Category: Random Posts

  • Hotels.com and Why It’s Probably Best to Book Direct

    Hotels.com and Why It’s Probably Best to Book Direct

    One of the biggest problems that the hospitality industry has over the next few months is gaining the trust of guests in terms of their cleanliness, their operations and their financial security. So, I’ve merrily been posting about hotels who have treated me with professionalism over refunds, as I’ll return once this is all over. One hotel that gave me some problems was the Hampton by Hilton in Bristol, with this timeline of confusion:

    18/02/2020 – Reservation made for hotel
    26/03/2020 – Reservation cancelled by hotel, full refund confirmed and would be processed immediately
    15/04/2020 – Hotels.com say hotel is now offering voucher only
    15/04/2020 – Hotels.com say this is in error, a refund will be offered
    06/05/2020 – Hotels.com say they are not currently authorised to offer a refund
    17/05/2020 – Speak to hotels.com, they say they need to refer internally and get back to the hotel
    24/05/2020 – Hotels.com confirm Hampton by Hilton have refused to allow them to refund

    The refund in itself wasn’t much of a problem, there is lots else for hotels to focus on in the world, but it was clear that either Hampton by Hilton or hotels.com was telling me complete nonsense. A delay in refunding is fine, but this playing one off against the other for two months was a little frustrating. And, although small fry, I had posted that Hampton by Hilton had acted professionally back in March 2020 and over 1,000 people had read that (I had trusted the refund e-mail), so I felt that I’d misled people.

    So, on 27 May 2020, I just asked the press offices of hotels.com and Hampton by Hilton to investigate. Then it became apparent to me exactly who was acting with professionalism and who wasn’t.

    E-mails to hotels.com on 27 May and 1 June 2020 asking for the press office to become involved were ignored. No response at all, nothing, so not even the phone number of the press office. Incidentally, the web address provided by hotels.com’s web-site for the press office, http://press.hotels.com/, doesn’t even work. And, I can see why Expedia, who own the company, might well hide their press office details, given the state of https://www.trustpilot.com/review/www.hotels.com.

    An e-mail to Hampton by Hilton received a swift acknowledgement, a holding e-mail, an investigation and a reply on 3 June 2020. Their reply was professional, to the point and confirmed to Hampton by Hilton that hotels.com had agreed they should be refunding and they themselves would get in touch with regards to this refund. Apologetic, timely and helpful, it was clear that Hampton by Hilton were acting with respect.

    It’s three days on, and I can’t exactly imagine hotels.com are going to rush to respond, but this is a reminder that booking directly with hotel companies is now much safer in terms of receiving refunds and having that direct contact. Hotels.com take a fair chunk of commission from hotels and in all fairness to Hampton by Hilton, they should be very disappointed in what they’re receiving (my words, not theirs).

    I’ve had around 440 nights booked through hotels.com over the last nine years, but I’ll be using my rewards nights up and won’t use them again after those nights are used. So, the best advice really is just book direct and get the best price and take advantage of the hotel’s own loyalty scheme. Or, perhaps, for those who really want to use an aggregator site, just use booking.com.

  • Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue – Day Seventy-Nine

    Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue – Day Seventy-Nine

    The Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue was first published at the end of the eighteenth century, and given that the Coronavirus crisis is giving too much time to read books, I thought I’d pick a daily word from it until I got bored…..

    Cloak Twitchers

    There’s a sense of vibrancy to this phrase, defined in the dictionary as “rogues who lurk about the entrances into dark alleys, and bye-lanes, to snatch cloaks from the shoulders of passengers”. They were listed as 33rd in the “order of villains”, which was a list of how criminals were respected within the canting community and the phrase dates from at least the late seventeenth century. The word twitcher is probably best used to describe bird-watchers now, but it was originally defined as “to give a sharp tug”. I can imagine this being a profitable exercise in the dimly lit and narrow streets that once existed in many towns and cities across the country.

  • Simon Roper and his Youtube Videos

    Simon Roper and his Youtube Videos

    For anyone interested in linguistics and the evolution of language, Simon Roper is producing some detailed and accessible videos. Their production quality is perhaps as basic as can be, which absolutely adds to the whole thing, he’s got a very informal style. If they ever brought something like Time Team back, he should present it.

  • Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue – Day Seventy-Eight

    Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue – Day Seventy-Eight

    The Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue was first published at the end of the eighteenth century, and given that the Coronavirus crisis is giving too much time to read books, I thought I’d pick a daily word from it until I got bored…..

