PolishForums LIVE  /  Archives [3]    
   
Posts by convex  

Joined: 25 Nov 2009 / Male ♂
Last Post: 28 Nov 2011
Threads: Total: 20 / In This Archive: 13
Posts: Total: 3928 / In This Archive: 3150
From: Wroclaw
Speaks Polish?: un poco...wait
Interests: aviation

Displayed posts: 3163 / page 30 of 106
sort: Latest first   Oldest first   |
convex   
10 Nov 2010
News / Smoking ban in Polish bars and restaurants (AT LAST!) [400]

no, no, no, no. At the root of this issue is a very personal and human right, and that is what we BREATHE into our lungs. These other issues are superfluous or are less closely connected with one's health.

Who is forcing you to go to the place that does you harm? You are going there by choice. Living with the idea that going to a pub is your right. It's not your right. Entrepreneurs built those places with their own money. They took the risk. They invested their money, time, sweat. You aren't doing anything but deciding to walk into the door because of the atmosphere. You like it there, that's why you go there and not to a non-smoking bar. Now you want to tell the person who risked everything to open a place that he should run his business in a certain way. A business in which you have invested NOTHING. Who's the selfish one here?

Again, the challenge is open, why are there no takers? Because you're not willing to put in the effort. And if you;re not willing to put in the effort and make the sacrifice, you shouldn't have a say. You have the freedom to go wherever you want, in Poland, that includes non smoking pubs. You chose not to go there. Why won't you go there? Show me that it's a viable business model, and I will adapt.
convex   
10 Nov 2010
Food / Any królik (rabbit) fanciers on PF? [76]

Most people that squirm at the thought of eating rabbit or squirrel don't have a problem eating a burger or chicken tenders.

Hunt what you eat people! It's good for you, it's good for the environment!
convex   
10 Nov 2010
News / Smoking ban in Polish bars and restaurants (AT LAST!) [400]

We are talking about air in a private establishment which you have chosen to visit. Not a public place. If there was a vote, and smoking was banned in public places, I could half way agree to that. Private property, no. Absolutely not. Property rights are what all other freedoms are built on, like it or not.
convex   
10 Nov 2010
News / Smoking ban in Polish bars and restaurants (AT LAST!) [400]

Of course the do. Here it's terrible. They modify traffic patterns for noise avoidance. Traffic patterns exist out of safety grounds. In quite a few European countries you have people that picked up houses cheap (BECAUSE THEY ARE CLOSE TO AIRPORTS), they complain, and now every airport in Germany has a separate traffic pattern built around noise reduction, and not safety. It's insane. Smoking bans, same thing. People refusing to exercise the rights and expecting someone to clean up after them for their bad decisions. It's the basis of selfishness.

Hey, if any of you want to pay my rent, I'll make my place in Split non smoking. Deal?
convex   
10 Nov 2010
News / Smoking ban in Polish bars and restaurants (AT LAST!) [400]

Makes no difference to me if your a publician, i managed a pub back at home for a while & if you want some advice I dont mind giving you some. If I were you I'd build a really nice beer garden with some outside gas heaters and install a few flatscreen tvs for sport. I'd sit outside with my smoker friends and it'd be great craic altogether.

Sounds wonderful, my place is in Diocletian's Palace, no chance of a beer garden. On the other hand, no worries about idiotic smoking laws as Split has opted out...

Also following your argument - I should be poisoned only whan I want it and pay for it. Not like now. Plus, there are less stinky poisons;)

No one is forcing you into the pub. Unless you can disprove that, you're just complaining about the noise from the airplanes being too loud because you bought a cheap apartment in the flightpath of an airport.
convex   
9 Nov 2010
Law / Motorcycling Business In Poland [10]

I just got back from a quick ride. Probably the last one for a while. The nine months of cold and rainy has started.
convex   
9 Nov 2010
News / Smoking ban in Polish bars and restaurants (AT LAST!) [400]

Agreed, with the exception that such a private place is open to public and hence some public issues occur (like safety and fire extinguishers for instance, emergency exits, food inspection etc. whatever) with smoking problem being one of the issues that unfortunately needs regulating by law.

The place you're talking about makes it's money by selling you poison.

I don't know of any non-smoking pubs in Poznań.

Read up in the thread. There're area a couple of links (with places in Poznan).

exactly, what the **** is the problem with smokers...? Have some decency and step outside for a minute or two.

