Good money maker today
Discussion
Mk3Spitfire said:
There was no wading in, Jag. I was referring to your innapropriate and offensive language. Threats of "wrapping bikes around people's heads" and "throwing them in the river" and generally making judgements about people's choice of transport, while at the same time complaining people were judging you.
If you want to refer to people as "tits" and muppets, that's your choice. But like I said before, it comes across as hypocritical. Do you want the Mods to look at your posts too?
I also think that responding to others use of the word "w
ker" etc without any foul language would be considered acceptable.
And what about the language of the cyclists? Is it appropriate to shout swear words in public with ladies in earshot for no good reason? Not to mention braking the law. And doing it in someone elses neighbourhood. Perhaps I am too old fashioned in expecting people to act with a bit of respect?If you want to refer to people as "tits" and muppets, that's your choice. But like I said before, it comes across as hypocritical. Do you want the Mods to look at your posts too?
I also think that responding to others use of the word "w
ker" etc without any foul language would be considered acceptable.Edited by Mk3Spitfire on Monday 2nd March 11:17
Thats why I posted what I did as I was annoyed at their behavior and admittedly the content could have been better, at the time when I was annoyed it seemed to portray my upset at their behavior. People sometimes tell their children "I'll kill you if you don't behave" do we see loads of badly behaved children being murdered?
In no way have I ever "generally making judgements about people's choice of transport" So not sure why you inject this? Peoples transport choices are their own business, just use them legally, sensibly and not as a tool to annoy and abuse others is all I ask.
To carry one post on, having digs at the poster and changing the content to do so to boot, spilling out into other threads I feel is also not acceptable. Which is why I responded as I did in someone elses defence as this seemed to be the very hypocrisy that I was being accused of from you.
"I also think that responding to others use of the word "wker" etc without any foul language would be considered acceptable." Isn't that what I did? Rather than use foul language I (quite justifiably given their behaviour despite what others have posted) refrained from resorting to using bad language (both when the incident happened and subsequently online) and instead referred to them as "tits" and muppets. There would have been no need if their behaviour was acceptable would there?
I would be perfectly happy for the MODs to look at my posts and if they judge that they are unacceptable am quite happy for them to tell me about it.
V8forweekends said:
Devil2575 said:
JagXJR said:
Mk3Spitfire said:
22Rgt said:
Mk3 Spitfire being a turd as usual..
Since you and Tovie have both said really nasty things about me, can I cry "pack mentality"? The two posters concerned should learn to control themselves and if they feel they have something to add they should do so in a rational and grown up manner. As it stands their responses say something about them and very little about the recipient, as do 99% of emotional outbursts.
Some people on this site need to grow up and I am not pointing any fingers here!
ETA sorry to the OP for being dragged off topic in my responses
JagXJR said:
Mk3Spitfire said:
There was no wading in, Jag. I was referring to your innapropriate and offensive language. Threats of "wrapping bikes around people's heads" and "throwing them in the river" and generally making judgements about people's choice of transport, while at the same time complaining people were judging you.
If you want to refer to people as "tits" and muppets, that's your choice. But like I said before, it comes across as hypocritical. Do you want the Mods to look at your posts too?
I also think that responding to others use of the word "wker" etc without any foul language would be considered acceptable.
And what about the language of the cyclists? Is it appropriate to shout swear words in public with ladies in earshot for no good reason? Not to mention braking the law. And doing it in someone elses neighbourhood. Perhaps I am too old fashioned in expecting people to act with a bit of respect?If you want to refer to people as "tits" and muppets, that's your choice. But like I said before, it comes across as hypocritical. Do you want the Mods to look at your posts too?
I also think that responding to others use of the word "w
ker" etc without any foul language would be considered acceptable.Edited by Mk3Spitfire on Monday 2nd March 11:17
Thats why I posted what I did as I was annoyed at their behavior and admittedly the content could have been better, at the time when I was annoyed it seemed to portray my upset at their behavior. People sometimes tell their children "I'll kill you if you don't behave" do we see loads of badly behaved children being murdered?
In no way have I ever "generally making judgements about people's choice of transport" So not sure why you inject this? Peoples transport choices are their own business, just use them legally, sensibly and not as a tool to annoy and abuse others is all I ask.
