more bike bashing ?
in [Aussie Motorcycles]
|
Prev: Yamaha design flaw
Next: Got some spare coin?
From: Diogenes on 24 Nov 2009 02:15 On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:04:17 +0930, "Pietro" <noone(a)dontbesilly.com> wrote: >"Diogenes" <cynic(a)society.sux.ok> wrote in message >news:m5smg5dbnsq4i9rftu5mhiks5ibhc399or(a)4ax.com... >> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:10:24 +0930, "Pietro" <noone(a)dontbesilly.com> >> wrote: >> >>>"Diogenes" <cynic(a)society.sux.ok> wrote in message >>>news:efdmg5tnovfddv0hkqnd9bhun7150nb3ac(a)4ax.com... >>>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 06:35:38 GMT, Andrew >>>> <amckNOSPAM3047(a)telNOSPAMstra.com> wrote: >>> >>><snip> >>> >>>> Hence my question to Zebee (to which he, although he is a great bloke, >>>> has not yet replied.) >>> >>>Maybe that is because you directed your question to alx - who has in fact >>>replied... >> >> Maybe if you ACTUALLY read my message PROPERLY, you'll see that it was >> reponding to Zebee's comment. > >Maybe if you were ACTUALLY responding to Zebee you should have ACTUALLY >responded to Zebee... Pietro, Pietro, Pietro... I see you STILL can't read PROPERLY... Here, I'll explicate it for you: My message started with: "On Nov 22, 8:51�pm, Zebee Johnstone <zeb...(a)gmail.com> wrote: In aus.motorcycles on Sun, 22 Nov 2009 01:15:45 -0800 (PST)" Get it? I said "Zebee said". And THEN I followed with a comment made by Zebee, to wit: "Dunno why people think this 'licence' thing is going to solve any problems." So, how was this NOT responding to what Zebee said? >Just a thought mind you Oh... Is THAT what you call it? ================= Onya bike Gerry
From: Diogenes on 24 Nov 2009 02:26 On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:34:14 +1100, Kevin Gleeson <kevingleeson(a)imagine-it.com.au> wrote: >>>So yes, I really do need you to explain it to me. >> >>Well, Kev, me old mate, I think it's fair to say that licencing >>brings with it the applicant's need to demonstrate a reasonably >>detailed knowledge and understanding of the road rules. With me so >>far? Good. >> >>Now, I think it is also fair to say that if no licencing regime >>existed, things would get pretty chaotic on the roads, and this would >>arguably lead to a greater death toll. >>What's so hard to understand? >OK, so where do I line up for my pedestrian licence? You've entered the dork side of the farce, Kev. >I'm not saying people shouldn't be licenced. That would be silly. >"Ooh, is it OK if I have a go at flying this 747 to London? Ripper >mate, thanks". >I just don't see any connection between current drivers/riders >licences having much effect on the road toll. That's a convenient position to take, Kev, but... Would you be happy to drive on the roads in ten years time if ten years' worth of new riders and drivers were on the roads who had to sit for NO tests whatsoever? Would you really, Kev? And remember, you would be letting all those riders/drivers with cancelled licences right back on the roads immediatley after your scheme was implemented. Still happy to maintain your "enlightened" position, Kev? ================= Onya bike Gerry
From: Pietro on 24 Nov 2009 02:47 "Diogenes" <cynic(a)society.sux.ok> wrote in message news:si1ng5157k0l1jmrbhun2igdn8lvqhvajo(a)4ax.com... > On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:04:17 +0930, "Pietro" <noone(a)dontbesilly.com> > wrote: > >>"Diogenes" <cynic(a)society.sux.ok> wrote in message >>news:m5smg5dbnsq4i9rftu5mhiks5ibhc399or(a)4ax.com... >>> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:10:24 +0930, "Pietro" <noone(a)dontbesilly.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>"Diogenes" <cynic(a)society.sux.ok> wrote in message >>>>news:efdmg5tnovfddv0hkqnd9bhun7150nb3ac(a)4ax.com... >>>>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 06:35:38 GMT, Andrew >>>>> <amckNOSPAM3047(a)telNOSPAMstra.com> wrote: >>>> >>>><snip> >>>> >>>>> Hence my question to Zebee (to which he, although he is a great bloke, >>>>> has not yet replied.) >>>> >>>>Maybe that is because you directed your question to alx - who has in >>>>fact >>>>replied... >>> >>> Maybe if you ACTUALLY read my message PROPERLY, you'll see that it was >>> reponding to Zebee's comment. >> >>Maybe if you were ACTUALLY responding to Zebee you should have ACTUALLY >>responded to Zebee... > > Pietro, Pietro, Pietro... > > I see you STILL can't read PROPERLY... > > Here, I'll explicate it for you: > > My message started with: "On Nov 22, 8:51 pm, Zebee Johnstone > <zeb...