Things that annoy you beyond reason...(Vol 4)

[MartG]

People who see a photo depicting something a little outside their personal experience, so they immediately cry 'Photoshop'

A case in point - the pic below shows a liquid oxygen sphere being transported between launch pads at Canaveral Air Force base. It is real, yet a few people refuse to believe it despite other evidence of it actually happening

[cookmysock]

MartG said:

People who see a photo depicting something a little outside their personal experience, so they immediately cry 'Photoshop'

A case in point - the pic below shows a liquid oxygen sphere being transported between launch pads at Canaveral Air Force base. It is real, yet a few people refuse to believe it despite other evidence of it actually happening

of course that's fake - they forgot the foundation

[glenrobbo]

yellowjack said:

Network bloody Rail (and it's predecessors).

Why the hell can't Network Rail build something akin to a towpath alongside the railway? It's not like the idea is fraught with problems or anything...

I don't think they have given much thought to the use of horse-drawn trains, but it might allow a quicker more reliable service on some routes...

[ChrisnChris]

MartG said:

People who see a photo depicting something a little outside their personal experience, so they immediately cry 'Photoshop'

A case in point - the pic below shows a liquid oxygen sphere being transported between launch pads at Canaveral Air Force base. It is real, yet a few people refuse to believe it despite other evidence of it actually happening

I guess the chap hanging on is there to balance the load, I like the sign on the truck, just in case you hadn't seen the oversize load.

[mikal83]

Why during an event....usually the TdeF or F1....when they have a helicopter shot, do they dub in a helicopter blade noise??

[MartG]

People on forums who, while knowledgeable are just so abrasive in the way they communicate that they can kill a thread stone dead with a single post

There's a guy on a spaceflight forum I'm on who has worked for NASA in the past, and sees himself as the fount of all knowledge, and seems to believe that no-one else should be allowed an opinion Anything posted by someone else is immediately labelled as delusional etc. - many interesting discussions have been halted in their tracks when he decides to 'contribute'

[Rich_W]

The fat ugly middle age woman I see in a metallic red Ford Focus in Tescos every Monday morning. Puts her shopping in her car (most often parked in a kiddie/disabled bay) then just leaves the trolley in the next bay and fks off. Often tossing some food wrapper as she gets in.


Everything about her is dogst! I sincerely hope my life never deteriorates that badly!

[anonymous-user]

MartG said:

People on forums who, while knowledgeable are just so abrasive in the way they communicate that they can kill a thread stone dead with a single post

There's a guy on a spaceflight forum I'm on who has worked for NASA in the past, and sees himself as the fount of all knowledge, and seems to believe that no-one else should be allowed an opinion Anything posted by someone else is immediately labelled as delusional etc. - many interesting discussions have been halted in their tracks when he decides to 'contribute'

Must resist temptation to name potential PHer competitors...

[yellowjack]

glenrobbo said:

yellowjack said:

Network bloody Rail (and it's predecessors).

Why the hell can't Network Rail build something akin to a towpath alongside the railway? It's not like the idea is fraught with problems or anything...

I don't think they have given much thought to the use of horse-drawn trains, but it might allow a quicker more reliable service on some routes...

The railways started off horse-drawn...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swansea_and_Mumbles_...



Trouble is, the horse was front and centre, so no 'towpath' as such.

My annoyance was more to do with a lot of dead land that used to be (pre-Beeching) railway cuttings or embankments, but is now just dead land between current active lines, and also the fact that land alongside railways is seldom used for anything particularly productive. With the motorists versus cyclists debate still raging, and showing no signs of either "side" mellowing their position, why not utilise ALL former rail beds, and land adjacent to existing railway lines as traffic-free cycling infrastructure? Make it wide enough to accommodate a truck and you've got network-wide access for Network Rail's maintenance and engineering fleet too. It's a winner all round. Better access for repairs and maintenance, and a massive traffic-free cycleway system keeping parents happy and their kids away from busy roads, commuters able to switch to bikes and take advantage of the flattest, fastest route between towns, and drivers would be cock-a-hoop at the prospect of fewer cyclists "holding them up" on their busy commute. And then, when their journey time failed to miraculously halve, we could finally put to bed this ridiculous fiction that asserts that it is cyclists holding up motor traffic.

