Nuxx:MPG.27904208a3ea6426989847@news.zen.co.uk

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!npeer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!news2.euro.net!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!dedekind.zen.co.uk!zen.net.uk!hamilton.zen.co.uk!shaftesbury.zen.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.net.news.moderation Subject: URCM: How is Suggesting Compulsory Rider Testing "Inflammatory"? Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 21:18:36 -0000 Lines: 37 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: MicroPlanet-Gravity/2.9.14 Organization: Zen Internet NNTP-Posting-Host: 173b937e.news.zen.co.uk X-Trace: DXC=VJo30eMRmChiecb`[XPR_jnok4Z\f?JbkhEn<S9LLeaZm7[4F=GlDbKe X-Complaints-To: abuse@zen.co.uk Bytes: 2564 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.net.news.moderation:35878

JNugent has had the following rejection:

http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~webstump/g.urcm/messages/nr- 129431985523590.txt

The complete content is appended. Only in the world of URCM, where certain perfectly reasonable viewpoints are systematically ostracised, would anyone dream of calling it "inflammatory". Looks like URCM "moderation" is being particularly heavily criticised at the moment, and with good reason.

> On 04/01/2011 16:41, Alistair Gunn wrote: > > > Phil twisted the electrons to say: > > >> Perhaps if cyclists carried insurance then when they do damage they wouldn't > >> be seen to get off scott free? After all what is the point in making them > >> take the blame if they don't pay the bill? > > > 1) Not having insurance in no way prevents you being sued ... > > 2) Many (by which I mean, a non-insignificant number which may or may not > >    be a non-insignificant percentage) cyclists *do* have insurance. Be > >    it CTC, or BC membership or just their household insurance ... > > >> Perhaps if cyclists obeyed the rules of the road then they would get more > >> sympathy? > > > You mean if some other random cyclist who I've (a) never met and (b) may > > never meet behaves better then I might get better treatment from car > > drivers even though I obey the rules (generally) anyway? Interesting ... > > Do you have any suggestions about how I might go about persuading said > > random cyclist who I don't know to behave better? > > Support proposals for compulsory rider testing, vehicle (cycle) testing, > insurance, licensing and a points system? > > Just a suggestion.