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

[phazed]

Let's face it, they are made differently and no amount of logic will persuade otherwise, I know........

[Bobberoo99]

Antony Moxey said:

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...

Ok then, would you care to elaborate, or are you one of those pedantic, self absorbed, dimwits who insist on clogging up the road in a selfish ignorant way despite the fact that people lobbied for and got you a nice shiny cycle path for your own safety???

[ClockworkCupcake]

[anonymous-user]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/41731576/gem...



This useless fat orange-faced slack-ttted burger-nippled compo-chasing of all s.

[V8mate]

OpulentBob said:

... burger-nippled ...

Mmmm... lunchtime!

[alorotom]

V8mate said:

OpulentBob said:

... burger-nippled ...

Mmmm... lunchtime!

when you LOL on a conference call when unmutued and then need to invent something quickly as the real reason is wholly inappropriate

[V8mate]

alorotom said:

V8mate said:

OpulentBob said:

... burger-nippled ...

Mmmm... lunchtime!

when you LOL on a conference call when unmutued and then need to invent something quickly as the real reason is wholly inappropriate

Sadly, despite invoking Google's support on the matter, I can find no evidence for Bob's claim.

[tezzer]

My wife has 2 annoying habits, well 2 in particular.

1) She always drinks her tea with the bag (decaffeinated green tea ) in the cup. Then leaves it in there, on the side, or in the dishwasher.

2) She never sorts the cutlery, so I reach into the drawer for a fork, and pull out a knife or a spoon...............

Small things I know, but enough to move me towards murder sometimes !

[ClockworkCupcake]

tezzer said:

so I reach into the drawer for a fork, and pull out a knife or a spoon...........

Isn't it ironic.

[tezzer]

Ironic ? No. Does it offend my OCD ? Hell yes. In fact, OCD should of course be CDO, as that's in the correct order.

[alorotom]

ClockworkCupcake said:

Isn't it ironic.

Don’t ya think ...

[ClockworkCupcake]

alorotom said:

ClockworkCupcake said:

Isn't it ironic.

Don’t ya think ...

[SlimJim16v]

OpulentBob said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/41731576/gem...

This useless fat orange-faced slack-ttted burger-nippled compo-chasing of all s.

Don't hire a fat fking talentless in the first place.

[glenrobbo]

ClockworkCupcake said:

alorotom said:

ClockworkCupcake said:

Isn't it ironic.

Don’t ya think ...

10,000 spoons when all you need is a knife?

[Vocal Minority]

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

Aye - any video of a speed hill climb where someone says 'sped up' because they don't have the imagination to understand just how afst these guys send a car up a tiny lane.

[MartG]

SlimJim16v said:

OpulentBob said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/41731576/gem...

This useless fat orange-faced slack-ttted burger-nippled compo-chasing of all s.

Don't hire a fat fking talentless in the first place.

If she does sue it'll be the last time anyone will hire her - so there's a positive aspect

[MartG]

Vocal Minority said:

Aye - any video of a speed hill climb where someone says 'sped up' because they don't have the imagination to understand just how afst these guys send a car up a tiny lane.

[Antony Moxey]

Bobberoo99 said:

Antony Moxey said:

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...

Ok then, would you care to elaborate, or are you one of those pedantic, self absorbed, dimwits who insist on clogging up the road in a selfish ignorant way despite the fact that people lobbied for and got you a nice shiny cycle path for your own safety???

Erm, who’s clogging up the road in a selfish ignorant way?

[AstonZagato]

Bobberoo99 said:

Antony Moxey said:

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...

Ok then, would you care to elaborate, or are you one of those pedantic, self absorbed, dimwits who insist on clogging up the road in a selfish ignorant way despite the fact that people lobbied for and got you a nice shiny cycle path for your own safety???

They are currently causing chaos on the A10 to build a cycle path from the outlying villages into Cambridge. It's costing millions. They will narrow the road significantly through Harston. Chances of it being used? Not high. Chances that the cyclists will remain on the narrower road and be more difficult to pass safely? High.

I was in Oxford at the weekend. There is a road with a cycle path separated from the road by a bank and a grass verge. Ther is also a cycle path separated by a broken painted line. Which one do the cyclists overwhelmingly chose? The one that exposes them to more danger.

I understand their arguments but I'd much prefer to be safe than righteous.

[mko9]

glenrobbo said:

ClockworkCupcake said:

alorotom said:

ClockworkCupcake said:

Isn't it ironic.

Don’t ya think ...

10,000 spoons when all you need is a knife?

That annoys me beyond reason. There is basically nothing ironic highlighted in that entire song.