[grumbledoak]

yellowjack said:

... why not utilise ALL former rail beds, and land adjacent to existing railway lines as traffic-free cycling infrastructure?

It would give the truck drivers a break, I suppose.

[Ted2]

yellowjack said:

With the motorists versus cyclists debate still raging, and showing no signs of either "side" mellowing their position, why not utilise ALL former rail beds, and land adjacent to existing railway lines as traffic-free cycling infrastructure? Make it wide enough to accommodate a truck and you've got network-wide access for Network Rail's maintenance and engineering fleet too. It's a winner all round. Better access for repairs and maintenance, and a massive traffic-free cycleway system keeping parents happy and their kids away from busy roads, commuters able to switch to bikes and take advantage of the flattest, fastest route between towns, and drivers would be cock-a-hoop at the prospect of fewer cyclists "holding them up" on their busy commute. And then, when their journey time failed to miraculously halve, we could finally put to bed this ridiculous fiction that asserts that it is cyclists holding up motor traffic.

Not sure if serious..

Cyclists don't use any the thousands of miles of cycle paths that have already been specifically provided for them because pebble in sponge, so what makes you think they would use old railway paths? The answer of course is that they wouldn't and instead would continue to clog up the roads.

[Bobberoo99]

Ted2 said:

yellowjack said:

With the motorists versus cyclists debate still raging, and showing no signs of either "side" mellowing their position, why not utilise ALL former rail beds, and land adjacent to existing railway lines as traffic-free cycling infrastructure? Make it wide enough to accommodate a truck and you've got network-wide access for Network Rail's maintenance and engineering fleet too. It's a winner all round. Better access for repairs and maintenance, and a massive traffic-free cycleway system keeping parents happy and their kids away from busy roads, commuters able to switch to bikes and take advantage of the flattest, fastest route between towns, and drivers would be cock-a-hoop at the prospect of fewer cyclists "holding them up" on their busy commute. And then, when their journey time failed to miraculously halve, we could finally put to bed this ridiculous fiction that asserts that it is cyclists holding up motor traffic.

Not sure if serious..

Cyclists don't use any the thousands of miles of cycle paths that have already been specifically provided for them because pebble in sponge, so what makes you think they would use old railway paths? The answer of course is that they wouldn't and instead would continue to clog up the roads.

Been my argument all along, virtually every cycle path I see is unused while they continue to clog the roads, I sincerely believe they should be fined for not using them, just as they should be fined for jumping red lights!!!!!!!!

[phazed]

Bobberoo99 said:

Been my argument all along, virtually every cycle path I see is unused while they continue to clog the roads, I sincerely believe they should be fined for not using them, just as they should be fined for jumping red lights!!!!!!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9GUpcaG24s

Edited by phazed on Tuesday 24th October 09:58

[Antony Moxey]

Bobberoo99 said:

Ted2 said:

yellowjack said:

With the motorists versus cyclists debate still raging, and showing no signs of either "side" mellowing their position, why not utilise ALL former rail beds, and land adjacent to existing railway lines as traffic-free cycling infrastructure? Make it wide enough to accommodate a truck and you've got network-wide access for Network Rail's maintenance and engineering fleet too. It's a winner all round. Better access for repairs and maintenance, and a massive traffic-free cycleway system keeping parents happy and their kids away from busy roads, commuters able to switch to bikes and take advantage of the flattest, fastest route between towns, and drivers would be cock-a-hoop at the prospect of fewer cyclists "holding them up" on their busy commute. And then, when their journey time failed to miraculously halve, we could finally put to bed this ridiculous fiction that asserts that it is cyclists holding up motor traffic.

Not sure if serious..

