Mahone

Welcome! I spent 28 years in England 1.5 months ago. I like it there. Well according to the NFL, it's in Spain: http://metro.co.uk/2014/10/22/nfl-team-atlanta-falcons-tries-to-show-fans-where-london-is-makes-hilariously-bad-infographic-fail-4916743

Like a lot of questions on this thread, the answers can be fairly complex when you look at it in more depth. But I believe much of the money donated in good faith was simply wasted. People are often happy to donate some excess wealth, but less often do we see people donating their time. Without the latter, the former is simply wasted. Just as an example from personal experience: I've spent a reasonable amount of time in Western Africa, along with several members of my family. One day we visited a local hospital while helping some of the locals, and came across an expensive X-Ray machine in an empty room there, still sitting in its box, covered in dust. The hospital did not have any operating X-Ray machines, so we queried why it was sitting there serving no purpose. It turned out that a hospital in the states had donated the machine to charity, and it ended in this Western African hospital. But they had no idea how to set it up, or use it. No-one had ever showed them. The charity that gave it to them clearly didn't spend the time following up what had happened to it, so it just sat there for years, wasted. Another problem that I realized through personal experience is the mindset of the very people we're trying to help. Many of them had a 'live for today' attitude, rarely considering the distant future. My grandmother made a small fortune for herself in the UK, so attempted to set up a company in West Africa, aimed at helping provide jobs and otherwise donating to the locals. After several years she gave up because of a series of issues, such as the local company partners she created stealing funds that she had provided and ran off with them, only to spend the lot on food and run out again within weeks. Also, investments that she made on their behalf, such as purchasing a car that could be used to make money in the long term, were simply sold for food, again finding themselves with nothing in a few weeks time. The locals are also very naively generous - they share everything they have with their neighbours, all of whom are always in immediate need, but only to the ultimate detriment of them all. None of them allow themselves to make investments in their future, which would ultimately be to the greater good of their communities.

Unfortunately also pictures that don't really do pro gun ownership supporters any favours, especially the second, which just demonstrates irresponsibility on the part of the sign owner. Such traits and gun ownership do not go well together. I have recently moved from a country that doesn't allow general gun ownership to one that does, and my opinion on the matter is mixed. I do enjoy listening to the reasoning of both sides, but there are also an awful lot of silly arguments and comments being made from both sides which just ruin it for everyone.

Yup. In my case, I was the child that was banned and hidden from technology for a period of time, because my parents, neither of whom to this day really know how to use a computer, were fearful of the harmful effects it would have on me - I wasn't allowed to use any kind of computer at home. Despite their very best of intentions, it was a naive decision. I think that lasted about a year when I was 14, until they gave in as a result of my protests. Even then I knew I wanted to work in system administration, and not being allowed to go near the very subject of the career I wanted was damaging at best and would have been a lot worse had it continued. Shunning technology entirely for any age is rarely a good decision, IMO.

Just a quick update. Samsung attempted to charge $160 plus tax and other charges for the repair under the category of "abuse". After a bit of correspondence, they eventually said that they had "examined the device very closely", and will now repair it free of charge. Finally! Thanks all.

Edit: answered above

I work in system and network administration. It's something I have studied for a number of years, have worked hard to get to where I currently am and is how I earn my living. I was called as the ward technical specialist in my previous ward, so essentially I was providing my expertise FoC. I didn't view it differently to any other calling.

Although they did initially argue that it was purchased from a different store, we got passed that eventually. There is no chance I'm driving that far for a broken phone that I believe was faulty, and I think they realized that. Besides, AT&Ts website doesn't mention returning it to the same store it was purchased from. At that point, the argument turned to whether or not a broken screen is covered under warranty. Understandably, it's not usually. A broken screen often indicates the device has been dropped, or mishandled. In my case, I'd had it less than 12 hours and it had barely been touched. It spent most of that 12 hours in a box on a secure shelf. So I believe that I'm being reasonable in believing that a fault on the device itself caused the screen to crack. Maybe the screen hadn't been fitted properly, and therefore standard pressure that it should be designed to cope with caused the crack. Their terms and conditions don't take this into account. Not covering such an issue under warranty would be highly unfair, in my opinion, as by definition it would be defective. Either way, the phone is currently with Samsung. I'm hoping to hear back from them soon.

It is their receipt though. I bought it from AT&T, I returned it to AT&T. It's the same company, why does it matter which particular AT&T store I return it to? As for why - simply because it was impractical. I bought it in a store 350 miles away. I'm not driving all that way across Florida just to return a faulty device.

