Rogie

!00% watchable indeed. Britain can be very proud of this young man, still only 18. How he managed it with the weight of expectation on his shoulders, to me defies description. Not only that but it's the way the diving is organised. There are preliminary rounds folowed by a 'semi-final' that whittles it down to the final 12, and then the final itself consists of six dives, so the drip drip drip is remorseless. . . you do your dive then have to wait for the eleven others, then repeat that procedure five more times . . . I don't want to take anything away from the performance of other athletes in other sports but there can be few where the athletes have to endure such a drawn-out procedure. But i'm not complaining, it was pure theatre. The top three divers were absolutely neck and neck going into the final dive. Unfortunately Tom Daley's final dive was of a lower difficulty and he came third behind the American David Boudia and Chinese Qiu Bo. Well done Tom! You did great. Ditto Mo Farah - had me on the edge of my seat coming round the final bend on the last lap in the 5,000 metres - another wonderful performance. As was the 4 x 100 metre men's relay with Jamaica winning in a world record time.

From TW's link: "In 1934, a comprehensive law controlling guns was passed by Congress. It was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1939, in U.S. v. Miller, in which Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s solicitor general, Robert H. Jackson, argued that the Second Amendment is “restricted to the keeping and bearing of arms by the people collectively for their common defense and security,” meaning the army. Furthermore, Jackson said, the language of the amendment makes clear that the right “is not one which may be utilized for private purposes, but only one which exists where the arms are borne in the militia or some other military organization provided for by law and intended for the protection of the state.” The Supreme Court agreed, unanimously." Surely all Americans understand this - it's just common sense, isn't it? From my standpoint as a Brit with only a patchy knowledge of American history, if somebody had asked me for my interpretation of the second amendment, that is more or less what I would have said. Now I know 100% what it means and I fail to see how anybody could successfully twist it to suit their own purposes.

I have reservations about BMX bike racing. It looks quite exciting but I guess as they didn't have that kind of thing when I was a kid I look down on it a bit. Why not have all the great kiddy sports, like skateboarding or roller skating? OK, only kidding, I dislike skateboards (another thing I never got to do when I was a kid!) so wouldn't want to see them. But skating could be good. I assume the winter olympics have ice-skating events so why not roller-skates in the summer one?

Some great athletics today. The American women's 4 x 100 metre relay time set a new world record, beating the time set by the East Germans that had stood since 1985. Of the four, I think Alyson Felix is my favourite, but boy that last leg was phenomenal. Sad to see the South African team coming last in the men's 4 x 400 metre relay. That Pistorious chap with the artificial legs, wow, what guts! Regarding sports I have never watched before, I saw about ten minutes of a men's handball game between Sweden and Hungary. Sweden won, I forget the score but there was only one goal in it. It looked quite interesting but I don't think I will go out of my way to watch any more games. It seems ridiculously easy to score a goal, witness the scoreline which was something like 29 to 28 (can't remember but a lot of goals anyway).

Let us know if you get the link back Bob. Sounds like a good meaty review with more than a whiff of scandal!

I think we should try and show a little human kindness towards HeyGay. Just because some people don't like certain activities doesn't mean that those who do are 'beyond the pale'.

I agree with most of the examples already mentioned. Football is one I would get rid of. Some people have commented on the level of committment of professional footballers on enormous wages compared to the dedication and wholehearted endeavour of most Olympic athletes. The Team GB football squad are a joke. The only bit of any of their games I saw was the penalty shootout against the Korean team. It was just pathetic to see an English footballer who plays for Chelsea FC completely muff his shot. I like football (soccer) but it should stay in its natural home, the Football League, not try and muscle in to the Olympics. We have the World Cup and the European Championships instead.

You're right, I haven't driven in the parts of the US where guys hang their rifles in their rear windows. At least I don't recall seeing any, as I guess such people exist in all of the states, just maybe a bit more numerous in some than others. I've driven in California (only the coast road, not inland), Florida, and New England. Yes it is a good film I saw when it came out, definitely needs a repeat viewing so I'll look out for a video sometime. Scared of guns? (I realise that's an open question directed at anyone reading this). It depends on what level. I don't think I would be scared of guns if I lived in a country where they were commonly seen in an everyday setting, but if I saw somebody in the UK with one walking down the high street or even a country road, sure I'd be mighty scared. As for being scared of guns or rifles in principal in a country like the US, no, I wouldn't feel strongly enough to back either camp. I'd be one of the mute millions, just hoping I'd never become an innocent victim. Maybe I'd have the odd bad dream, but no, I wouldn't be scared sufficiently to do any campaigning. On a local and personal level, I said earlier that using my yardstick of whether it is safe or not to go for a stroll in my mythical American neighbourhood would influence my decision as to whether to have a gun or not, so if I decided to get one I admit that'd mean I was worried and maybe even 'scared', but it would be the thought of violence that scared me rather than the actual gun. In Britain I could be walking down the road and attacked by a thug wielding a knife. So would I resort ot carrying a knife if I lived in a 'rough' neighbourhood in Britain? The answer's got to be no because it's illegal to carry a knife that could be used as a weapon. Maybe I would go and take karate lessons, I don't know. The worrying thing is lots of people in many British inner cities are scared to walk the streets at night. I own a bible KT, I sincerely hope you wouldn't be scared of me!