    Cleymes

    There’s not much to be written about this word, which is defined as “artificial sores, made by beggars to excite charity”, although it’s of note perhaps that this practice has been going on for hundreds of years. The word origins are unknown, one dictionary says that it’s a London slang for ‘claim’, as in to make a claim on someone’s pity. The word was used between at least the mid-sixteenth and early-nineteenth centuries and a similar phrase used during the same period was “sham sores”.

  • Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue – Day Seventy-Seven

    Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue – Day Seventy-Seven

    The Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue was first published at the end of the eighteenth century, and given that the Coronavirus crisis is giving too much time to read books, I thought I’d pick a daily word from it until I got bored…..

    Chummage

    Another one of the dictionary’s longer definitions, “money paid by the richer sort of prisoners in the Fleet and King’s Bench, to the poorer, for their share of a room. When prisons are very full, which is too often the case, particularly on the even of an insolvent act, two or three persons are obliged to sleep in a room. A prisoner who can pay for being alone, chooses two poor chums, who for a stipulated price, called chummage, give up their share of the room, and sleep on the stairs, or, as the term is, ruff it”.

    A guide at the time the dictionary was published gives great details about Fleet prison, which had 109 rooms and 89 of these could receive chums. Fifteen rooms were given away to the poor or large families (and as an aside, Fleet and King’s Bench had many debtors in who would have had little money), a practice known as Bartholomew Fair, whereas three rooms had no fireplace and were exempt from chummage and two were used for the blind, the mad or those it was probably just easiest to give their space.

    The process was strictly regimented so that new prisoners were placed in turn around the rooms and the concept was that the existing prisoner in a room was the owner, the newcomer was the chum. However, neither could force anything on the other, they could only pay each other out and that process was overseen by the warden. It would cost 4 shillings to buy someone out of a room, with rent then payable to the prison warden and this charge would depend whether it was a furnished or unfurnished room.

    As an aside, it’s far from the free for all I had expected in nineteenth-century prisons…. But, the above rules were for master’s side of the prison, whereas the common side was a different affair. Here people were dumped in larger cells and they didn’t pay fees, but were entitled to sit and beg at the side of the prison from people passing by. This might be handy for those who were debtors and who needed to buy themselves out of prison.

    There were usually around 200 prisoners in Fleet, but there were also another 75 or so who lived in the area of the Liberty of the Fleet, located around the prison. Prisoners could stay here instead, usually choosing accommodation to suit their wealth, but they had to give a deposit to the prison warden as a security against them running off. This was less as the warden was worried they might escape and go on the run, it was solely to ensure that they received their money, as prisons were run privately as profit-making enterprises.

    Another prison where chummage was common, and only debtors didn’t have to pay, was Marshalsea and the going rate in 1818 was half a crown a week to “make the roommate go away”, typically to a cold and bleak part of the buildings. It’s all a sign of how the rich and the poor certainly used to have different prison experiences…..

  • Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue – Day Seventy-Six

    Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue – Day Seventy-Six

    The Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue was first published at the end of the eighteenth century, and given that the Coronavirus crisis is giving too much time to read books, I thought I’d pick a daily word from it until I got bored…..

    Chuck Farthing

    The dictionary defines this as “a parish clerk” and I have no idea how that’s supposed to have come about. ‘Chuck farthing’ is best known as a game that essentially involves getting a farthing coin into a hole. And, this was a big game, which one MP complained in 1839 was debated for three hours in the House of Commons, but that was required as it became quite a common gambling option and legislation was considered. In 1884, the Dean of Manchester Cathedral said that “it was not right to stop a boy playing chuck farthing”, a situation that had arisen because there remained fears of gambling.

    Wikipedia has a nineteenth-century description of how the game, which existed since at least the seventeenth century, worked:

    “Each competitor starts with the same number of coins. They pitch their coins one at a time from a mark at a given distance towards a hole in the ground. The competitors are ranked based on how close they come to the hole. The competitor closest to the hole receives all of the coins and proceeds to a second mark nearer to the hole, from which he throws all of the coins at once towards the hole. All of the coins that remain in the hole are his to keep. The remainder of the coins are given to the next closest competitor, and the process is repeated until no coins remain.”

    It’s clear to see how gambling became a problem here, especially when the game was played for hours in pubs.