I took in back to an AT&T store, and managed to wade through a series of attempts to get rid of us (manager isn't in so we can't deal with this, this isn't the exact store you purchased it from so you need to go back to that specific AT&T store etc.) before they actually took a look at the device. They then tried to argue that they can't accept the phone back because it's damaged, and that their returns policy explicitly states that the phone cannot be damaged in any way, to which I responded that we don't want to return the phone because we've changed our mind, we're trying to get a defective device replaced - that's covered under an entirely different part of their policy. They then contacted AT&Ts warranty center on our behalf, who refused to take it, and eventually contacted Samsung's warranty center who will repair it under the condition that if it's found to be as a result of misuse, we'll be charged. I realize that we can get the screen repaired ourselves for a fairly cheap cost, but I'm concerned as to the effect that this will have under any potential future warranty or insurance claims. If anyone is going to repair it, I'd prefer it to be the manufacturer themselves - the phone is practically brand new. Thanks for the advice everyone, now I just hope that Samsung realize that this device has barely been touched, let alone dropped or knocked in any way. We've got rather a lot to do and this is just getting in the way now.

So, I've just moved stateside permanently, been here since Friday. On Saturday, my wife and I each bought a Samsung mobile/cell phone via AT&T. The smart phone I purchased is a little on the pricey side, but it's necessary in my line of work to have many of the features that come with this device. On the Saturday night, merely a few hours after purchasing it, I rotated the phone, and with the difference in direction that the light was being reflected, I noticed a hairline crack from top to bottom on the screen. I'm pretty sure it was there at the time of purchase, as I haven't dropped or abused the phone in any way - it's barely been touched. I wouldn't have noticed at the time of purchase because it's not obvious until you rotated the phone to a certain degree. The phone can be insured within 30 days of purchase, but has a $200 deductible. Not really what I want to have to pay when we're both currently unemployed due to the recent move. What is the warranty like for electronic goods/phones in the states? Will they accept my claim that the damage was there at point of sale? Thanks

Wallpaper in anticipation of where we're moving to this week!

Membership of the EU would have to be sought by an independent Scotland as it would not be automatic, which is not an easy task. It takes many Country's years to gain such a privilege.

Any delay on this referendum will look like London are scared of a yes vote and intentionally using delaying tactics to give themselves more time to argue against

Apologies, I'm on my mobile and admittedly this forum is not the easiest of websites to use on a small device. Just_A_Guy, commonwealth membership is being debate between the SNP and the commonwealth leadership. As usual, the SNP insist having commonwealth membership as an independent Scotland is no problem, and the commonwealth leadership is saying that it's not necessarily that simple. As for royal heir to the throne of Scotland, if the SNP don't want them to have to have that inheritance any longer, they can simply remove it. As it stands though, whether or not to do this is being debated by the Scottish Government. In my honest opinion, becoming independent will not be good for Scotland or good for the rest of the UK. I'm just glad that I'm flying to the states on a one way ticket that day so even in the event of a yes vote, I won't have to live here ever again to see the affects of the outcome.

...

So, on the 18th September, the population of Scotland will vote yes or no to the question, should Scotland be an independent Country? In the event of a yes vote, Britain would become a a meagre England and Wales, whereas the United Kingdom would only consist of only England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Will such a move benefit Scotland in the long run, how will it affect the remainder of the UK and perhaps more importantly to most of you across the pond, will this separation affect the UK's political and NATO allies, such as the USA, in any adverse fashion, maybe from a political or military viewpoint? From a military perspective, if Scotland becomes independent, the Scottish government wants to remove trident (the British nuclear weapons programme) from the country ASAP - not something I'd imagine the US has an interest in happening. Barack Obama has recently stated that the USA has "a deep interest in making sure that one of the closest allies we will ever have remains a strong, robust, united and effective partner". What are your thoughts on this?

That's known as IT specialist or ward clerk, hence why I want either calling. One of my colleagues once said the following about me: "the best way to handle James is to give him a computer with full domain admin rights to the network, leave him alone in the corner of the office and let him fix everything". Pretty much sums me up :)

Stake IT specialist, or ward/stake clerk. As I'm not musical, and very much dislike teaching and regular talking at the pulpit (despite having done it many times before), this pretty much rules out wanting 95% of other callings. I'd prefer IT specialist because I feel that's one area that I could make a real difference having seen the condition of some of the church IT setups, but I'd be happy performing the role of clerk too. I've never been called to either in my current ward/stake, maybe that will change once I move to the US next month.

