oops

re-reading the post I made the other day about town planning, I realise I didn't say what sort of block was being proposed. The answer is a block of flats, some of them to be dedicated to social housing (i.e. for use by those who can't afford the regular market price). So we're saying that land close to a river and in the shadow of the main railway line from London to Birmingham, Manchester etc is fine for those who have little money. And that it's also fine that the new block of flats should overlook the houses and gardens already in place - and currently NOT overlooked.

And why? Because a central government planner has decided that every county must bear its share of new housing, regardless of whether any money has been put in for the infrastructure and whether the quality of life of anyone there is degraded. Wonderful.

town planning...the wonder of our age

Imagine the situation. A small plot of land, crammed in between a road and a main railway line, on the edge of a residential area. It used to be workshops that served the community - car repairs, light industry. The developers chose to evict those workshops, demolish the buildings and dump containers on the rubble. They then did nothing for ten years. The local residents wanted the land to be used to ease the local car parking problems; the council were aware the land was liable to flood, was rather noisy, and local services were over stretched already.

So what have the local planners done? The developers came up with two plans - one for a small block; one for a much bigger block. The planners found reasons to reject the small block and said yes to the big one (ignoring the reasons they'd said no to the small one).

living in the past

It's something a lot of people do from time to time. I just spent a week doing a living history re-enactment; it was my choice. However, this morning a news story came out from Saudi Arabia about some medieval torture being inflicted on a citizen. Saudis are living in the past, but the vast majority of them have no choice in it.

One could say that at least we know that Saudis are living in the 14th century and so we can judge their actions accordingly. In a sense, the Taliban were doing the same in Afghanistan. And then there are those who would institute Sharia law in western countries.

Do they choose to ignore that such practices were only written to cope with life at the time of Mohammed? I am sometimes reminded of what I saw when I lived in Tehran. The Koran says that a stream that flows downhill for a certain distance is safe to drink. That's true if you live in a desert, where the water gets filtered. It's not true if the 5 miles (or whatever it is) are filled up by a city with all its pollution. So the devout muslims in South Tehran believed the holy book that said their water was fresh - but those of us who lived in central or north Tehran knew that our eyes showed it wasn't.

Equally pork isn't safe to eat in a hot climate - which is why Judaism forbids it. Now we have cold stores and fridges. Women in some lands are forced to wear full-face veils; is that acceptable in the 21st century?

You will have your views. Mine say that Sharia had its place; western Europe in the 21st century is not its place. If I go to Saudi, I would have to accept the customs of the land; if Saudis (or other strict muslims) come to the UK, they have to accept that Sharia is NOT appropriate here.

Though I imagine there are some who would love to see medieval remedies used on certain investment bankers and politicians.....

..and then...

...there's facebook and twitter....why do some people use the status updates instead of writing their blogs?

What I notice is that I tend NOT to use the status on facebook, because I'm aware how diverse the membership of my friends list seems to be. If I write about XYZ, will Julie be interested? What will Frank think? And how about Lucy?

Whereas if I write in a blog that I know (do I know?) that only people interested in that kind of blog will read, I can avoid the status feeds going to everyone....

As if people really care.....

why do people write blogs?

..or to put it another way, why do some start a blog and then not continue it?

I can only put forward my reasons - with my (lack of) understanding of why I do or don't write. I started to write because I felt I had something to say - and I'd reached the point where writing in my private journal wasn't enough. I suppose I'd reached the point where I wanted to justify myself - to use the internet as a way of saying "I exist, I think, I feel".

I'd been writing poetry for a while - and sharing some of it. I'd broken out of the shell of being an IT person. And I was ready to show some of my inner thoughts.

And tonight I notice it's been 7 months since I last wrote here. What I notice is that I didn't miss it. OK, there have been moments when I felt "I must go and write something about this". And generally those thoughts only made it into my journal - or got lost somewhere in transit.

I've just been reading an article about why people tend to defend their buying decisions - and why there is the phenomenon of "fanboys" on internet forums. It raised the question for me - why would I want to defend a buying decision I'd made? Is it to show I was rational in buying X instead of Y? Is it to show I don't feel bad about spending that amount of money? Is it to make me feel better?

Equally, why do people write blogs? Is it to show how clever they are - or how passionate they are - or how green - or..... (fill in the blank for yourself)....

Or is it to say "I'm confused/worried/upset/happy/amazed/delighted..." or maybe just "hey! I'm still here!"