I am increasingly asked to pay for other people's holidays. Now why on earth would I do that? Surely you wouldn't just pay for someone else to go gallivanting off round the world would you? Well, inadvertently you probably have.
I have, of course, got nothing against raising money for charity, but I have two issues with some tit asking me to sponsor them to walk the Great Wall of China.
1) It's not a challenge, given that the Great Wall Of China is essentially a road, and you're only walking 5 miles a day - you might as well ask me to sponsor you to walk up Watford High Street.
2) The first thousand pounds in sponsorship money you raise PAYS FOR YOUR HOLIDAY. So if you raise £1500 in total, you've essentially got a free holiday and only raised £500 for charity. I would therefore question your motivation.
Last April nine of us embarked upon a week long road trip around Europe. The challenge was to buy a banger for £500, and get round 12 countries in seven days. We then felt a bit guilty about essentially going on a week long piss-up - particularly as one of our best mates had cancer.
So we decided to get sponsorship from friends and family to make it look a little more responsible and raise money for a good cause. However, every single penny of that sponsorship money went to the charity. We each ended up spending about £700 on petrol, B&Bs, food etc etc. - none of it went towards the cost of us having a good time. And I think that's how it should be.
So all I'm saying here is that if you're thinking of doing a skydive, don't expect me to pay for it.
Wednesday, 9 December 2009
Tuesday, 4 August 2009
Cheese and Pickle
Whatever happened to cheese and pickle?
If you go into any service station or a sandwich shop these days, you can't get your bog standard cheese and pickle sandwich. It's all sun-dried tomatoes, red onion, spring onion -a load of nonsense ingredients that no-one needs.
Keep it simple and bring back cheese and pickle.
If you go into any service station or a sandwich shop these days, you can't get your bog standard cheese and pickle sandwich. It's all sun-dried tomatoes, red onion, spring onion -a load of nonsense ingredients that no-one needs.
Keep it simple and bring back cheese and pickle.
Thursday, 23 July 2009
Speaka de Ingleesh?
One of the best things about going on holiday abroad is coming back. Everything's familiar, you understand all the signs, and you can communciate with everyone again - no more phrase books and sign language.
However, I have recently realised that this is not the case if you live or work in London. I had the sudden realisation the other day that hardly anyone I encounter during the day, apart from about 80% of my work colleagues, actually speaks English to any degree of comprehension.
Now, before I go on, don't take this as some racist 'they should all bugger off home' rant. It's not. I absolutely love the diversity in London, and it really is one of the key characteristics that makes it such a great city. Nor is it a rant about the change on our language - languages change all the time, and ours is no exception. It's just that it's becoming increasingly difficult to communicate with anyone in any kind of service position in central London.
From the moment I get to the station for my commute to work, the platform announcements and driver announcements are more often than not in some incomprehensible dialect of English. Ordering food at lunch is a trial, and you have to explain everything twice, and still the orders regularly come back wrong. Any restaurant, shop, or bar is almost exclusively run by non-English speakers. I popped into a newsagent the other day and asked if he had a Telegraph. "Of course, my friend," he said, and pointed me towards chewing gum.
Communicating in a foreign language is tiring - and that's effectively what we're having to do nowadays. But when each accent and dialect differs from the last, it's absolutely exhausting trying to keep up.
On a similar note, A Bangladeshi man who runs a small Post Office recently hit the headlines for insisting that all his customers communicate in English - despite it not being his first language, or theirs. When asked why he was insisting on this, he simply replied "Because we are living in England and the common language is English". If only it was that simple.
However, I have recently realised that this is not the case if you live or work in London. I had the sudden realisation the other day that hardly anyone I encounter during the day, apart from about 80% of my work colleagues, actually speaks English to any degree of comprehension.
Now, before I go on, don't take this as some racist 'they should all bugger off home' rant. It's not. I absolutely love the diversity in London, and it really is one of the key characteristics that makes it such a great city. Nor is it a rant about the change on our language - languages change all the time, and ours is no exception. It's just that it's becoming increasingly difficult to communicate with anyone in any kind of service position in central London.
From the moment I get to the station for my commute to work, the platform announcements and driver announcements are more often than not in some incomprehensible dialect of English. Ordering food at lunch is a trial, and you have to explain everything twice, and still the orders regularly come back wrong. Any restaurant, shop, or bar is almost exclusively run by non-English speakers. I popped into a newsagent the other day and asked if he had a Telegraph. "Of course, my friend," he said, and pointed me towards chewing gum.