To carry one post on, having digs at the poster and changing the content to do so to boot, spilling out into other threads I feel is also not acceptable. Which is why I responded as I did in someone elses defence as this seemed to be the very hypocrisy that I was being accused of from you.
"I also think that responding to others use of the word "wker" etc without any foul language would be considered acceptable." Isn't that what I did? Rather than use foul language I (quite justifiably given their behaviour despite what others have posted) refrained from resorting to using bad language (both when the incident happened and subsequently online) and instead referred to them as "tits" and muppets. There would have been no need if their behaviour was acceptable would there?
I would be perfectly happy for the MODs to look at my posts and if they judge that they are unacceptable am quite happy for them to tell me about it.
ker... You certainly seem to have a bee in your bonnet about cycling of late.RobinOakapple said:
yonex said:
I don't have the ticket and I am not interested in posting it up, if you choose not to believe me, that also, doesn't matter much.
I think I am going to make that choice, good job it doesn't matter much because from the looks of it nobody else believes you either.+1 It didn't happen (at 34).
WinstonWolf said:
If you're threatening to wrap people's bikes around their head from the safety of a keyboard you probably are a bit of a wker... You certainly seem to have a bee in your bonnet about cycling of late.
ker... You certainly seem to have a bee in your bonnet about cycling of late.JagXJR said:
.............................
Thats why I posted what I did as I was annoyed at their behavior and admittedly the content could have been better, at the time when I was annoyed it seemed to portray my upset at their behavior. People sometimes tell their children "I'll kill you if you don't behave" do we see loads of badly behaved children being murdered?
............................
Thats why I posted what I did as I was annoyed at their behavior and admittedly the content could have been better, at the time when I was annoyed it seemed to portray my upset at their behavior. People sometimes tell their children "I'll kill you if you don't behave" do we see loads of badly behaved children being murdered?
............................
JagXJR said:
which sound provocative and troll-like than you can expect to get a bit of flak back.
Apologies if this is not the case, but there are a lot of keyboard warriors on here lately. Taking peoples posts and altering and twisting them for their own means. People then having not read the posts leading up to them wade in and it all gets a bit silly
As you yourself should know, had a few uncalled for comments from yourself as I recall.
If anyones behaviour is out of order it should be referred to the MODs who can be impartial, rather than having little digs that can only make the situation worse!
Are you replying to me or Mk3Spitfire?Apologies if this is not the case, but there are a lot of keyboard warriors on here lately. Taking peoples posts and altering and twisting them for their own means. People then having not read the posts leading up to them wade in and it all gets a bit silly
As you yourself should know, had a few uncalled for comments from yourself as I recall.
If anyones behaviour is out of order it should be referred to the MODs who can be impartial, rather than having little digs that can only make the situation worse!
I've certainly had a recent ban for an uncalled for outburst where I responded out of anger rather than thinking first.
I don't think we should always rely on moderation to control our behaviour. Maybe if we all paused for a moment before posting then threads may be a little bit more constructive than they currently are. However I suspect that some people are not actually interested in a constructive discussion and simply want to start an argument. I think that out of all the people that post on PH Mk3Spitfire is generally pretty good at posting sensibly.
Mk3Spitfire said:
And what was "wrong" about my post?
Does it not seem like trolling to you?If you have a problem with someone report them to the MODs so they can be dealt with. As I will to those swearing at me for no reason.
Now can we drop it before I have to report myself for being off-topic
WinstonWolf said:
If you're threatening to wrap people's bikes around their head from the safety of a keyboard you probably are a bit of a wker... You certainly seem to have a bee in your bonnet about cycling of late.
Actually i'd say that it is simply a case of someone venting, which although not especially constructive, is something that most of us do from time to time.ker... You certainly seem to have a bee in your bonnet about cycling of late.We all have the capacity to say things that on reflection aren't really what we's say if we were being calm and rational about a situation.
Devil2575 said:
Are you replying to me or Mk3Spitfire?
I've certainly had a recent ban for an uncalled for outburst where I responded out of anger rather than thinking first.
