out of from the back with the handle of my stick (held by the bottom), turned my stick around so I could put it down and put the packet in my basket, but before I could reach up a woman grabs the packet, says ‘Thanks’, and walks off.

 

[Calthrop]

People who think that you have considerately pulled something forward from the back of a supermarket shelf or brought it down from the top for them, even though you were already doing so before they came round the corner. Particularly if they then take it and walk off, even if they say ‘Thank you’. Hoicked something out of from the back with the handle of my stick (held by the bottom), turned my stick around so I could put it down and put the packet in my basket, but before I could reach up a woman grabs the packet, says ‘Thanks’, and walks off.

Indeed, somewhat exasperating: I suppose -- trying to be charitable -- that it's a genuine mistake on the person's part, rather than their practicing deliberate and cynical exploitation vis-a-vis one. And in a situation of the item's being the last one on the shelf... I'd have felt tempted to proceed to making an alternative use of the stick !

 

[Gloster]

Not really comedic, but something that does genuinely irritate me: the all too frequent misspelling of Attlee with only one ‘t’. He was one of our greatest prime ministers and his government probably produced more changes to society than any other other, so pay him due respect. Spurred by The Guardian (of all papers) getting it wrong, not for the first time.

 

[Calthrop]

Not really comedic, but something that does genuinely irritate me: the all too frequent misspelling of Attlee with only one ‘t’. He was one of our greatest prime ministers and his government probably produced more changes to society than any other other, so pay him due respect. Spurred by The Guardian (of all papers) getting it wrong, not for the first time.

"Of all papers" -- have they not been notorious for decades past, for frequent mis-spellings of various kinds? -- nicknamed accordingly, the "Grauniad".

 

[Gloster]

"Of all papers" -- have they not been notorious for decades past, for frequent mis-spellings of various kinds? -- nicknamed accordingly, the "Grauniad".

Indeed they are known by many by that name: I would usually called them that as well, but such was my outrage… I was meaning that The Guardian is a left-leaning paper and so should get the name of Labour’s greatest leader right.

 

[Calthrop]

I tend to think, "sloppy is sloppy -- allegiances regardless".

 

[dangie]

People walking along roads with no footpaths who don’t know which side of the road they are supposed to walk on.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

People walking along roads with no footpaths who don’t know which side of the road they are supposed to walk on.

Which, for the avoidance of doubt, is which side?

 

[jfollows]

Which, for the avoidance of doubt, is which side?

Presumably into the oncoming traffic, usually meaning the right hand side.
https://www.ramblers.org.uk/go-walking-hub/highway-code-walkers says

Rules for pedestrians when there is no pavement​

If you are in a small group, keep to the right-hand side of the road so you can see oncoming traffic. Keep close to the side of the road and be prepared to walk in single file. If you come across a sharp right-hand bend it may be safer to cross to the left-hand side of the road and cross back after the bend.

If you are in a large group keep to the left. There should be a look-out at the front and back of the group wearing fluorescent clothes in daylight and reflective clothes in the dark. At night, the front look-out should have a white light and the rear look-out a red light. People on the outside of large groups should also carry lights and wear reflective clothing.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/rules-for-pedestrians-1-to-35 says

Rule 2​

If there is no pavement, keep to the right-hand side of the road so that you can see oncoming traffic. You should take extra care and

• be prepared to walk in single file, especially on narrow roads or in poor light
• keep close to the side of the road.

It may be safer to cross the road well before a sharp right-hand bend so that oncoming traffic has a better chance of seeing you. Cross back after the bend.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Presumably into the oncoming traffic, usually meaning the right hand side.

That's the thing. The Highway Code (2022 version?) does indicate, on a sharp right-hand bend, that it may be better (for a pedestrian or pedestrians) to cross the road, well before the bend, so that oncoming traffic has a better chance of seeing you. Before then crossing back again to the right-hand side of the road afterwards.

 

[Richard Scott]

That's the thing. The Highway Code (2022 version?) does indicate, on a sharp right-hand bend, that it may be better (for a pedestrian or pedestrians) to cross the road, well before the bend, so that oncoming traffic has a better chance of seeing you. Before then crossing back again to the right-hand side of the road afterwards.

But that's a very rare occurance, on all roads around me with no footpaths this doesn't apply. Was driving down one last week and a jogger was on left hand side, it's very disconcerting, especially if they have headphones in, as you have no idea if they know you're there or not.

 

[dgl]

I'll always walk on the side that I believe gives the best view to any driver.

 

[AM9]

Presumably into the oncoming traffic, usually meaning the right hand side.
https://www.ramblers.org.uk/go-walking-hub/highway-code-walkers says

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/rules-for-pedestrians-1-to-35 says

Almost as important is keeping left on the pavement of a two-way carriageway when passing pedestrians walking the other way and the pavement width is narrow. That way, those that are facing the oncoming traffic are able to keep clear of it (or wait for it to pass). Obviously make the appropriate change when walking on the offside of a one-way road. It's nothing to do with good manners/chivalry etc., it's actually the only safe way to avoid being struck by a vehicle that you haven't seen coming whilst on what should be a pedestrain only path.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Almost as important is keeping left on the pavement of a two-way carriageway when passing pedestrians walking the other way and the pavement width is narrow. That way, those that are facing the oncoming traffic are able to keep clear of it (or wait for it to pass).

Unbelievably, on occasion while I have been doing exactly that even on a particularly wide pavement, with seven feet of clear space on my right, some oncoming clot will step out into the ( busy! ) road, back to the traffic, to pass me even though I'm almost on the kerb and I've left a million miles of clear space to my right for him or her...

Our species is doomed, I tell ye...

 

[styles]

But that's a very rare occurance, on all roads around me with no footpaths this doesn't apply. Was driving down one last week and a jogger was on left hand side, it's very disconcerting, especially if they have headphones in, as you have no idea if they know you're there or not.

Round our way (West Fife) it is very common.

Agreed though that walking down a carriageway, often national speed limit, with headphones in is dangerous. Similarly, I cycle a lot and wouldn't cycle such roads with earphones in. The compromise I sometimes make is, if I need directions, I have one (usually left) ear bud in.

When I was commuting in London, I'd often cycle with both ear buds in, but in all honesty I was hyper aware of my surroundings.

 

[BingMan]

People walking along roads with no footpaths who don’t know which side of the road they are supposed to walk on.

Around here those people walk in the middle of the road,
And look extremely surprised when a car or bicycle turns up.

I am surprised just how much faith most pedestrians have in motorists ability to avoid them

 

[dangie]

Things that are just not thought out.

For example. Currently sitting in hospital waiting room. Wife having a CT Scan.

There is a television in the waiting room. Nothing wrong with that. However, all the chairs in the waiting room are facing forward towards the reception desk. The television is mounted on the rear wall behind all the chairs. You can hear it, but you sure as hell can't see it.

Whoever decides these things?

 

[py_megapixel]

Things that are just not thought out.

For example. Currently sitting in hospital waiting room. Wife having a CT Scan.

There is a television in the waiting room. Nothing wrong with that. However, all the chairs in the waiting room are facing forward towards the reception desk. The television is mounted on the rear wall behind all the chairs. You can hear it, but you sure as hell can't see it.

Whoever decides these things?

Perhaps it's there so the receptionists can watch it?