go 532 <a href=http://biology.polytechnique.fr/proteinsathome/view_profile.php?userid=45020>cialis</a> ;0) http://biology.polytechnique.fr/proteinsathome/view_profile.php?userid=45020 cialis 6 xeui <a href=http://biology.polytechnique.fr/proteinsathome/view_profile.php?userid=45020>cialis</a> 118
Posted by: TekNomensueme | 23 Mar 2009 22:16:44
<a href=http://biology.polytechnique.fr/proteinsathome/view_profile.php?userid=45019>viagra</a> conditions <a href=http://biology.polytechnique.fr/proteinsathome/view_profile.php?userid=45019>viagra</a> 1410 http://biology.polytechnique.fr/proteinsathome/view_profile.php?userid=45019 viagra
Posted by: Mogdwesse | 23 Mar 2009 21:55:59
That's an interesting coincidence, I hate niggAz myself.
Posted by: Bob | 3 Jun 2008 08:00:52
I hate ethnic minorities.
Posted by: joe | 3 Jun 2008 07:59:19
Hi all,
There's a post on the other thread that should answer everyone's questions about postcode, privacy and everything survey.
http://timesonline.typepad.com/alphamummy/2008/05/want-to-comment.html?cid=116087010#comment-116087010
Jen
Posted by: Jennifer | 23 May 2008 10:49:33
On Ts And Cs, there is a different between those hidden in small print and those which are brought to your notice. Let's not even think about having to tick the "I have read your T&C" box each time we post, but there is such a thing as "reasonable notice" of terms between professionals on the one hand and members of the lay public on the other.
Posted by: J | 22 May 2008 07:51:09
Caitlin, thanks.
I'd like to be told if our material will be used in *any* publication, not just the Times. I think an email to the individual asking permission for a quote beforehand would be reasonable.
I enjoy contributing to this blog, but I dont want to be farmed.
Posted by: J | 22 May 2008 07:20:45
And Caitlin? You could always, like, pretend you were, like, talking like a Californian? Y'know? They do the same thing? and they'd be all, like, "whatever" if you made jokes about it?
Posted by: Lazy Mummy | 22 May 2008 04:34:46
I suspect that if we all go & read the fine print somewhere on Times Blogs there is a user agreement that by posting here, we've already officially accepted, and that this fine print describes how timesonline & its subsidiary sites can use our personally identifiable information; also (most likely) that the comments we post are property of timesonline, not ourselves.
At least, that's how most websites word it and actually I'd be surprised if CM, JH et al don't already know that (I'd expect them to have been forced to read the T&Cs by their legal team when they set up the blog, but maybe timesonline is more like a start-up than one would expect).
Personally, I don't want to see a formal code of conduct for the blog - I think that would be more restricting & like the "reasonable use/comments" approach that seems to have developed. However, I do think it's fair of Jennifer to explain her motivation for the survey. After all, a blog like this, which consists mostly (like 99.9%) of comments by intelligent astute professional women is a great & easy source of anecdotal research for a journalist. Not that that's a bad thing for her, but I can see how it would smart for some people if they felt their comments were being used as some sort of "rent-a-quote".
Posted by: Lazy Mummy | 22 May 2008 04:32:33
You'll be lynched if you hang round here pretending to be Australian, Caitlin. Have you never noticed how many New Zealanders and linked-to-NZ comment on this site?
We should rename it Elfememmy.
Posted by: Kieransmum | 21 May 2008 22:05:28
Hey ladies, dunno why no-one else is answering your queries - can only presume "the guys" are maybe doing half term or something. I'll send an email to them and get back to you? And use a question mark at the end of my sentence, like I'm Australian?
Posted by: Caitlin MOran | 21 May 2008 21:34:51
"I think it is time for an alpha mummy code of conduct on what the editors can do with our posts without prior consent and/or notification".
J - I think this is a v good point, and one I wholly support!
How about it, Timesfolk??
Posted by: Baggofbones | 21 May 2008 18:48:23
did you not read the google terms and conditions?
Posted by: Rachel | 21 May 2008 17:10:42
Whoops. Just realised I put in my whole postcode. How dozy is that. Now my neighbours may get to know about my sex life. Or worse still - my husband.
Seriously though - I agree the point about the use of information/privacy etc. Entire anonymity I hope.