I quit smoking a while back, but anyway, I'm speaking as the owner of a bar, not a patron. Why are you telling me how to run my place? Just don't come to my establishment if it bothers you. Isn't that easy enough? You don't pay the rent. Smokers drink more, they drink more spirits and mixed drinks. The economical trade-off isn't equal.
convex   
9 Nov 2010
News / Designer drugs kill 18 in Poland [32]

It's these little guys you're after in Polska:

Or rather, not after. Completely legal in the Czech Republic though. In Poland you can go to jail for inadvertanly picking one. Yup, jail time for picking the wrong the mushroom, crazy world.

Also avoid these:
convex   
9 Nov 2010
News / Smoking ban in Polish bars and restaurants (AT LAST!) [400]

how is a non smoking bar a "concept"?

For the majority of my lifetime, non smoking bars were used like any other marketing device, and they weren't the norm (still aren't in the majority of the world).

I just put two opinions against each other and I don't think my comment is necessary here, Convex ;)

You don't have too, but the proof is in the puddin'. Anyway, for me it's still a private property rights issue. It'll be sad to see the small places go to placate a couple of people too lazy to vote with their wallets.

Well, other countries' example have that imposed an actually more strict ban do not support your fears at all.

Anyway, Holland is reversing the ban for small pubs.

reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6A347820101104

Also, in Scotland, you non smokers really need to pick up the slack:

ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/36/1/149.full

Results We found that the Scottish ban led to a 10% decrease in sales [P = 0.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) −19% to −2%] and a 14% decrease in customers (P = 0.02, 95% CI −26% to −2%).

It's a handout to large pubs. The Dutch realize it, and the every country has evidence backing it.
convex   
9 Nov 2010
Classifieds / English cuisine week in Lidl shops in Poland [203]

I'm gonna stock up on baked beans and Cheddar....hurray

Is that Cheddar any good? How does it compare to that Old Irish stuff that's usually on sale around here?
convex   
9 Nov 2010
News / Smoking ban in Polish bars and restaurants (AT LAST!) [400]

I dont think so.
You see the thing is, most people dont smoke, the vast majority actually

You might want to check who is lobbying for this legislature (and who did in the UK).

The big boys can afford to comply, and won't be impacted. The little guys obviously can't, and the business that is lost by their smokers going to big places won't be made up by people that will now go out to the pub 5 nights a week instead of their usual 1 due to the smoke.

Small places will be affected, and you'll end up with crappy chain places all over the place like on the island.
convex   
9 Nov 2010
News / Smoking ban in Polish bars and restaurants (AT LAST!) [400]

Ok, so this means that a pub has to ban smoking unless they have at least 2 rooms and the 2 room have to be separated by another room?

Yup, so you can expect small pubs to lose quite a bit of business to large chain affairs. You reap what you sow...
convex   
9 Nov 2010
Life / Any treatment centres for homos in Poland? [455]

Gates said that? Really recent, eh? Anyway, you can pick your joint chief for a quote, Chairman Mullens is for repealing it:

"We have in place a policy that forces young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens,"

Neither are the words "separation of church and state".
The 1st Amendment was supposed to protect peeps freedom of worship; it is promoting religious tolerance and freedom. Filthy, God-hating secular Libs have taken this concept and twisted it into full-blown religious intolerance attempting to turn it into "freedom from religion".

The first was meant to allow speech critical of the government. Henry spoke out rather adamantly about it, as well as Jefferson, Madison, and Adams of course. No laws, to my knowledge, prevent private worship, or public worship for that matter.

Um, no. They were mostly all Christians, practicing to various degrees. And their kids all attended schools where they openly prayed to God. And they all owned guns. They certainly weren't Modern Liberals.

The fellows I mentioned were hardcore deists. They were also Masons. I don't know if they're kids prayed in school, but I do know they went to private non state funded schools. The same kind that you can pray openly at today. Dunno about the rest of the US, but in Texas and Oklahoma, students and teachers can, and do, pray at school.

Right. And it is clear that they built this country on Christian values. In many writings "the Creator" is mentioned. Our oaths all cite "God". On and on...

Thomas Paine would be a good read. Should I hit you with the quotes from the founding fathers? You could worship whatever you wanted at home. It was first and foremost built on civil liberties. Deists believe in a creator, just not the bible. Our oaths have been recently amended to include "god".

If our Founders had any idea the crap Libs would be pulling they would have defined marriage.

Doubtful, over and over it was mentioned that the government has no role in the personal lives of the citizenry, and that the people should be free to pursue their own ways with a bare minimum of State intervention, not to mention Federal intervention...