    But back to the parish clerk definition of the term, this goes back to at least 1655 when ‘A Satyr Against Hypocrites’ was written by John Phillips. And, perhaps the hypocrites bit is important, maybe parish clerks played the game regardless of the betting issues related to it. But, who knows….

    Judging from this, the game went out of fashion long before the farthing coin ceased to be used at the end of 1960.

  • Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue – Day Seventy-Five

    Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue – Day Seventy-Five

    The Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue was first published at the end of the eighteenth century, and given that the Coronavirus crisis is giving too much time to read books, I thought I’d pick a daily word from it until I got bored…..

    Chop-Stick

    The dictionary definition is simply “a fork”, with the first usage of the word in English being at the end of the seventeenth century. It’s too far back in history to work out, but it’s likely that the ‘chop’ meant quick and had been picked up from travellers to China.  At some stage, the word became an alternate name for a fork, before more recently returning to its original meaning.

    The use of the word chopstick over time, a relative surge since the 1970s. I’m a little surprised though that people at the beginning of the nineteenth century would be freely using the word chopstick, I thought it was a word brought into the English language much later on.

  • Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue – Day Seventy-Four

    Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue – Day Seventy-Four

    The Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue was first published at the end of the eighteenth century, and given that the Coronavirus crisis is giving too much time to read books, I thought I’d pick a daily word from it until I got bored…..

    Choak Pear

    Quite a lengthy definition this:

    “Figuratively, an unanswerable objection: also a machine formerly used in Holland by robbers; it was of iron, shaped like a pear; this they forced into the mouths of persons from whom they intended to extort money; and on turning a key, certain interior springs thrust forth a number of points, in all directions, which so enlarged it, that it could not be taken out of the mouth: and the iron, being case hardened, could not be filed: the only methods of getting rid of it, were either by cutting the mouth, or advertising a reward for the key. These pears were also called pears of agony”.

    And the instruments that the dictionary refers to have since been created to show what they would have been like. They are though almost certainly a figment of imagination from the early author, F. de Calvi, who first mentioned them. It’s true that devices like this were used as gags in punishment, but there has been no evidence present for criminals ever using them.

    If a criminal of the time wanted to steal something from someone, they could easily do that. The chances of them having some complex mechanical device which they then used to extort a ransom seem low, there must have been easier ways for them to manage to get money out of their victim. I’m blaming the grub street press again, keen to sell newspapers and scare people, this would be the perfect story to spread. A few newspapers reported the device, but they all referenced Grose’s dictionary.

    So, the stories behind devices also known as Pears of Agony or Pears of Anguish are likely false, with the museum pieces mostly dating to the nineteenth century. But if they were true, this must have been a hideous thing to endure.

  • Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue – Day Seventy-Three

    Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue – Day Seventy-Three

    The Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue was first published at the end of the eighteenth century, and given that the Coronavirus crisis is giving too much time to read books, I thought I’d pick a daily word from it until I got bored…..

    Chirping Merry

    A charming way to describe someone who has been drinking perhaps just a little too much, the dictionary defines this as “exhilarated with liquor. Chirping glass, a cheerful glass, that makes the company chirp like birds in spring”. The phrase was also linked with a regional term that was “cherry merry” meaning the same thing, the phrases were in use from the late seventeenth century to the early nineteenth century. It’s quite a polite term, there are much more vulgar ones in the dictionary.

  • Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue – Day Seventy-Two

    Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue – Day Seventy-Two

    The Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue was first published at the end of the eighteenth century, and given that the Coronavirus crisis is giving too much time to read books, I thought I’d pick a daily word from it until I got bored…..

    With the moving of server last week I got a bit behind on these, but I’ve caught up now and today is day 72 of this. This has lasted for considerably longer than I had anticipated.

    Cherry-Coloured Cat

    I had heard of this phrase in relation to PT Barnum, when he agreed to buy a cherry coloured cat for his circus and realised he had been fooled when he was presented with a black cat and the seller told him “you can get black cherries as well as red”. But, this dictionary pre-dates Barnum, and their definition is nearly identical, which is “a black cat, there being black cherries as well as red”.

    The phrase has also been used to describe a confidence trick or scam and there was a report in a newspaper in the 1830s fondly telling the story of how a man in Scarborough enjoyed fooling the gentry who came to the town with the same trick. This then became a common jape in the late nineteenth century, but it’s perhaps through Barnum that this lives on.