Nuxx:Be259ab4-e8d9-4137-9ba4-710646da5e66@q14g2000vbn.googlegroups.com

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!q14g2000vbn.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: Yesterday's ride 3:30 Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 16:05:50 -0700 (PDT) References: <8%FLl.8686$iK7.7569@newsfe08.ams2>  <1iz7ila.3df5s8jbohfeN%NEWS@wodger.demon.co.uk> Lines: 31 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 86.163.208.50 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1241478351 12939 127.0.0.1 (4 May 2009 23:05:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 23:05:51 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: q14g2000vbn.googlegroups.com; posting-host=86.163.208.50; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.10) Gecko/2009042316 Firefox/3.0.10 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Bytes: 2997 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:699503

On May 4, 7:40=A0pm, N...@wodger.demon.co.uk (Roger Merriman) wrote: > Simon Mason  wrote: > > That's a bit poor. I find it's more like 1 in 50. The vast majority are > > considerate, it's the few that aren't that stick in your mind though. > > thats still be very high for me and i live in one of the most packing > bits of uk, ie SE england.

You two, see the self-elected moderator Chapman after class. You know perfectly well that you're not allowed to say things like that, however true they are. Instead, you must pretend that all motorists (except yourselves and Chapman) are dangerous, selfish, irresponsible, lunatic scum who drive at cyclists and kill them just for fun. This may not actually be true, but by pretending that it is, we're more likely to get the anti-motorist measures which we so desperately crave in place.

For example, we're hardly likely to be able to keep our beloved anti- motorist cameras if we start admitting that the vast majority of motorists are capable of selecting a safe speed for the conditions without speed limits or cameras...you may not feel great about lying, but you must realise that it's for the greater good: a motorist-free utopia. And if a few thousand road users die along the way because of bad road "safety" measures, then that's a price worth paying, wouldn't you say? Chapman certainly thinks so.

So, please take back the "fewer than 1 in 50 motorists are inconsiderate" nonsense, and toe the party line: *all* motorists are inconsiderate except members of the URC clique and their families. If you don't do so then you risk being taken less seriously, and ultimately maybe even being deemed "trolls".