Posted by: kk | 21 May 2008 16:48:26
I'm not trying to be arsy for the sake of it, but I totally agree with J on this one.
It is a mammoth favour you're asking: I'm sure you'll get lots of data without us responding, so you don't "need" us, but it is a question of professional courtesy, surely?
Posted by: Kieransmum | 21 May 2008 16:48:09
Jennifer - I agree with J. An answer would be nice.
Posted by: margot | 21 May 2008 16:41:39
Jennifer, this was a serious question and I would like the courtesy of an answer please. What are/were you going to do with this?
And if you were indeed going to puiblish it without our permission, then I think it is time for an alpha mummy code of conduct on what the editors can do with our posts without prior consent and/or notification.
PLease answer the question, Jennifer.
Posted by: j | 21 May 2008 13:06:27
Oh - and Alex, remember that whilst that is true you would need to have access to the Times computer records to find out where I am through the internet, which is going to be very few people. Whereas all you would need for this is the results of the survey, likely to be distributed more widely.
I'm not seriously suggesting there are many statisticians out there interested in finding out how many times a night I bump on my marital bed, but I do think there is a potential compromise of privacy there and we haven't been told who the data will be made accessible to.
Posted by: Kieransmum | 21 May 2008 13:02:55
Yes, absolutely true Alex, but remember that I have been careful to write nothing that could be embarrassing...well, not TOO embarrassing...
Posted by: Kieransmum | 21 May 2008 11:29:09
"our attitude towards sex defines the way that you actually live your life. The freedom to express your desires, openly and without fear, is very powerfull, and can have major impacts on your relationships, career and even future goals."
You see, sextherapist, I think this is a load of old tosh. I no more am defined as a person by my attitude to sex than I am by the job I do, or the colour of my hair. Sex is just one small part of life, yet it has been elevated to some sort of magical status in our culture, in a way that I really abhor. The constant emphasis on the importance of sexual activity leaves people feeling abnormal, dissatisfied and insecure. I think it is damaging to young people, who cannot just develop and live in their own way, but feel the pressure to 'perform'. I think it's damaging to marriages, where there is pressure to be at it like rabbits no matter what the circumstances. No one wants to go back to dark days of ignorance and fear, but I think the pendulum of popular culture has swung far too far in the opposite direction.
God, I sound like Mary Whitehouse! Sorry!
Posted by: margot | 21 May 2008 09:05:15
Why is it that when sex is debated in the public domain, and women express themselves as sexually liberated, free, expressive individual, it is seen as "socially positive and empowering for women". Where as if heterosexual men attempt to engage in some serious debate about this, it is "a socially negative" and the men are seen as predatory or perverted sex pests. Can someone please enlighten me?
Posted by: Ian | 21 May 2008 08:17:56
Sex is such an emotive topic, being asked about something personal will trigger some very strong reactions with some people. your attitude towards sex defines the way that you actually live your life. The freedom to express your desires, openly and without fear, is very powerfull, and can have major impacts on your relationships, career and even future goals.
Imagine your wildest fantasy, would you not like this to be fulfilled in your lifetime? so, what is stopping you, what are the fears. fears or intimacy, fear of rejection, fear of judgement, body issues? if you work through these, you will find your life starts to flow in so many ways. Do not settle for a shadow of your life, except only the real thing.
Posted by: sex therapist | 21 May 2008 07:51:35
"why is everyone so frightened of speaking about their sex lives"
I don't think it's necessarily that people are 'frightened', just that I think many of us here feel that this kind of tabloid crap is utterly irrelevant to any intelligent debate about women's lives, and, in that immortal American phrase, Too Much Information. Just ask any normal person if they winced at the detail in Cherie Blair's autobiography.
Posted by: margot | 21 May 2008 07:41:24
why is everyone so frightened of speaking about their sex lives. I hardly think your neighbors care enough about what you are doing to look it up with your postcode etc. and it can be helpful in dissapating all these idealistic sex life dramas. especially for our youngsters.
Posted by: Kendra | 21 May 2008 00:51:55
Kieransmum, I assure you that there are better ways to identify you then using your postcode and information about your children(s). E.g. with every post you wrote here you've left your unique IP address of your computer which can be easily translated into your home address :) So - it's good that you are careful but also consider that there is no anonymity on the Internet...
Cheers :)
Posted by: Alex | 20 May 2008 22:55:42