Communicating in a foreign language is tiring - and that's effectively what we're having to do nowadays. But when each accent and dialect differs from the last, it's absolutely exhausting trying to keep up.
On a similar note, A Bangladeshi man who runs a small Post Office recently hit the headlines for insisting that all his customers communicate in English - despite it not being his first language, or theirs. When asked why he was insisting on this, he simply replied "Because we are living in England and the common language is English". If only it was that simple.
Half and Half
When talking about nationality, how would you describe yourself? English, Scottish, British, half-Irish? I describe myself as English, and I'm just coming round to the idea that the rest of the world doesn't acknowledge the individual countries in Britain, and therefore my nationality is actually British - to the point where the Americans talk about a 'British accent'. What a joke.
But I'm not here to discuss the differences between Great Britain, the United Kingdom, the British Isles, or whether Wales is actually a country or not (many refer to it as a region or a principality). No, I'm here to discuss nationality itself.
So back to my original question - I used to work with a girl who described herself as Italian. She was born in England, educated in England, and still lives and works in England. Her primary language is English and she betrays no trace of her Italian parentage. So I asked what makes her Italian? The answer, it seems is just down to choice. She is undeniably British in every way, but chooses to say she's Italian as it gives her a different sense of identity. Clearly she's not Italian, but if she feels Italian, then who am I to comment?
What I did think was particularly strange though was that she said her kids would be Italian. Errr...no. I'm sorry, but when you are born in a particular country, and both your parents were born in that country, there is absolutely no way you can claim nationality from another country altogether. By all means say you are of Italian descent, but even this has to stop somewhere. I, for instance, don't go around saying I am of Saxon descent, or go on about by Norman ancestors- but I'm sure somewhere up the line I could trace back to them.
My grandmother was born in Belgium, but think it's a bit of a stretch to say I am a quarter Belgian. Even more of a stretch for the Americans of New York to say they are full-blooded Irish. It's just a desperate attempt to have an identity different to your own - it's like when you were young and used to dress up as Superman. You are not Superman. Or Italian.
But I'm not here to discuss the differences between Great Britain, the United Kingdom, the British Isles, or whether Wales is actually a country or not (many refer to it as a region or a principality). No, I'm here to discuss nationality itself.
So back to my original question - I used to work with a girl who described herself as Italian. She was born in England, educated in England, and still lives and works in England. Her primary language is English and she betrays no trace of her Italian parentage. So I asked what makes her Italian? The answer, it seems is just down to choice. She is undeniably British in every way, but chooses to say she's Italian as it gives her a different sense of identity. Clearly she's not Italian, but if she feels Italian, then who am I to comment?
What I did think was particularly strange though was that she said her kids would be Italian. Errr...no. I'm sorry, but when you are born in a particular country, and both your parents were born in that country, there is absolutely no way you can claim nationality from another country altogether. By all means say you are of Italian descent, but even this has to stop somewhere. I, for instance, don't go around saying I am of Saxon descent, or go on about by Norman ancestors- but I'm sure somewhere up the line I could trace back to them.
My grandmother was born in Belgium, but think it's a bit of a stretch to say I am a quarter Belgian. Even more of a stretch for the Americans of New York to say they are full-blooded Irish. It's just a desperate attempt to have an identity different to your own - it's like when you were young and used to dress up as Superman. You are not Superman. Or Italian.
Feelin' Good
Simon Cowell recently did something charitable. He bought a dying girl a pony or something - I can't remember the details. What I do remember is what he is quoted as saying after the event: "I never thought being generous could feel so good". But isn't that the fundamental reason why anyone displays charitable behaviour?
Now, you may have gathered that I am a cynical bugger, and this is probably one of the most cynical theories there is. I once read in New Scientist that the only truly altruistic behaviour displayed by animals is the protection of their young - everything else is done for some sort of gain, whether emotional, social or tangible. And we are animals after all.
Take a simple example of helping an old lady across the road. Nothing to gain from that right? Just a good deed with no gain whatsoever. OK, well imagine if you didn't help the old lady across the road - you might experience all sorts of negative emotions such as guilt. I know I would. Particularly if she got mown down by the number 32 bus. So, the gain you are getting from helping someone is that you are feeling good about yourself. It's not tangible, but it's significant.
