• Re: I am utterly sick of George.

    From Chris@chris.mcmillan@ntlworld.com to uk.media.radio.archers on Wed Dec 10 21:11:36 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.media.radio.archers

    Kosmo <krw@whitnet.uk> wrote:
    On 5.12.25 15:09, Mike McMillan wrote:
    Steveski <steve@invalid.com> wrote:
    He's as self-centred as a gyroscope.

    And blocking other stuff.


    Is he in a bit of a spin?


    As I have said in another universe George is not an Archer, should not
    be the centre of attention or indeed his own universe and in the world
    of Ambridge should not be given a second thought.

    In addition his parents, particularly his mother, have failed to teach
    him right from wrong and only the sainted Nick who gave him a long
    overdue slap, ever gave him any indication of the difference between
    right and wrong. Nick was right, the rest wrong.


    HerCOs a Grundy, and a Horrobin (the male side) : he doesnrCOt have a leg to stand on. HerCOs got the limelight because of the Alice trouble. What our ears heard (or thought we heard), IrCOm still not 100% sure was a correct interpretation.

    Did he stop Alice from killing herself and him, never mind the others, as
    she was on the booze or not? Maybe werCOll never know.

    Mrs Mc

    `t
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From john ashby@johnashby20@yahoo.com to uk.media.radio.archers on Wed Dec 10 21:30:12 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.media.radio.archers

    On 10/12/2025 21:11, Chris wrote:
    Kosmo <krw@whitnet.uk> wrote:
    On 5.12.25 15:09, Mike McMillan wrote:
    Steveski <steve@invalid.com> wrote:
    He's as self-centred as a gyroscope.

    And blocking other stuff.


    Is he in a bit of a spin?


    As I have said in another universe George is not an Archer, should not
    be the centre of attention or indeed his own universe and in the world
    of Ambridge should not be given a second thought.

    In addition his parents, particularly his mother, have failed to teach
    him right from wrong and only the sainted Nick who gave him a long
    overdue slap, ever gave him any indication of the difference between
    right and wrong. Nick was right, the rest wrong.


    HerCOs a Grundy, and a Horrobin (the male side) : he doesnrCOt have a leg to stand on. HerCOs got the limelight because of the Alice trouble. What our ears heard (or thought we heard), IrCOm still not 100% sure was a correct interpretation.

    Did he stop Alice from killing herself and him, never mind the others, as
    she was on the booze or not? Maybe werCOll never know.


    There is an intriguing moral ambiguity about George's actions that night.

    1) He assumes control of Alice's car, rightly considering her unfit to
    drive (GOOD)
    2) He does this without seeking her consent or cheking if she intended
    to drive (there is evidence that she was planning to sleep it off in the
    car) (BAD)
    3) Because he doesn't have consent he is driving while uninsured
    (possible TWOC) and it is unclear whether he has actually passed his
    test (BAD)
    4) He attempts to intervene when Alice opens her car door (GOOD) which
    is what precipitates the accident.
    5) He rescues several villagers from the icy waters of the Am (GOOD)
    6) When it becomes apparent the police are attending the accident he deliberately moves Alice into the driver's seat (VERY BAD) and continues
    to lie about it until the last moment (BAD, BAD, BAD)

    It's quite possibly the most mature bit of plotting The Archers has ever
    done.

    john
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Kosmo@krw@whitnet.uk to uk.media.radio.archers on Wed Dec 10 23:51:31 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.media.radio.archers

    On 10.12.25 21:30, john ashby wrote:
    1) He assumes control of Alice's car, rightly considering her unfit to
    drive (GOOD)
    2) He does this without seeking her consent or cheking if she intended
    to drive (there is evidence that she was planning to sleep it off in the car) (BAD)
    3) Because he doesn't have consent he is driving while uninsured
    (possible TWOC) and it is unclear whether he has actually passed his
    test (BAD)
    4) He attempts to intervene when Alice opens her car door (GOOD) which
    is what precipitates the accident.
    5) He rescues several villagers from the icy waters of the Am (GOOD)
    6) When it becomes apparent the police are attending the accident he deliberately moves Alice into the driver's seat (VERY BAD) and continues
    to lie about it until the last moment (BAD, BAD, BAD)

    It's quite possibly the most mature bit of plotting The Archers has ever done.

    I would contend that George was wrong at step 1 - which points 2 and 3
    detail.

    If he had never touched the car because he wanted to test drive her
    sporty little number the rest could never have happened. So getting his
    first decision wrong was far from GOOD. Alice was safe and had planned
    her drinking in what to her was a safe space - she might well have been
    unfit to drive home in the morning which is a separate point but George
    was driven into the course of action to save himself a walk home and a
    wish to drive the car.
    --
    Kosmo Richard W
    www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
    https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Ben Blaney@benblaney@gmail.invalid to uk.media.radio.archers on Thu Dec 11 03:16:51 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.media.radio.archers

    On Dec 10, 2025 at 4:30:12 PM EST, "john ashby" <johnashby20@yahoo.com> wrote:

    There is an intriguing moral ambiguity about George's actions that night.

