Off Topic Thread 4.0

Deleted User wrote: »

swiwi_ wrote: »

Fair play to yiz with the Worlds best gin. Anyone tried it?

Was thinking of getting a bottle as a gift for the misses albeit she only ever has it with tonic and I'm not sure if it's worth getting good quality liquor when it's just going into a mixer.

Personally think gin is one of those drinks that is so noxious I actually find myself questioning the people that drink it. Tastes horrific to me.

Dingle is pretty cheap tbh. At 36e a bottle before a sale (O Briens) its probably a tenner cheaper than Hendricks, 20 cheaper than Gunpowder and 30 cheaper than Monkey 47 (and 200ml larger). If she likes her G&Ts and she drinks at home a lot go to the whiskey shop in the powerscourt centre. Buy her the gin and behind the counter they have jars of botannicals. Candied Ginger, Pink Peppercorns, Rose Petals. Big bags of notions basically. Get two or three of them too.

I've found it's a winner for gin people.

troyzer wrote: »

In other news, the Irish Times et al are driving me insane calling the Favourite an "Irish production" without any qualification. It had five production companies involved, one of which is an Irish company. We're getting as bad as the Brits calling Saoirse Ronan British.

Its like when you Paddies try to claim Daniel Day-Lewis. He's a Brit.

Deleted User wrote: »

Why don't you just come right out and say it ?

I'll say it : The only way someone could live you with you, is if they were drunk. A lot. Permanently. Wasted. Hammered.

Now go buy her a bottle of Beefeater. She won't be able to tell the difference.

Buer wrote: »

It's all marketing and rubbish. This gin should only be drank with rasberries and elderflower tonic. That gin should be drank with a sprig of rosemary and lime.

No. It's gin. It's from juniper berries. Drink it with tonic and some ice if you'd like. Last year, Aldi's home brand won best in the world in a similar award. This year, Dingle won it. The biggest difference between them all is the price tag.

I agree with you, but almost everything is the same. People pay more for Evian than they do for Ballygowan. The differences between the most expensive top shelf Gin (Monkey 47) and Beefeater is 200% of so. Which isn't too much of a range for products.

I find Whiskey to be the worst for that ****e. "This was aged in a cask that was once used for Bourbon, then used for wine from the Burgundy region, you can still just about taste the grain particles adsorbed from the air kicked up by the farms in Kentucky".

errlloyd wrote: »

I find Whiskey to be the worst for that ****e. "This was aged in a cask that was once used for Bourbon, then used for wine from the Burgundy region, you can still just about taste the grain particles adsorbed from the air kicked up by the farms in Kentucky".

Yep and it still tastes like ****e even after all that.

Zzippy wrote: »

Whiskey? You philistine...

Whiskey and coffee are two tastes I’ve never and will never acquire. Also whiskey doesn’t agree with me or rather it makes me (more) disagreeable.

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

Thinking of getting a hotel or AirBnB down the south of France for a week or two in September, myself and the girlfriend.

Anyone got any recommendations for what city to go for/in around?

I've heard Marseilles is a bit dodge, but any one spent much time down around that area?

Personally I'd say Nice, you've day trips to Antibes/Juan Les Pins or Cannes further west, and then Monaco to the east.

Yeah Nice here as well. All the little hilltop villages are a bus ride away and are beyond lovely.
Carcassonne is another area to consider.

troyzer wrote: »

I'm a bit perplexed by this George Pell case. Let me just start by saying I'm not a member of any religion and I'm not a religious person, so I'm not coming at it from that perspective.

But is it really possible to convict someone of something so awful based on a victim's statement? I'm not familiar with the law but is it really possible to go to prison because someone said you did it without any supporting evidence?

You certainly can’t convict someone based on a statement with no supporting evidence. That’s why other cases against him have been dropped due to a lack of evidence.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

You certainly can’t convict someone based on a statement with no supporting evidence. That’s why other cases against him have been dropped due to a lack of evidence.

But that's what happened here. The other victim died a few years ago and the prosecutor said that the case hinged on whether or not the jury found the still living victim to be a trustworthy witness.

I've read a couple of articles on this and none of them allude to supporting evidence. It's just one person's word against another. This is from the Guardian article:

In his closing address, the crown prosecutor Mark Gibson told the jury their verdict would come down to whether they believed the complainant beyond reasonable doubt. They should find the complainant an honest witness, Gibson said.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Yeah, I think people just misunderstand the concept.

They didn’t just sit there for over a month listening to the same statement on repeat.

I'm open to correction but none of the articles have alluded to any other evidence.

It's also hard to imagine what evidence there could be, it happened over 20 years ago.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Ok

Alright, apologies if this is a sensitive topic for some. A close family member was affected by something similar and I probably shouldn't have brought it up.

Podge_irl wrote: »

There would be circumstantial evidence that could be used to corroborate as many statements of the witness as possible. A lot of crimes get prosecuted without the "hard" evidence people might expect.

Hmm, interesting. I suppose I'm coming at this from the persective of seeing other cases with loads of hard evidence go down in flames in different legal regimes.

I work in science as well so I'm coming at it from a different persective when it comes to evidence.

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

Thinking of getting a hotel or AirBnB down the south of France for a week or two in September, myself and the girlfriend.

Anyone got any recommendations for what city to go for/in around?

I've heard Marseilles is a bit dodge, but any one spent much time down around that area?

thomond2006 wrote: »

Stay in Aix-en-Provence. I can't recommend it enough and it's a half hour bus from Marseille. Definitely go to Marseille for a day trip or two to the Vieux Port and Notre Dame de la Garde.

You've the pick of places to go on the Cote d'Azur and surrounds really. Avignon is worth a day trip as well.

If you're going to Aix, Hotel Negrecoste might be worth a shout. It's on the Cours Mirabeau which is the main street of the town. It was an old hotel when I stayed there five years ago but a look on the website suggests it's been renovated since.

If you end up around that region, drop me a PM if you need to know anything.

Buer wrote: »

Nice is a good spot to base oneself in relation to surrounding areas and transport links. But I have to say, I was very underwhelmed with Nice itself. I found it to be extremely bland. I feel if someone was dropped in the middle of Nice without being told where they were, there's no guarantee that they'd realise they were in France, let alone Nice.

swiwi_ wrote: »

Yeah basically Nice is a misnomer.

Savage Supermarkets though if you want every sort of alcohol known to man at cheap prices.

Think Montpellier is nicer myself.

Yeah I guess I can see where you're coming from, I stayed further out in Cagnes Sur Mer with family every year for a few years and found Nice to be nice enough.

Depends what you're looking for I guess.