Giving a little money to charity each month gives you absolutely no return whatsoever. No thank you, no acknowledgement even. So why do we do it? Not because 'it's the right thing to do', or because 'there are those less fortunate than ourselves'. these aren't reasons - they are facts. We do it because it absolves us of just a little bit of the guilt that comes from being in a better position than someone else, and therefore means we can sleep a little better at night.
It's all part of the social order - we are social animals and society dictates certain codes of practice. Being 'good' comes with social rewards and helps us fit in more with those around us - there is a distinct advantage in this in that we don't end up alone in a bedsit watching Friends on repeat.
Yes, call me cynical - but try and think of one example where you have done something out of the goodness of your heart without feeling good about it, without it being what society 'expects' you to do and without it lessening the burden of guilt that would come from not doing it.
Now, you may have gathered that I am a cynical bugger, and this is probably one of the most cynical theories there is. I once read in New Scientist that the only truly altruistic behaviour displayed by animals is the protection of their young - everything else is done for some sort of gain, whether emotional, social or tangible. And we are animals after all.
Take a simple example of helping an old lady across the road. Nothing to gain from that right? Just a good deed with no gain whatsoever. OK, well imagine if you didn't help the old lady across the road - you might experience all sorts of negative emotions such as guilt. I know I would. Particularly if she got mown down by the number 32 bus. So, the gain you are getting from helping someone is that you are feeling good about yourself. It's not tangible, but it's significant.
Giving a little money to charity each month gives you absolutely no return whatsoever. No thank you, no acknowledgement even. So why do we do it? Not because 'it's the right thing to do', or because 'there are those less fortunate than ourselves'. these aren't reasons - they are facts. We do it because it absolves us of just a little bit of the guilt that comes from being in a better position than someone else, and therefore means we can sleep a little better at night.
It's all part of the social order - we are social animals and society dictates certain codes of practice. Being 'good' comes with social rewards and helps us fit in more with those around us - there is a distinct advantage in this in that we don't end up alone in a bedsit watching Friends on repeat.
Yes, call me cynical - but try and think of one example where you have done something out of the goodness of your heart without feeling good about it, without it being what society 'expects' you to do and without it lessening the burden of guilt that would come from not doing it.
Wednesday, 22 July 2009
Caring Corporations
Since when has a corporation, or even a small company, been capable of 'caring'? I can make a connection with charities and caring for the people they support, but not a large, profit-making company. A company is an entity incapable of emotion or compassion - only individuals within that company can 'care' about causes. The cynical side of me, therefore, finds it hard to believe their motivation behind certain 'green' initiatives.
Of particular note are hotel chains who 'care for the environment' so much, that they'd like us to re-use our bedsheets and bath towels for our entire stay, in order that we save the planet. And this would have no correlation with saving them thousands of pounds in laundry bills? Of course not.
Same with the supermarkets - we'll charge you 5p for a carrier bag because it will put you off using them and therefore save the three-toed Columbian tree frog from extinction. Hmm - nothing to do with making an absolute fortune on plastic bag sales then?
I don't mind saving the environment - I'm all for it - but not if someone else is making a massive profit from my efforts.
Of particular note are hotel chains who 'care for the environment' so much, that they'd like us to re-use our bedsheets and bath towels for our entire stay, in order that we save the planet. And this would have no correlation with saving them thousands of pounds in laundry bills? Of course not.
Same with the supermarkets - we'll charge you 5p for a carrier bag because it will put you off using them and therefore save the three-toed Columbian tree frog from extinction. Hmm - nothing to do with making an absolute fortune on plastic bag sales then?
I don't mind saving the environment - I'm all for it - but not if someone else is making a massive profit from my efforts.
Sugar Puffs
I have a very acute sense of smell, and sitting at my desk at work the other day, I mentioned to a colleague that I could smell sugar puffs. She replied that the smell of sugar puffs always reminds her of wee. Funny that, because the smell of wee always reminds me of sugar puffs.
A Nice Juicy Pear
Pears are ripe for exactly one hour. One minute before, and they are rock hard and it's like chewing on a raw potato. One minute after, and you are faced with a blackened mush.