I don't think we should always rely on moderation to control our behaviour. Maybe if we all paused for a moment before posting then threads may be a little bit more constructive than they currently are. However I suspect that some people are not actually interested in a constructive discussion and simply want to start an argument. I think that out of all the people that post on PH Mk3Spitfire is generally pretty good at posting sensibly.
Whomever it fits. I would apologise to Mk3Spitfire if it turns out I am wrong.I've certainly had a recent ban for an uncalled for outburst where I responded out of anger rather than thinking first.
I don't think we should always rely on moderation to control our behaviour. Maybe if we all paused for a moment before posting then threads may be a little bit more constructive than they currently are. However I suspect that some people are not actually interested in a constructive discussion and simply want to start an argument. I think that out of all the people that post on PH Mk3Spitfire is generally pretty good at posting sensibly.
This is actually a really good post!
I am also guilty of that otherwise would not have talked of throwing someone in a reservoir (not that I physically could anyway) and would completely understand a ticking off from the MODs for doing so.
However personal attacks and abuse I don't feel is warranted, given the circumstances leading up to it.
It is as if a large number of people completely overlook the fact that I acted correctly, legally and responsibly, avoided responding to the abuse and somehow blame me for something (that they are making up) just because I think the cyclists acted like tits.
What message is that spreading? It is ok to swear (breach of the peace) at motorists for sounding the horn (legally and with correct usage for their benefit)?
Plus which the post replies from, I suspect cyclists in the main do not improve opinion of them.
You are right, MODs should not have to waste their valuable time with petty arguments, people should be able to control themselves. As I did which is why I vented on the Internet instead of getting involved in something I shouldn't.
Sadly you are right, some on here are not interested in discussing what should be their passion, motoring rather than petty arguing.
It is about time that the police cracked down on (anyone) breaking the law and cyclists are not exempt from this. Not just speeding but bad riding/driving leading to incidents of bad behaviour.
tony wright said:
In reality it's the opposite to safety. We constantly have to check our speedos, rather than watching the bloody road.
Regardless of what our individual views are on speeding and its enforcement, this line that's trotted out on an all too regular basis is the biggest load of old tripe on PH.If this actually applies to you, if you really cannot stay below a posted limit without constantly checking your speedo, then the sooner you incur 12 points and are hoofed off the road the better for all of us.
yonex said:
In answer to the points.
It was an observation that the Police were out to make as many easy speeding tickets as possible off the back of people returning from an event, it was cynical. My other half was caught and was speeding, she will either go on the course or take the FPN, it doesn't matter as it is her first offence in as long as I can remember. I don't have the ticket and I am not interested in posting it up, if you choose not to believe me, that also, doesn't matter much. My own SAC was for a similar speed and I can remember posting about the experience on here saying I had found it positive, I still do, it was useful and curbed some daft habits of mine.
I guess the only thing that irks me is that given the lack of bodies within TVP (or whatever part of the force this was) I would have thought there was a better use for them? Did this have anything to do with safety on the roads, I've looked at it and it didn't, it was purely about tickets. That is my issue. I'd rather everyone went on a mandatory course every year, which would do far more good and raise more money whilst freeing up resources for things like random breath tests and car crime.
Anyway.
I don't believe you, but how about this. If you scan and post it, then I'll pay for your wife's fine or SAC and any increase in her car insurance premium as a result for the next 5 years whilst this is on her licence and declareable for insurance purposes. It was an observation that the Police were out to make as many easy speeding tickets as possible off the back of people returning from an event, it was cynical. My other half was caught and was speeding, she will either go on the course or take the FPN, it doesn't matter as it is her first offence in as long as I can remember. I don't have the ticket and I am not interested in posting it up, if you choose not to believe me, that also, doesn't matter much. My own SAC was for a similar speed and I can remember posting about the experience on here saying I had found it positive, I still do, it was useful and curbed some daft habits of mine.
I guess the only thing that irks me is that given the lack of bodies within TVP (or whatever part of the force this was) I would have thought there was a better use for them? Did this have anything to do with safety on the roads, I've looked at it and it didn't, it was purely about tickets. That is my issue. I'd rather everyone went on a mandatory course every year, which would do far more good and raise more money whilst freeing up resources for things like random breath tests and car crime.
Anyway.
Come on, there's a good incentive in there to prove me wrong and get some money out of me.
Over to you
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff