Re: psychos

Quoted message said:

I have a list of license plates for similar offenders.. maybe we should
start a site with them listed or is that defammation or something?

This has been a long time coming. People should be outed publically for
poor behaviour in public. Driving by it's nature is very public and if
ever there was anywhere that a police state was required it is on the
roads. Anyone who thinks that their civil liberties are being infringed
upon when they are out on the road should probably pull their head in
and stay at home.

Even better is when a company car emblazened with advertising is spotted
driven by moron. Then you can spread the word about the company and make
sure they suffer through lack of business.

--

Quoted message said:

--------------------------<

Posted via cyclingforums.com
http://www.cyclingforums.com

Paul J:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I have a list of license plates for similar offenders.. maybe we should
start a site with them listed or is that defammation or something?

This has been a long time coming. People should be outed publically for
poor behaviour in public. Driving by it's nature is very public and if
ever there was anywhere that a police state was required it is on the
roads. Anyone who thinks that their civil liberties are being infringed
upon when they are out on the road should probably pull their head in
and stay at home.

Even better is when a company car emblazened with advertising is spotted
driven by moron. Then you can spread the word about the company and make
sure they suffer through lack of business.

The biggest problem with this idea is how to ensure that it is not
abused. How will you decide whether someone's complaint of a driver is
true or not? How will you determine whether someone has exaggerated a
situation, or unfairly blames someone else for his/her own mistake?

Not easily nor practically achievable, that's for sure.

Jose Rizal <_@_._> wrote in news:eVf3b.19206$8i2.4565
@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

The biggest problem with this idea is how to ensure that it is not
abused. How will you decide whether someone's complaint of a driver is
true or not? How will you determine whether someone has exaggerated a
situation, or unfairly blames someone else for his/her own mistake?

Not easily nor practically achievable, that's for sure.

Coincidentally I have been thinking about this very topic for quite some
time 🙂 Your point is the main problem I forsaw (aside from any legal
ramification). The only way I saw past it was to only allow people you
know and trust to send you the information for you to post on the site. By
myslef I can probably get 3 - 5 a day, ranging from the stupid to the
downright dangerous, with 5 "trusted" friends, that's whole lota number
plates in a short time.

Another point, a photo would be good to document the plate, in case of the
human error problem of remembering a plate incorrectly. This would prove
difficult as the moment has often passed to allow this sort of
documentation and of course the times the most dangeroous events occur is
when you are sans camera 🙂 Perhps when camera quality improves in mobile
phones and they become more ubiqutious (phone cameras not phones), not
having the camer might not be as big a problem 🙂

--
Trevor S

"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth."
-Albert Einstein

Trevor S:

Quoted message said:

Jose Rizal <_@_._> wrote in news:eVf3b.19206$8i2.4565
@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

The biggest problem with this idea is how to ensure that it is not
abused. How will you decide whether someone's complaint of a driver is
true or not? How will you determine whether someone has exaggerated a
situation, or unfairly blames someone else for his/her own mistake?

Not easily nor practically achievable, that's for sure.

Coincidentally I have been thinking about this very topic for quite some
time 🙂 Your point is the main problem I forsaw (aside from any legal
ramification). The only way I saw past it was to only allow people you
know and trust to send you the information for you to post on the site. By
myslef I can probably get 3 - 5 a day, ranging from the stupid to the
downright dangerous, with 5 "trusted" friends, that's whole lota number
plates in a short time.

Having the contributors to such a website truly identified will
discourage maliciousness to a great extent. However, it's still one's
word against another, except that the other doesn't have an easy way to
refute the accusation unless it's allowed for on the site. It can then
become an argument forum; will its function exist when that happens?

I think the only way you can do something like what you are proposing is
publish a list of drivers who have been *convicted* in a court of law.
We all know that this is a very small percentage of offenders, but
people also have a right to a fair trial before being smeared.
There is a website (I think crimenet.com or similar) that allows fee
paying subscribers to check if an individual is on the public record for
being convicted of an offence (such as larceny etc).

- Luther
(v. tired, sorry for poor grammar)

Once again. The real solution to our problems is a police state on the
roads. Then we wouldn't need to personally attack people for their
stupidity. Fear of being caught (again and again and again and......)
would surely wake them up.

--

Quoted message said:

--------------------------<

Posted via cyclingforums.com
http://www.cyclingforums.com

Jose Rizal <_@_._> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Having the contributors to such a website truly identified will
discourage maliciousness to a great extent. However, it's still one's
word against another,

Agreed, the disclaimer is, the definition of what is considered notable
in this instance lies solely with the publisher 😉

Quoted message said:

except that the other doesn't have an easy way
to refute the accusation unless it's allowed for on the site. It can
then become an argument forum;

Certainly the right of rebuttal would be allowed but probably would not
be published unless it was a genuine case of error.