Tuesday, 30 June 2009
Profound
I was interviewing a chap the other day for a job in my team. I had seven interviews to do back to back, and he was something like number six - so by this time I was getting a bit bored. Generally I like to keep interviews fairly informal, but you do end up asking the old stock questions. Having said that, instead of "What are your weaknesses?", I'd prefer to say "What would your friends say about you?" or something along those lines.
Anyway, my day was brightened up by this one guy when I saw him discover a revelation about himself right in front of my very eyes. When asked what he could improve on, he replied that he thought he could do with being a little more self-aware. I told him that having just said that, he was already on the right track. I had to explain what I meant (like an addict admitting they are an addict), and I could see the enlightement spread across his face.
Not that it matters - he was a bit of a twat and didn't get the job.
Anyway, my day was brightened up by this one guy when I saw him discover a revelation about himself right in front of my very eyes. When asked what he could improve on, he replied that he thought he could do with being a little more self-aware. I told him that having just said that, he was already on the right track. I had to explain what I meant (like an addict admitting they are an addict), and I could see the enlightement spread across his face.
Not that it matters - he was a bit of a twat and didn't get the job.
Friday, 26 June 2009
In the lap of the Gods
Driving standards around the world vary hugely. As frustrated as you might be with old grannies driving at 20mph or being stuck behind some muppet in the middle lane of the M1, it's nothing compared to the shenanigans they get up to around the world.
In Vietnam, where motorbikes are the vehicle of choice, they approach intersections without touching the brakes, and effortlessly cross three other paths of traffic without so much of a prang - for the most part anyway. It's like watching the Red Devil Motorcyle display team - nothing short of genius.
In Bolivia, you drive like it's a computer game. Foot to the floor, no attention to lights or pedestrians, and a small bump here and there in a traffic jam goes completely unnoticed.
Indians are probably the most renowned bad drivers in the world. They can turn a two lane carriageway into four, they overtake on the outside of a bend with a cliff edge centimetres away, and they have no regard for pedestrians or 'sacred' cows. The locals say it's more important to have a horn than brakes.
As different as they are, they all have one thing in common - an unshakeable belief in fate. In the Middle East, they say 'Inshallah', or God Willing. When I try to reconcile this I find myself torn. On one hand it seems sheer madness to literally gamble your life and put your foot to the floor, based on some belief in a pre-ordained path set out for you by a higher being.
On the other hand, it seems quite sensible. Why worry? Just do your thing, and if you get smashed to bits, then so be it. It could happen at anytime anyway....
In Vietnam, where motorbikes are the vehicle of choice, they approach intersections without touching the brakes, and effortlessly cross three other paths of traffic without so much of a prang - for the most part anyway. It's like watching the Red Devil Motorcyle display team - nothing short of genius.
In Bolivia, you drive like it's a computer game. Foot to the floor, no attention to lights or pedestrians, and a small bump here and there in a traffic jam goes completely unnoticed.
Indians are probably the most renowned bad drivers in the world. They can turn a two lane carriageway into four, they overtake on the outside of a bend with a cliff edge centimetres away, and they have no regard for pedestrians or 'sacred' cows. The locals say it's more important to have a horn than brakes.
As different as they are, they all have one thing in common - an unshakeable belief in fate. In the Middle East, they say 'Inshallah', or God Willing. When I try to reconcile this I find myself torn. On one hand it seems sheer madness to literally gamble your life and put your foot to the floor, based on some belief in a pre-ordained path set out for you by a higher being.
On the other hand, it seems quite sensible. Why worry? Just do your thing, and if you get smashed to bits, then so be it. It could happen at anytime anyway....
Tuesday, 23 June 2009
Billy Crap-iott
I like Grease - it's got some great songs, it's a bit cheesy, and it's an all round classic. What I would have though of it when it first came out, I honestly can't say. But I've grown up with it and it seems natural that people are singing songs all the time.
What I can't stand is the contrived song-writing of today's West End musicals. Something like 85% of all shows currently running in the West End are musicals. Why? What happened to a good old fashioned play with real acting? Why all the cheesy smiles, jazz hands and dull, formulaic choreography.
I went to see Billy Elliott a couple of years ago. I may be traumatised by the experience, so forgive me if I am remembering this incorrectly, but I'm sure there's a song in there about coal mining. For the love of god why? Where does it stop - will we soon have a song about walking up the stairs, doing the washing up, or taking a shit? Actually, the last one would be quite entertaining thinking about it.