The legislative process is what the gay lobbyists have been trying to circumvent and undermine, as well as the will of the People.

Referendum, vote, wash, rinse, repeat. That's why we have a Constitution....and any kind of legislation for that matter.
convex   
9 Nov 2010
News / Designer drugs kill 18 in Poland [32]

All of these dopalacze store owners are already working on how to continue dealing/selling them.

They're just sending them in from Slovakia as the law was sloppy (as mentioned earlier in a previous thread).
convex   
8 Nov 2010
Life / Any treatment centres for homos in Poland? [455]

Looks like change is afoot. Which is ok, there will be ballot initiatives, and they will pass, or they will fail. There will be challenges, and we'll see where we're at in 20 years.

No, I said troops should vote on it. Same as above.

Right, so combat troops can decide if they see homosexuals serving with them as a threat. It'll be interesting talking to the psyops guys that lost translators because of DADT what they think, but hey, it's a good idea. There is a study going on right now polling the military on DADT. I agree with Gates that it's important to take that into account, and then send it to the Congress. Of course, Congress doesn't listen to the military much anyway, but, we'll see.

The underhanded incremental creep of Liberalism is hardly something to celebrate.
I feel certain that had our conservative Christian Founding Fathers even thought of gay marriage they would have banned it in the Constitution.

Some were deists, but "conservative Christian Founding Fathers" is a bit out there. There's a reason that we don't have a national religion and the word "god" is nowhere to be found in the Constitution. Have a read through the federalist papers or some of the works of Adams and Jefferson to get a feel for what they wanted. Anyway, the Constitution doesn't define what constitutes marriage, it obviously should be a state issue and follow the local legislative processes.

And thus it should not have been forced on them.

Which is fair enough, George Wallace proved that it shouldn't have been handed down on a Federal level.
convex   
8 Nov 2010
Life / Any treatment centres for homos in Poland? [455]

I don't go for little Lib activist enclaves making their own Lib rules. But if the US population were to vote on it and say they wanted to allow it then you wouldn't hear any more from me about it. That's how the gay lobby should respect the will of The Peeps here in this democracy. They don't.

Then you're a Statist, fair enough. I figured you more for a Federalist.

Same as above.

Combat troops are liberal activist enclaves?

Yes, the creeping brainwashing and bullying PC has had some success. But when folks are in the privacy of the voting booth they let everyone know how they really feel.

Yup, that's fair enough. The neat thing about the Republic, is that the people can push change, both ways. Universal suffrage was shot down for a while as well, eventually adopted, and now we don't think twice about it.

Looking at demographical information on polls regarding social issues, it's just a matter of time...

Bottom line: The People of this nation clearly do not want gay marriage. This should be the end of it.

They didn't want desegregation either. It's a relevant argument regarding the processes.
convex   
8 Nov 2010
Life / Any treatment centres for homos in Poland? [455]

@Convex "guys in the field worry about completly other issues"
Like not to bend under a shower, that is?

Hilarious.

On more serious note, I seem to remmember reading something about a faq unit to cause some massacre in Serbia or other Kosovo, because they were too afraid to react, to even try to prevent it.

I'd suggest reading up on that incident before trying to make an argument based on it. It is sad that you'd mention something like that instead of actually providing something of substance.
convex   
8 Nov 2010
Life / Any treatment centres for homos in Poland? [455]

We're talking about gay marriage, not interracial marriage. The conflating of the two is tired and inacurate, a real grasp... that misses.

Why's that? Legal consenting adults being barred from marrying the person they love.

No one is talking about rolling anything back, just not granting special rights.

But interracial marriage by your definition is a special right. Blacks were free to marry any other blacks they chose, same goes for whites.

Not the state; We The People have already decided this issue. A number of times.

So if the people of a state support it (or better yet, a local municipality), you're ok with that?

Doesn't make sense that the gay lobby refuses to get the message and keeps pushing anyway with disregard for democracy. Gays are free to move to Europe if that is how they want to live. Why must we change in order to accomodate them?

Society changes over time. Apparently support for gay marriage is on the up. Guessing the next generation won't care (bigger issues obviously).

How does no gay marriage harm you?

Doesn't harm me any, but friends. Personally, I think the state shouldn't be involved in marriage at all.

No such thing has been "proven". That other armies didn't collapse when they had gay forced on them is hardly a valid argument. Besides, we're talking about the US here, not Lib Europe. The matter of DADT should be put to a vote of active duty troops and the results written in stone. Any attempts to repeal after that should bring jail time.