"Yes. I didn't give way and nearly ran you over but my Mum was feeling
poorly " is not a suitable defence. Actually thinking about it, nothing
is a suitable "defence" as there is no claim made for vindication or of
determining right from wrong, it is simply a documentation of an
incident, with all the discrimination inherent in that.

i.e. while cycling between X and Y, vehicle XYZ with license plate XYZ
failed to Stop and passed through the intersection, forcing me to mount
the kerb to avoid an accident"

is no different from "Vehicle XYZ with license XYZ was seen pulling up at
a stop sign, giving way correctly and the proceeding on"

It's only in Court where there is redress for punitive damages, be they
incarceration or monetary, where this becomes an issue IMO.

--
Trevor S

"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth."
-Albert Einstein

Jose Rizal <_@_._> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

That's open to interpretation;

Of course it is.

Quoted message said:

if the driver's opinion is that you
were the one who failed to stop

Then they should set up a web site and note that:

Quoted message said:

and your swerving on the kerb to avoid
a collision is all your fault, therefore exonerating him/herself of
any wrongdoing, why would your account be more credible than his,

You seem to be wanting to assign credibility at a whim. Neither is
credible, credability (for what it is worth) needs to be earned in this
instance.

Quoted message said:

in
the eyes of your website's readers? In the absence of a legal
moderator to declare your account as the accurate one in the absolute
sense, you can be accused of defamation.

You don't need a legal moderator to determine accuracy (except under the
law, which has nothing to do with what we are discussing), e.g. something
can be legally accurate but not representative of what happened. How can
they possibly determine the "accuracy" of an incident ? Even an
independent witness can't determine accuracy, all they can do is recount
to the best of their ability what they witnessed. The best you can say
is that you accurately recounted your interpretation of what you
witnessed.

Quoted message said:

The difference is that this latter is complimentary to the driver,
while the former is not.

Says you, _you_ have made a moral judgement.... what I wrote was amoral.

Quoted message said:

It's to court where you can be taken if people are identified by their
license plates and accused of wrongdoing.

That is misleading.

--
Trevor S

"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth."
-Albert Einstein

Trevor S:

Quoted message said:

Jose Rizal <_@_._> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

and your swerving on the kerb to avoid
a collision is all your fault, therefore exonerating him/herself of
any wrongdoing, why would your account be more credible than his,

You seem to be wanting to assign credibility at a whim.

No, and that's juts the point: when you put up a website and accuse
people, you are assigning credibility to yourself. In the absolute
picture, that is on a whim because you're asking people to take your
word for it.

Quoted message said:

Neither is
credible, credability (for what it is worth) needs to be earned in this
instance.

And how do you do that? Certainly not on a personal website which only
relies on your word and a presumption of honesty on your part,
regardless of whether your account is accurate or not. Your accused can
always have an opposite point of view which is just as credible as yours
in the eyes of others, until either account is proven to be less
accurate than the other. This needs to be done in the interests of
fairness, and to minimise the potential for abuse of such a website.
Who will do that?

Quoted message said:

You don't need a legal moderator to determine accuracy (except under the
law, which has nothing to do with what we are discussing), e.g. something
can be legally accurate but not representative of what happened.

But this is where it can potentially be headed, in the law courts, if
someone takes issue with your account and accusations. This is a
significant issue which you need to look at in putting up a website of
wrongdoers.

Quoted message said:

How can
they possibly determine the "accuracy" of an incident ? Even an
independent witness can't determine accuracy, all they can do is recount
to the best of their ability what they witnessed. The best you can say
is that you accurately recounted your interpretation of what you
witnessed.

You'll find then that your account is subject to scrutiny and question,
something which is not obvious on a personal website which only contains
your version of events. This is what can lead to claims of defamation
against you.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The difference is that this latter is complimentary to the driver,
while the former is not.

Says you, _you_ have made a moral judgement.... what I wrote was amoral.

If you look back on what you have written, one was an accusation of
wrongdoing, and the other example was an account of following the law.
It's obvious that when placed side by side, the latter is complimentary.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It's to court where you can be taken if people are identified by their
license plates and accused of wrongdoing.

That is misleading.

If I have a website which accuses you of evil deeds, with your license
plate number and car description, I'm sure you can sue me for
defamation. Where is the misleading bit there? Whether a court will
take it seriously enough obviously depends on the severity of the
accusations and perceived damage to you, but these are beside the main
point.

"Jose Rizal" <_@_._> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

That's open to interpretation; if the driver's opinion is that you

were

Quoted message said:

the one who failed to stop and your swerving on the kerb to avoid a
collision is all your fault, therefore exonerating him/herself of any
wrongdoing, why would your account be more credible than his, in the
eyes of your website's readers? In the absence of a legal moderator

to

Quoted message said:

declare your account as the accurate one in the absolute sense, you

can

Quoted message said:

be accused of defamation.

Oh, okay, I think I get it now. The moderator needs to be present when
the claim of wrongdoing is made, right?
Therefore, any claims made on this website could be defaming due to the
lack of a moderating power, right?

Quoted message said:

It's to court where you can be taken if people are identified by their
license plates and accused of wrongdoing.

What if 5/6ths of the plate was identified along with details of the
car?

hippy