What I can't stand is the contrived song-writing of today's West End musicals. Something like 85% of all shows currently running in the West End are musicals. Why? What happened to a good old fashioned play with real acting? Why all the cheesy smiles, jazz hands and dull, formulaic choreography.
I went to see Billy Elliott a couple of years ago. I may be traumatised by the experience, so forgive me if I am remembering this incorrectly, but I'm sure there's a song in there about coal mining. For the love of god why? Where does it stop - will we soon have a song about walking up the stairs, doing the washing up, or taking a shit? Actually, the last one would be quite entertaining thinking about it.
Topics for debate
Speaking of debating - a great one to throw in the pot is music. We may not realise it, but we are incerdibly attached to our choice of music - it holds memories of childhood, teenage years, and almost every significant event in our lives. No wonder you can cause a few sparks with a couple of carefully selected comments thrown into conversation. Try these for starters:
1) U2 are twats, and really not that talented. Discuss.
If you say this to any Irishman, it is honestly the worst possible insult you can bestow upon them. I'm not kidding - U2 are like royalty over there. So if I'm going to offend a whole nation, let me take a minute to justify myself.
U2 have had some great hits - this is undeniable. But consider the amount of time it takes them to write an album, the amount of money behind them, and the producers they work with. Give this same resource to an 'average' band and see the results. Early TV appearances highlighted their amateur musicianship and, despite giving loads of mony to charity, Bono is undeniably a ball-sack.
2) The Beatles were in the right place at the right time. Discuss.
Again, undeniably, The Beatles have written some of the most iconic songs in history - so one could not possibly say they weren't a great band - at the time. The question is this - would the same people have stood out in today's competitive market? There's only a finite amount of songs that can be written - did they just stumble across the melodies before anyone else, or are they truly brilliant? If you're into music, you can pick up a guitar and play any three chords in a row - guaranteed it's one of The Beatles songs, so not particularly tricky if you ask me. And the lyrics - I love you, you love me , she loves you etc etc. Not the work of great poets - just your bog standard 60s tripe. Oh, and Seargant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band is absolute shite.
3) Abba's music is genuis and blokes shouldn't be ashamed to listen to it. Discuss.
Guys - listen to ABBA, they are amazing. Just don't get caught.
4) S-Club 7 had some great hits. Discuss.
See 3)
1) U2 are twats, and really not that talented. Discuss.
If you say this to any Irishman, it is honestly the worst possible insult you can bestow upon them. I'm not kidding - U2 are like royalty over there. So if I'm going to offend a whole nation, let me take a minute to justify myself.
U2 have had some great hits - this is undeniable. But consider the amount of time it takes them to write an album, the amount of money behind them, and the producers they work with. Give this same resource to an 'average' band and see the results. Early TV appearances highlighted their amateur musicianship and, despite giving loads of mony to charity, Bono is undeniably a ball-sack.
2) The Beatles were in the right place at the right time. Discuss.
Again, undeniably, The Beatles have written some of the most iconic songs in history - so one could not possibly say they weren't a great band - at the time. The question is this - would the same people have stood out in today's competitive market? There's only a finite amount of songs that can be written - did they just stumble across the melodies before anyone else, or are they truly brilliant? If you're into music, you can pick up a guitar and play any three chords in a row - guaranteed it's one of The Beatles songs, so not particularly tricky if you ask me. And the lyrics - I love you, you love me , she loves you etc etc. Not the work of great poets - just your bog standard 60s tripe. Oh, and Seargant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band is absolute shite.
3) Abba's music is genuis and blokes shouldn't be ashamed to listen to it. Discuss.
Guys - listen to ABBA, they are amazing. Just don't get caught.
4) S-Club 7 had some great hits. Discuss.
See 3)
Argumental
I love a good debate, and never more than when the person I'm debating with is enjoying it too.
One of my favourite topics is "If you could combine two animals into one 'super animal' to take over the world, what would your 'super animal' be?" My stock answer is the "wasp-shark"; agressive, angry, mobile in the water, air and on land (to a degree). I'll happily challenge anyone to come up with a more deadly combination - and will even more happily debate the flaws in their assertions. This is fun debate.