It has been proven in other militaries, where the exact same argument was made. It's not the US military, but same argument. Keep in mind, it's not European countries, but "Lib" countries like Russia, Czech Republic, Argentina, Taiwan, Israel...

Let combat troops vote on it with proper background. Most of those guys have served with gay troops from fellow NATO armies with no issue. I think you'd see that the guys in the field worry about completely other issues.
convex   
8 Nov 2010
Life / Any treatment centres for homos in Poland? [455]

Tired false argument. They already can. Anyone can designate anyone they want to visit them and make medical decisions for them.

Not if they're incapacitated. Give them the same rights as a spouse, problem solved. Anyway, don't cherry pick, you forgot the rest.

What's the problem that needs correcting? Society has been fine for thousands of years without formal gay marriage, as has our nation since its start.

Because society never tied basic privileges and massive subsidies to marriage like it does now. Up until very recently interracial marriage was illegal in a lot of places. I suppose society was doing fine for thousands of years without interracial marriages, so that should be rolled back as well? Things change. Why should the state be allowed to say that two consenting adults of legal age shouldn't be allowed to take part in the subsidies and legal framework that is marriage? Doesn't make any sense. How does it harm you?

If anything this ugly incident shows the failed logic of forcing straights and gays to bunk together out of some misguided Lib need to force "tolerance" and "inclusion" to the point of cohabitation... repealing DADT comes to mind. Some straights are made uncomfortable and it opens gays to harassment.

These guys are soldiers first. The unit cohesion argument has been proven not to hold up after removal of the ban. Anyway, US troops are already serving, and bunking, with openly gay British, Dutch, German, Australian, and French troops....and even female troops. The majority of the worlds armed forces have gay troops, no problems. Quite a few also allow women combat roles, no problems there either.
convex   
8 Nov 2010
Genealogy / Adopted from Poland - share your experience [6]

Hi there,

Welcome to the forum. There are a couple of threads open on adoption. Just do a search in the top right hand corner for "adopted".
convex   
8 Nov 2010
Travel / Very dangerous defrauding trend started in some hotels in Krakow [49]

Lots of US banks allow you to sign up online, without actually physically showing up. Right or wrong. They use scanned copies of photo ID and recent bills showing your name and address to prove your identity. There's a bit more than a little gap in that verification process. All of the online brokerages do it the same way.
convex   
8 Nov 2010
UK, Ireland / The more subtle differences: Ireland/Britain v Poland [310]

Convex doesn't kiss and tell.... But I can tell you it was an honest to god Polish breakfast. Some of the best eggs I've ever had (fresh from the hen house!), there was a battle for the pickles (they were that good), and the rest was equally amazing :) But most of all, good people make the meal, and that was definitely the case :) . I would rather eat Mcdonalds with a good friend than eat at a place with Michelin stars with assholes.
convex   
8 Nov 2010
Life / Any treatment centres for homos in Poland? [455]

Of course it is. Ask any mother in the world if she wants her child to turn gay one day.

Dunno, I would want my kids first and foremost to be happy, should I choose to have them. My personal ideology would be irrelevant.
convex   
8 Nov 2010
UK, Ireland / The more subtle differences: Ireland/Britain v Poland [310]

You just don't know Polish breakfasts. You can have selection of dairy based dishes, both cold and hot, boiled sausages, fried sausages, scrambled eggs in full glory of combinations and full choice of other egg-based dishes, both hot and cold. You can drink tea, coffee, cocoa, milk, corn coffee, all traditional Polish breakfasts. You are just unlucky to be stuck with a lazy cook.

That is very true...the last Polish breakfast that I partook in was an extravagant affair, amazing eggs, sausage, uber sexy pickles...it was great! For bonus points, it was someone off of PF :)

Seriously though, a good 10 different dishes to choose from, plus the cold cuts and cheeses. An incredible outlay :)
convex   
8 Nov 2010
Life / Any treatment centres for homos in Poland? [455]

"gay circles"

Never heard that term before.

Some people are gay, some aren't What's the problem with it? If your kids turn out to be gay and completely happy, is there a problem? Why discriminate against someone for something so superficial?
convex   
8 Nov 2010
Life / Any treatment centres for homos in Poland? [455]

but some other people for sure.

Fight against those other people. Choose your battles for maximum impact. If you boiled down what you actually don't like, and peruse that, you'll be much more effective than going after a broad group.