Ha! I attended a conference not too long back, most of which was dominated by two fairly high ranking officials with differing opinions shouting at each other quite emotively from across the room. It was interesting to see them drinking in the pub together and laughing as friends that evening, like the conference had never happened. The next day, they were shouting at each other again during the second phase of the conference...

Not that this makes the images any better, but certain the ones of the beheaded girl are from Syria, and are posted in news sources are far back as October 2013 - nothing at all to do with Iraq. There are also many suggestions that it wasn't an execution per se, but a result of a bomb going off near her. I've also found images of the supposed woman having her throat slit as far back as 2008 on the web, using a well known reverse image search engine. I also strongly suspect this has been photoshopped, and was probably an animal in the original photo, not a woman. I didn't bother checking the rest, but I bet most of them aren't entirely what they seem. I despise ISIS, but I would rather see accurate information from known reputable news sources (there really aren't that many of them) than stuff that's been cobbled together from various different events in history in entirely different places by entirely different people in order to rile everyone's emotions. Until then, we can't possibly know what is really going on and form valid opinions of our own on the subject. Just my 2p.

Part of the justice process is allowing the convicted to appeal their conviction and sentence. In the case of those given the death penalty, every opportunity is given to the convict to prove a judgement was either incorrect or unfair. After all, they won't get the opportunity to do this after the sentence has been carried out. It's not always about guilt or innocence - sometimes it might just be that the sentence is too harsh, and considering the circumstances should be reduced. This process contributes enormously to the length of time they spend on death row. Many of the arguments can be complex and take time to consider. Any big reduction in the time spent on death row would also reduce their window of time for appeals. So you solve one problem and by doing so, create another. Even if just one innocent person was saved from death row as a result of the appeals process in its current form, do you think it's worth having it?

I just want to concur with this. My wife is an US citizen. She currently lives in the UK with me and has done since late 2012. We applied for my US greencard in May 2013, which is when we both felt we were ready to move back to the states. At that time, we were both naive enough about US immigration to believe what was stated on the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services website that it would only take around 8 months from start to finish to process our application, and therefore we'd be moving by January 2014. Fast forward to today, 439 days, dozens of lengthy application forms that take days to fill in, dealing with three different US government agencies and thousands of $$ in fees later, we'll both still in the UK waiting for the processing of our applications to complete. I don't anticipate that our application will finish completion until September 2014, bringing the total waiting period to over 500 days. Believe it or not, I'm one of the higher priority applicants, being an immediate relative/spouse of a US citizen - there is no limit to the amount of these visas that can be given out each year. Other types of immigrants have to wait much, much longer, as PC stated. Also, my spouse and I are lucky that we've been together throughout this process, and have no children yet. Most of my fellow applicants are in their home countries, with their US citizen spouse still in the states along with their children throughout this process - over 500 days is a very long time to be separated from each other. All of this because a US citizen and a non US citizen had the "audacity" to get married to each other. How dare they? Even for us, it's not been at all easy. For 95% of the process, we've had no idea of what the timescales for completion are - even at Christmas 2013, I thought we'd have moved by May 2014. This lack of knowledge creates havoc and destroys relationships with jobs, family, friends etc. because I had absolutely no idea when I was actually going to be leaving them all - not even which year it was going to be. My wife hasn't seen many of her friends and family for well over a year, and misses her home immensely. Both of us have been suffering from stress and depression bought on as a result of the issues we've had due to these delays. And then on top of that, we've had to watch Barack Obama grant pathways to citizenship to undocumented illegal immigrates currently living in the US (know as deferred action applications) which was given priority over spousal applications, adding a delay of about six months for us and all other spousal applications. In other words, those that had moved to the US illegally were being given higher processing priority over those that were following the legal process from the outset. And yet they want people to follow the legal routes for migration to the states? PC is correct. Sort out legal migration, and then sort out the problem of illegal migration. The former will go some way to sorting out the latter anyway.

I'm not sure if it's just a British stiff upper lip thing then, but my relatives rarely accept any kind of FoC external help unless we're absolutely desperate. We either do it ourselves or pay for a professional. It's nothing personal against the person that offered.

This aligns to my thoughts on the incident. The rebels have demonstrated time and time again that they are highly disorganized and this kind of incident is more likely to come about by someone who has had very little experience/training on using such equipment, only knowing enough to perform basic operations. They'd probably never used this kind of kit prior to a few months ago. What's that well known phrase? Knowing enough to be dangerous... quite literally in this case. None of this information will be of any comfort to the relatives of those on board, knowing that there was no good reason for their deaths, they were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time, there were a series of actions that could have been taken to avoid their deaths and they'll probably never find the person directly responsible.