Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: RTGorkle on September 24, 2009, 01:06:01 AM

Title: Big Prawn
Post by: RTGorkle on September 24, 2009, 01:06:01 AM

Nooooooooooooooooo!

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/09/24/2695494.htm (http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/09/24/2695494.htm)

Title: Re: Big Prawn
Post by: phatzo on September 24, 2009, 01:17:16 AM

noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooo
they have the best fish and chips within an hours drive of here too
waiting for SD67's coment

Title: Re: Big Prawn
Post by: Plawranc on September 24, 2009, 06:41:38 AM

THEY MAY TAKE OUR PRAWN BUT THEY SHALL NEVER TAKE MY KOALA

 :rock

Title: Re: Big Prawn
Post by: Dragon on September 24, 2009, 07:59:57 AM

Is a Pelican better than a Prawn.  Why remove it anyhow.  Nothing in the story explains why they were even voting on it.  Any more details?

Title: Re: Big Prawn
Post by: OOZ662 on September 24, 2009, 08:26:05 AM

Yeah...what's the big issue with it that required a vote in the first place?

Title: Re: Big Prawn
Post by: Reaper90 on September 24, 2009, 09:32:19 AM

I don't understand... if it's a "recognizable landmark" then obviously it's been there for quite a while... why is there all of a sudden some issue with it that requires local government to assume the role of deciding if it can stay, go, or be replaced with something else?

Title: Re: Big Prawn
Post by: phatzo on September 24, 2009, 05:31:58 PM

Australia is a big country full of big things. The big Marino, the big pineapple, the big banana, the big lawnmower and many more. This is the thin edge of the wedge, if we lose the prawn whats next.
(http://www.inmycommunity.com.au/_uploads/images/myblogs/BigMower_BeerwahQLD.jpg)

Title: Re: Big Prawn
Post by: E25280 on September 24, 2009, 08:29:41 PM

Quote from: Reaper90 on September 24, 2009, 09:32:19 AM

I don't understand... if it's a "recognizable landmark" then obviously it's been there for quite a while... why is there all of a sudden some issue with it that requires local government to assume the role of deciding if it can stay, go, or be replaced with something else?

This is just a guess, but my take was that the current owner of the property wants the prawn gawn - er - gone, and likely it was a bunch of locals tried to block the action because it was a "landmark".  Thus the council was just affriming the right of the owners to get rid of it if they want.

Happens in the US all the time.  A developer wants to tear down an old building to do a new project, and somebody somewhere decides that old building has "historic significance" of some kind and tries to block the development.

Title: Re: Big Prawn
Post by: Reaper90 on September 25, 2009, 09:20:06 AM

Quote from: E25280 on September 24, 2009, 08:29:41 PM

This is just a guess, but my take was that the current owner of the property wants the prawn gawn - er - gone, and likely it was a bunch of locals tried to block the action because it was a "landmark".  Thus the council was just affriming the right of the owners to get rid of it if they want.

Happens in the US all the time.  A developer wants to tear down an old building to do a new project, and somebody somewhere decides that old building has "historic significance" of some kind and tries to block the development.

Ahh, OK, I just read the comments on the article. Seems the owners wanted it gone. The story wasn't clear on that.