What riles me is when an outsider from said debate gets 'uncomfortable', and starts trying to 'calm people down', as if we're on the verge of pulling out pistols or having a full-on fist-fight. There's one thing that gets my back up like nothing else - and that's someone telling me to calm down when I'm already perfectly calm.
So why do people get uncomfortable in the presence of two people having an animated debate? Without being allowed to debate, should we just accept everything another person says? Of course not - we are born to challenge, and this makes us mentally stronger and ultimately better equipped to challenge ourselves.
Please don't confuse healthy debate with shouty argument - they are two entirely different concepts.
One of my favourite topics is "If you could combine two animals into one 'super animal' to take over the world, what would your 'super animal' be?" My stock answer is the "wasp-shark"; agressive, angry, mobile in the water, air and on land (to a degree). I'll happily challenge anyone to come up with a more deadly combination - and will even more happily debate the flaws in their assertions. This is fun debate.
What riles me is when an outsider from said debate gets 'uncomfortable', and starts trying to 'calm people down', as if we're on the verge of pulling out pistols or having a full-on fist-fight. There's one thing that gets my back up like nothing else - and that's someone telling me to calm down when I'm already perfectly calm.
So why do people get uncomfortable in the presence of two people having an animated debate? Without being allowed to debate, should we just accept everything another person says? Of course not - we are born to challenge, and this makes us mentally stronger and ultimately better equipped to challenge ourselves.
Please don't confuse healthy debate with shouty argument - they are two entirely different concepts.
Tuesday, 6 January 2009
What would you recommend?
When I was younger there was the 'local' video shop. Before the days of Blockbuster, these shops were little gems - they seemed to have one copy of every film you'd ever want to see. If the film was out, try again the next night. Nowadays Blockbuster has 20 copies of about 20 films, so your choice is somewhat limited.
One thing, however, has remained the same across all video/dvd rental establishments. You should NEVER ask the guy behind the counter what he thinks of a certain film. Why do I trust his opinion? He is nothing like me, and by virtue of his occupation if nothing else, he has completely different tastes to almost everyone on Planet Normal. What he thinks is great is almost always a bucket of shite. He is twenty years younger than me.
Nevertheless, if I am undecided about which of two titles I should rent, I will always defer to him for an opinion. He is always wrong and I am always disappointed, but I just can't help myself.
Although it was worth it once when I quizzed him about Deja Vu and he asked if I'd seen it already. Comedy gold - at least the first time you hear it anyway.
One thing, however, has remained the same across all video/dvd rental establishments. You should NEVER ask the guy behind the counter what he thinks of a certain film. Why do I trust his opinion? He is nothing like me, and by virtue of his occupation if nothing else, he has completely different tastes to almost everyone on Planet Normal. What he thinks is great is almost always a bucket of shite. He is twenty years younger than me.
Nevertheless, if I am undecided about which of two titles I should rent, I will always defer to him for an opinion. He is always wrong and I am always disappointed, but I just can't help myself.
Although it was worth it once when I quizzed him about Deja Vu and he asked if I'd seen it already. Comedy gold - at least the first time you hear it anyway.
How Are You?
Ah, the period after Christmas/New Year. Many of us are back in the office/workplace now, and not looking forward to another year of drudgery. For me in particular, this time of year represents one of my least favourite formalities - smalltalk.
"Morning"
"Morning"
"How are you?"
"Good thanks. You?"
"Yeah, good. Good Christmas?"
"Yeah, good thanks. What about you?"
"Good....yeah.. good.
"Good"
To be honest, I don't really care. Whether you were round your parents or you parents-in-law is of zero importance to me, and what you ate in the way of Christmas dinner even less so.
Can we not just assume that we've all had a good weekend/Christmas/New Year/holiday/Easter etc unless we hear otherwise? I reckon I could claim back around half an hour of my life every day.
"Morning"
"Morning"
"How are you?"
"Good thanks. You?"
"Yeah, good. Good Christmas?"
"Yeah, good thanks. What about you?"
"Good....yeah.. good.
"Good"
To be honest, I don't really care. Whether you were round your parents or you parents-in-law is of zero importance to me, and what you ate in the way of Christmas dinner even less so.
Can we not just assume that we've all had a good weekend/Christmas/New Year/holiday/Easter etc unless we hear otherwise? I reckon I could claim back around half an hour of my life every day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
