Numero

As long as it’s not the clean, sanitised utopia that he wanted and that DS9 rightfully killed. The exploring the Galaxy stuff is something I’m definitely interested in. Strange New Worlds, new species, cultural and societal stuff.

Genuinely an inspiration. Great lady.

I agree that it is one of the better DS9 episodes, although it’s funny that you say it’s what Trek is all about. It’s certainly not what it was traditionally about, but DS9 - for some at least - seemed to change the scope of what it was about. I’m glad DS9 did something different, even if it’s my least favourite completed Trek show. It allowed the franchise to move passed Gene’s vision. That said, Star Trek could do with a bit more of the traditional Trek now. Hopefully that comes along with the new Pike show.

Negged again for ‘nu Trek’. Anybody who thinks that episodes like Sub Rosa are better than New Eden or, actually, any episode of Discovery, they’re off their rocker.

Nonsense.

I don’t know. Quite far I would guess, but I don’t stat-track post topic intervals so I can’t give you an accurate answer. What I will point out is the fact a society and one person who once spoke about my mum’s rotten pussy and called my family rats aren’t the same thing and I want different things for them. One is general and one is specific. Yes, it is. That was the intention. I can be an incredibly vindictive, hateful, nasty person - especially when somebody comes at the ones I love. It’s also honest. I’ve answered your questions, which seem utterly ridiculous to me. I didn’t dodge them, I just object to the dishonest nonsense they’re based on. I don’t think you care that a random guy said a nasty thing, I don’t think you care about mental health, I don’t think you care about Gnasher, I don’t think it was anything to do with ego jabs, you just saw an opportunity to have a pop after I negged you earlier. I’m sure we will both get over it.

Nah, you were banging on about mental health in a fake outrage. Funny stuff.

Fuck off. Faux outrage wanker.

There were some pretty exceptional circumstances, to be fair. Brexit isn’t the only factor in why Labour lost, but it’s certainly a factor in why they lost so badly. Also, your analogy is daft. That’s two halves of one match. You’re blaming Dudek for us losing the 2018 CL final. Half a decade is a long time for a leader.

I think it’s fair to say I’ve been a critic of Corbyn but even I can’t pin an event on him that will happen half a decade after he stopped being leader. Might be a *touch* harsh. Tell you what though, Attlee has some fucking questions to answer about 2010.

You might want to read it again. As for Corbyn’s legacy. Well, Labour might well lose to the Tories with a 50 seat majority. It won’t be on Corbyn though, it will be on Starmer. You don’t have 5 years of leadership and then get to blame it on the last guy. Yes, Corbyn’s reign turned out to be disastrous and has made it harder for Starmer, but he knew what he was getting into. He is responsible for Labour’s showing in the next election.

2 euro if you buy two years or something, right? That’s the normal thing anyway. Then about a tenner if you don’t want to commit.

Yeah, partial recovery definitely isn’t a boom.

You’re not ‘back’ on ignore. I put you on ignore and you’ve been on ignore ever since.