(a)gmail.com> wrote: In aus.motorcycles on Sun, 22 Nov 2009 > 01:15:45 -0800 (PST)" > > Get it? I said "Zebee said". > > And THEN I followed with a comment made by Zebee, to wit: "Dunno why > people think this 'licence' thing is going to solve any problems." > > So, how was this NOT responding to what Zebee said? > >>Just a thought mind you > > Oh... Is THAT what you call it? > > > ================= > > Onya bike > > Gerry
From: Pietro on 24 Nov 2009 02:50 "Diogenes" <cynic(a)society.sux.ok> wrote in message news:si1ng5157k0l1jmrbhun2igdn8lvqhvajo(a)4ax.com... > On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:04:17 +0930, "Pietro" <noone(a)dontbesilly.com> > wrote: > >>"Diogenes" <cynic(a)society.sux.ok> wrote in message >>news:m5smg5dbnsq4i9rftu5mhiks5ibhc399or(a)4ax.com... >>> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:10:24 +0930, "Pietro" <noone(a)dontbesilly.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>"Diogenes" <cynic(a)society.sux.ok> wrote in message >>>>news:efdmg5tnovfddv0hkqnd9bhun7150nb3ac(a)4ax.com... >>>>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 06:35:38 GMT, Andrew >>>>> <amckNOSPAM3047(a)telNOSPAMstra.com> wrote: >>>> >>>><snip> >>>> >>>>> Hence my question to Zebee (to which he, although he is a great bloke, >>>>> has not yet replied.) >>>> >>>>Maybe that is because you directed your question to alx - who has in >>>>fact >>>>replied... >>> >>> Maybe if you ACTUALLY read my message PROPERLY, you'll see that it was >>> reponding to Zebee's comment. >> >>Maybe if you were ACTUALLY responding to Zebee you should have ACTUALLY >>responded to Zebee... > > Pietro, Pietro, Pietro... > > I see you STILL can't read PROPERLY... > > Here, I'll explicate it for you: > > My message started with: "On Nov 22, 8:51 pm, Zebee Johnstone > <zeb...(a)gmail.com> wrote: In aus.motorcycles on Sun, 22 Nov 2009 > 01:15:45 -0800 (PST)" > > Get it? I said "Zebee said". Yes - "Zebee said" was cut from a REPLY TO alx - this is a thread - things follow in sequence... It is patently obvious you don't understand sequence. P
From: hippo on 24 Nov 2009 02:56
George W Frost wrote: > > > "Kevin Gleeson" <kevingleeson(a)imagine-it.com.au> wrote in message > news:revmg59nlo0tq6ecbd7c2m7mhmbpos8pc6(a)4ax.com... > > On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:51:08 +1100, Diogenes <cynic(a)society.sux.ok> > > wrote: > > > >>On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:46:35 +1100, Kevin Gleeson > >><kevingleeson(a)imagine-it.com.au> wrote: > >> > >>>On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:37:11 +1100, Diogenes <cynic(a)society.sux.ok> > >>>wrote: > >>> > >>>>On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 06:35:38 GMT, Andrew > >>>><amckNOSPAM3047(a)telNOSPAMstra.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>>On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 09:25:01 +1100, Diogenes wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Nov 22, 8:51 pm, Zebee Johnstone <zeb...(a)gmail.com> wrote: In > >>>>>> aus.motorcycles on Sun, 22 Nov 2009 01:15:45 -0800 (PST) > >> > >>What's so hard to understand? > > > > OK, so where do I line up for my pedestrian licence? > > > > > Bloody great idea Kev, > Not for you, but for the total pedestrian population, > then maybe we will not have so many pedestrian deaths if they know what > their responsibilities are and not throw the blame all the time onto the > vehicle driver/rider. > > > > And while they're in training, you could strap Harold Scruby to their front so that if some calamity befalls them, the airbag will protect them and they'll live to tell the tale! -- Posted at www.usenet.com.au |