Cyclists don't use any the thousands of miles of cycle paths that have already been specifically provided for them because pebble in sponge, so what makes you think they would use old railway paths? The answer of course is that they wouldn't and instead would continue to clog up the roads.

Been my argument all along, virtually every cycle path I see is unused while they continue to clog the roads, I sincerely believe they should be fined for not using them, just as they should be fined for jumping red lights!!!!!!!!

The terminally dimwitted being allowed unsupervised access to the internet. Although I'm not sure if it annoys me beyond reason or makes me laugh beyond reason. Hmm...

[DRFC1879]

I'm quite lucky as I have the Trans-Pennine Trail ten minutes' ride from my house which is great for recreational cycling but that's quite different to the cycle paths alongside major roads. They are usually allocated a portion of the pavement meaning you have to stop and give way to cross every T-junction which is a complete PITA compared to riding along the road and having priority.

[GAjon]

In the hallway of my house we have a coat hooks rack.

It has four double coat hooks, so space for eight items.

I hang one fleece jacket on it.

Why the shuddering fk does she have to always, and I mean fking always, hang her poxy bloody fking ing coat over the top of mine.

It makes me want to fking kill!

[anonymous-user]

You kind of deserve it, wearing a fleece. I try and hide the fact my Mrs has a fleece too. Up there with Crocs in terms of dignity-free clothing

[SpeckledJim]

We've just moved house. A project 6 months in the making.

Having moved EVERYTHING from the old house to the new, she starts having a clear out, and deciding to throw lots of things away.

So just to plot out the sequence of events:

• She spends six months sitting on her arse while I renovate the new place

• She watches me lump everything we own across town over 4 awful, awful days

• Literally one day later she puts 20% of it in a pile and asks me to take it to the tip

Chuffed to bits. Like being run over by a steam train.

[Shakermaker]

SpeckledJim said:

We've just moved house. A project 6 months in the making.

Having moved EVERYTHING from the old house to the new, she starts having a clear out, and deciding to throw lots of things away.

So just to plot out the sequence of events:

• She spends six months sitting on her arse while I renovate the new place

• She watches me lump everything we own across town over 4 awful, awful days

• Literally one day later she puts 20% of it in a pile and asks me to take it to the tip

Chuffed to bits. Like being run over by a steam train.

We moved house 2.5 years ago. Prior to that, we had spent 3 months living at my parents and prior to that, my now wife had lived in my old house for 3 months after moving out of her flat.

I helped her move from her old flat to her previous flat. Then I helped her move from that flat, to my house. Then we moved from my house, to my parents after a purchase fell through, and then finally, we moved into my house.

Next week, we are having a new kitchen fitted and so I have prepared by emptying out the kitchen cupboards of stuff, the kind of things that live at the back of the cupboard and you just forget about for a while.

I was throwing away food that had expired before she left the first flat! she had clearly boxed it all up, moved it to one flat, unpacked it there and not used it, boxed it up again to take to mine, my parents etc etc, and then eventually, its now gone.

Nothing "smelly" of course, that would have been obvious, but things like old tins of soup, bottles of sauces etc that you keep in the cupboard.. HOW? I've moved some of that stuff 4 times!!

[The Don of Croy]

GAjon said:

In the hallway of my house we have a coat hooks rack.

It has four double coat hooks, so space for eight items.

I hang one fleece jacket on it.

Why the shuddering fk does she have to always, and I mean fking always, hang her poxy bloody fking ing coat over the top of mine.

It makes me want to fking kill!

I find it annoying that 'she' will put her coat or whatever over the top of any available hook, without engaging the the loop sewn into the clothes. Apparently said loop might distort the hang of the garment, whereas draping it over the topmost hook point is in no way detrimental.

The fact it also restricts the capacity is lost on her, too. So I HAVE to spend time going through all the coats hanging them by their loops and suddenly there's room for everyone's apparel. I would get out more but there's another set of hooks in the downstairs loo will need sorting first...