Is that supposed to act as a deterrant? Why would one want to be aware of a pickup truck with a rifle hanging in the rear window? Am I right in thinking there is a difference between that and other kinds of vehicle? eg. long-distance truck. Surely in that kind of situation (long-distance truck driver) it makes sense for a driver to be armed. Assuming he is driving for a company would they not insist on it?

Be yourself, don't follow the herd!

Your niche HeyGay is the scoop and sometimes what you tell us is of interest and sometimes not. Provided you stick within the posting rules of any particular Message Board, I say carry on if that's what you enjoy doing. I can understand your feelings of boredom re sterile forum content, but that's where we differ, you and I. I don't find this board sterile at all, in fact I find it 'infectious', although I would agree some other boards (no names mentioned) could be described as 'sterile'. No, I shall take my life into my hands and carry on wallowing in this infectious environment

Dear HeyGay, I hope you are keeping well. If you had been reading this Forum recently you would have seen two thread concerning the various shenanigans going on at: bahtstop and Baht-Stop confused? well, if you had followed those threads you would now be in the picture! or maybe not!

Hello again Bottomdad! (please note my comments that follow are more directed at the author of the blog than yourself, feel free to pass them on). That's good of you to mention the Gay Pattaya blog again and as I said in a previous post I like this blog. However I have no intention of posting any comments on the blog itself, as I don't read any blogs on a regular basis (although to be fair to myself I don't live in Thailand, let alone Pattaya) and to do so would only be because I felt sorry for the guy and I am sure he is more than capable of sailing through a few choppy waters. As everyone agrees, including khun baobao (see above) they are jolly hard work which Gay Pattaya himself also admits. That must be galling to think you are not reaching your target audience in the way you would have liked. One of the ways you can gauge a response is in feedback and it seems there isn't much of that in this blog. As I say I don't live in Pattaya but reading the Gay Tantrum I can certainly symapthise when some of the activities appear to have little support. No easy answers there, other than to maybe scale things down a bit . . . Rome wasn't built in a day sort of approach. I would suggest getting a higher profile on one or two gay Message Boards. Gaybuttonthai is the one that comes to mind as it is very Pattaya focussed. I will just comment on one topic in the blog and that is the Gay boat cruise. I see the Pattaya Players have a cruise this coming Sunday, the 12th. It would be interesting to know how successful that is going to be. On the assumption it proves popular, why not tag along yourself, get to meet what i am sure is a great bunch of people and do a bit of networking. That's what i'd do get out a bit more instead of moping at home and venting your frustrations on readers of your blog. Please be assured I wish the blog every success!

Point taken. I'll be there watching Tom Daley's grace and poise. Hopefully it'll be 100% watchable.

Darn, I never knew that! Not sure if they're sold in the UK, I've never seen them but then again I never looked. http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/05/03/name-change-fig-newtons-are-now-just-newtons/

I didn't know about psychology and gays, thank you for explaining that KT. Would I own a gun if I lived in America? I don't know for sure and it would only be after carefully evaluating my situation, eg. where I was living, a good yardstick might be whether I could safely walk outside my house at night and go for a stroll (I know Americans are famous for going everywhere in the car but I am a Brit and I enjoy walking!). It is more than just a possibility that if I felt I was living in a place where I felt uncomfortabe doing that I would go out and buy a gun. If there was any doubt in my mind as to my safely there would be two alternatives open to me: 1. take the gun with me on my 'stroll' 2. stay at home Quite clearly option 1 is ludicrous, the idea of going out for a walk with a gun in my pocket, but I would feel my personal liberty was infringed by not being able to go for a walk without 'worrying'. That would cause me a fair bit of frustration. As we all know frustration is a bad thing and can lead to unpredicatable outcomes. Sleeping soundly in my bed at night is very important to me. I do worry and the slightest reason to do that is going to affect my sleep - maybe I could get used to that but I'm not sure. So I probably would have my gun somewhere in my bedroom 'just in case'. I speak as somebody who has never fired a gun or rifle in my life, not even handled one, but some of my heros as a kid were people like Chuck Connors in the TV series The Rifleman. I think those kind of images stay with you, the good guy only using his weapon as a last resort against the baddie who shoots to kill for no good reason. I wonder how many American males feel a bit like that, and can identify with TV and movie heros as a justification for having a gun to protest their interests and their families.

