Re: Reasonable? Necessary? You Decide

On 25 Feb, 11:56, Nuxx Bar <derderderder...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Feb 25, 9:14 am, spindrift <newty...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:





On 24 Feb, 16:06, Paul Rudin <paul.nos...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Don Whybrow <d...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
_ wrote:
On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 04:30:52 -0800 (PST), Nuxx Bar wrote:

1. Location: a stretch of wide, straight urban road with compulsory
cycle lanes.

What is a "compulsory cycle lane"?

A lane that is available for a cyclist to use if they want to, but
other vehicles are not allowed to enter. Marked by a solid line.

HC63 & HC140

The usual term is "mandatory", not "compulsory", although both terms
are a bit misleading, since use of the lane by cyclists is not
mandatory (or compulsory). However non-use of such by drivers of
motor-vehicles is (although little-prosecuted).

Mandatory lanes are pretty rare, and routinely flouted by motorists.

Nuxxy, why have you started a different thread when I'm still waiting
for your response to my evidence of the dead Paul Smith using his
website to threaten and harrass people?

Why have you disappeared from the thread that outlined the unpleasant,
threatening behaviour of those swiss freaks from the safespeeding
website?

Your posts tend to be heavily interspersed with this sort of noise,
and I've become accustomed to just tuning it out.  I'm not interested
in your disturbing and tasteless obsession with Paul Smith and Safe
Speed, I'm interested (at the moment) in why you hate motorists and
why you continually deny it despite it being so obvious.

And see above for my comment on this "Safespeeding" nonsense.  The
implication that "the idea that speeding is ever safe is ridiculous"
is ridiculous in itself.  You can go on making out that exceeding the
posted limit is hundreds of times more dangerous than it actually is
as much as you like; it will never change the facts, and it will never
mean that speed cameras work, however much you wish that the motorist
persecution devices did work so that motorists would just have to
accept them.  They don't work, and you'll just have to accept *that*.
It's time that you looked for another way of persecuting us, or better
still, concentrated on making things better for cyclists instead
(although of course you don't cycle...silly me).

The Earth is flat.
The Earth is flat.
The Earth is flat.
The Earth is flat.
The Earth is flat.

See, it still isn't true, no matter how many times I say it.  The same
is true with "Speeding isn't safe".  Deal with it.

Why are you and sir jeremy making claims that I'm mentally ill- an
insult that would result in a banning if I posted anything similar on
the ssafespeeding site?

Assuming that you're referring to Safe Speed, I don't think you would
be banned for saying that you were mentally ill.  Anyway, I don't ever
recall you denying that you are.  Are you saying that you've never had
any sort of medication or therapy for mental illness?

I tell you what, I'll do you a deal.  If you promise not to troll, use
ad hominem against Paul Smith or anyone else, go on and on about
ancient newsgroup posts or pages on the Safe Speed site (which don't
say anything that isn't also on the BBC site, Guardian site et al),
make utterly tasteless comments about dead people, or anything else
deliberately antagonistic, I'll see if I can get you unbanned.  When
you're not deliberately being a twat, you are at least more
intelligent than many of the camera supporters we get, who seem to
think that endlessly repeating "Speed kills" and "Don't exceed the
speed limit then" is somehow the way forward.

We would be delighted to have anyone from the "other side" who
genuinely wished to add to the camera debate and surrounding issues
without trolling.  Can't say fairer than that.  Or if you don't want
to post there, then don't complain about being banned (although if
that's true, why did you ever register an account in the first
place?)  I know that you (or at least one of your personalities) want
to post there really.  So if you won't promise not to troll and do
those other things, it kind of proves what people say about you
really.

Looks to me like you are taking full advantage of the free speech you
and your safespeeding colleagues deny anyone else....

You know perfectly well that the moderators on Safe Speed bend over
backwards to be fair.  Look at hjeg2, aka Mister Paul.  He was quite
obviously there to troll and antagonise from the start, yet he still
hasn't been banned.

Anyway, as above.  If you're that sore about being banned then let's
see if we can do something about it.  Otherwise, kindly STFU.  One or
the other, unless of course you just want to whinge for the sake of it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Errr, you start two threads here and one on Cycle Chat that both refer
directly to me, and then say you're not interested in anything I say?


Cheery bye, nutter.
.

Relevant Pages