    1) He assumes control of Alice's car, rightly considering her unfit to
    drive (GOOD)
    2) He does this without seeking her consent or cheking if she intended
    to drive (there is evidence that she was planning to sleep it off in the
    car) (BAD)
    3) Because he doesn't have consent he is driving while uninsured
    (possible TWOC) and it is unclear whether he has actually passed his
    test (BAD)
    4) He attempts to intervene when Alice opens her car door (GOOD) which
    is what precipitates the accident.
    5) He rescues several villagers from the icy waters of the Am (GOOD)
    6) When it becomes apparent the police are attending the accident he deliberately moves Alice into the driver's seat (VERY BAD) and continues
    to lie about it until the last moment (BAD, BAD, BAD)

    I've been thinking about this a lot recently, and my take is that the
    narrative from some other characters as well as some commentators here fails
    to appreciate the nuance.

    If Sid were here, he'd say something wise and kind and generous and thoughtful and he would express it beautifully. I really miss him.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Chris@chris.mcmillan@ntlworld.com to uk.media.radio.archers on Thu Dec 11 14:50:39 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.media.radio.archers

    <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 10 Dec 2025 23:51:31 +0000, Kosmo <krw@whitnet.uk> wrote:

    On 10.12.25 21:30, john ashby wrote:
    1) He assumes control of Alice's car, rightly considering her unfit to
    drive (GOOD)
    2) He does this without seeking her consent or cheking if she intended
    to drive (there is evidence that she was planning to sleep it off in the >>> car) (BAD)
    3) Because he doesn't have consent he is driving while uninsured
    (possible TWOC) and it is unclear whether he has actually passed his
    test (BAD)
    4) He attempts to intervene when Alice opens her car door (GOOD) which
    is what precipitates the accident.
    5) He rescues several villagers from the icy waters of the Am (GOOD)
    6) When it becomes apparent the police are attending the accident he
    deliberately moves Alice into the driver's seat (VERY BAD) and continues >>> to lie about it until the last moment (BAD, BAD, BAD)

    It's quite possibly the most mature bit of plotting The Archers has ever >>> done.

    I would contend that George was wrong at step 1 - which points 2 and 3
    detail.

    If he had never touched the car because he wanted to test drive her
    sporty little number the rest could never have happened. So getting his
    first decision wrong was far from GOOD. Alice was safe and had planned
    her drinking in what to her was a safe space - she might well have been
    unfit to drive home in the morning which is a separate point but George
    was driven into the course of action to save himself a walk home and a
    wish to drive the car.

    I agree, and am anyway prejudiced agains him, dislike him and think
    his motives are always bad. He's playing everyone now.


    Remember, herCOs a Grundy and Grundys and Horrobins are written rCybadrCO, never
    fully reformed.

    Mrs McT

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From BrritSki@rtilbury@gmail.com to uk.media.radio.archers on Fri Dec 12 10:05:25 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.media.radio.archers

    On 11/12/2025 03:16, Ben Blaney wrote:
    On Dec 10, 2025 at 4:30:12 PM EST, "john ashby" <johnashby20@yahoo.com> wrote:

    There is an intriguing moral ambiguity about George's actions that night.

    1) He assumes control of Alice's car, rightly considering her unfit to
    drive (GOOD)
    2) He does this without seeking her consent or cheking if she intended
    to drive (there is evidence that she was planning to sleep it off in the
    car) (BAD)
    3) Because he doesn't have consent he is driving while uninsured
    (possible TWOC) and it is unclear whether he has actually passed his
    test (BAD)
    4) He attempts to intervene when Alice opens her car door (GOOD) which
    is what precipitates the accident.
    5) He rescues several villagers from the icy waters of the Am (GOOD)
    6) When it becomes apparent the police are attending the accident he
    deliberately moves Alice into the driver's seat (VERY BAD) and continues
    to lie about it until the last moment (BAD, BAD, BAD)

    I've been thinking about this a lot recently, and my take is that the narrative from some other characters as well as some commentators here fails to appreciate the nuance.

    If Sid were here, he'd say something wise and kind and generous and thoughtful
    and he would express it beautifully. I really miss him.

    Yes, me too, and I'm sure you're right that he would have something
    insightful to say about rehabilitation in TA and closer to home and put
    us all (well, me anyway) to shame.

    I saw this msg while we were in France - back now but still catching up
    with everything, so haven't yet got round to asking ChatGPT to scrape
    all Sid's postings from umra and elsewhere (e.g. Colony Holidays
    Remembered on FB and his emails to me) and come up with a NuncAIus
    SidBot, so look out for those.

    I will of course check them to avoid egregious errors such as in the
    Sandie Peggie Triblnal Judgement :/

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2