One of the great astronomers, Sir Bernard Lovell of Jodrell Bank radio telescope in Cheshire, England, has died, aged 98. http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/aug/07/jodrell-bank-observatory-bernard-lovell-dies

Without checking I'll just hazard a guess Sir Isaac Newton has something to do with it

I'm dumbfounded! I certainly wasn't holding back, I've never come across it. As for newton, I hope where I assume it comes from is right, or I will be led out to face a firing squad! Yes, I was a scientist and was beginning to feel just a trifle inadequate until I looked up the Wikipedia entry: Stick this in your pipe and smoke it! "The slug is a unit of mass associated with Imperial units. It is a mass that accelerates by 1 ft/s2 when a force of one pound-force (lbF) is exerted on it. With standard gravity gc = 9.80665 m/s2, the international foot of 0.3048 m and the avoirdupois pound of 0.45359237 kg, one slug therefore has a mass of approximately 32.17405 lbm or 14.593903 kg. At the surface of the Earth, an object with a mass of 1 slug exerts a force of about 32.17 lbF or 143 N." If you're a glutton for punishment you can read more at: http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Slug_(mass)

And I always thought you were like an inanimate version of Mr Spock Hal. I see you have a spark of humour in your circuitry. What else have you got up your sleeve? Please don't tell me there's an obelisk buried in the Gale Crater!

This is how I would view firearms in a country where the law allows their possession. 1. A responsible person (i.e one with a brain) who knows how to use a gun in self-defence is unlikely to harm anyone unless he, or his family, is under threat. This kind of person should be allowed to possess a gun/rifle IMO. 2. A person with a history of drunken-ness, running his car of the road, drug abuse (including trafficking in drugs) or violence should be vetted and not allowed to carry firearms. If he already has them he should be made to give them up. Similarly anyone sentenced to a gaol term will not be allowed to possess a gun on his release. 3. A person with a history of mental disturbance, somebody who had made threats against an other person or somebody proven to have disseminated poisonous propanganda against anyone or any group, eg. Muslims, Sikhs, etc will not be allowed to carry a gun. So, how to determine if somebody is responsible? Very difficult, so as KT and FH would agree good education and opportunities to grow up in civilised surroundings and the chance to advance your life so you and your family enjoy a decent standard of living and are rewarded for your efforts. Surely that isn't too much to ask for and would have been my opinion of what America stands for, or once did. Decent, hard-working people for whom the necessity of carrying a firearm probably never entered their heads. Was it chicken or egg? At some stage in American history the tipping point was reached when enough of its citizens became gun-owners thus making those who up to that point were not to think maybe they too should acquire one 'just in case'. That scenario may be wrong but that's what I suspect happened. It would be interesting if we could turn the clock back and re-run American history, so if either: 1. where the gun laws were changed, let's say after WW2, so that would give us 60+ years to evaluate its effectiveness. 2. or, gun laws were not changed but America successfully coped with the increases in its population since WW2 and became a country where every child received a decent education, drug use was rare, and folks could enjoy a good quality of life. The streets were safe to walk around at night and all its citizens slept soundly in their beds at night (without feelng they had to have a gun hidden under the pillow 'just in case'. _________________________________________________________ I haven't studied psychology and never shall, I just use common sense (most of the time I hope!). Here is a link to a some sort of psycological explanation: Exploring the Minds of Young Killers: Psychology, Gun Control, and the Colorado Theater Shooting I find that dreadfully woolley. Most of these 'experts' are indeed wise after the event, just like politicians, but don't help much in the real world. http://www.monitor.upeace.org/innerpg.cfm?id_article=925

If he's the sailorman of my dreams I wouldn't mind being the one who gives him his medal. (There, that's about as short a post as I can make, I'm hopelessly incapable of succintness).

Nice photo of the moon on your blog entry for the 2 August khun baobao. Welcome back after your time in Hawaii. Your comment in bold (mine) reminds me of the Curiosity Rover that landed on the surface of Mars earlier today. It seems the Rover is pretty hi-tech but one thing it can't do is write down what it's thinking. Maybe years hence when our techology is more advanced, if they ever send a similar unmanned rover, the scientists might think to include an 'intelligent' computer ('Hal' from 2001?) that was capable of blog-style entries on its log.

It reminds me of Call my Bluff, a British TV programme where two teams of three try to guess the correct meaning of a word. One definition is always correct and the other two are red herrings. So here would be the three meanings: a slug is a measure of whisky a slug meaures the ferocity of Mohammed Ali's jab a slug is a measure of how fast you can load a gun unfortunately it is also possible for all three to be wrong

The power of intermittent fasting Scientists are uncovering evidence that short periods of fasting, if properly controlled, could achieve a number of health benefits, as well as potentially helping the overweight, as Michael Mosley discovered. http://www.bbc.co.uk...health-19112549