Charmed life ...

in message <[email hidden]>,

Squashme (') said:

David Martin said:

Pinky said:

>> Sniper8052
and while I think about it

*plonk*

????
Sniper would be one of the last I would killfile. His posting history
is generally well thought out and a positive contribution to the group
(not to mention entertaining about how he actively improves safety for
us on the road).

Definitely more light than heat, even if I don't agree with him at
times.

Can someone tell me why this account is generally seen as more
trustworthy than the attempted (racist) murder of a cyclist reported in
this group last December?

Past record of the contributer. We know Sniper. He can go off the deep
end on occasion (can't we all?) but is generally thoughtful and
reliable.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; Women are from Venus. Men are from Mars. Lusers are from Uranus.

"Sniper8052(L96A1)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I watched in dumbfounded disbelief yesterday as a cyclist travelled toward
me...#

<snip>

What form of conveyance was Sniper using? Given the normal state of
gridlock of the area described and the frequency of near misses within the
described travel (perhaps 300 to 500 m) I doubt anything other than another
bike or a infinite improbability drive device would keep up -- and anyone
riding a bike responsibly would be unlikely to unless of Olympic Athlete
Standard (TM).

Given the above I judge the chances of the story being complete [censored]
(TM) to be relatively high.

T

Quoted message said:

Given the above I judge the chances of the story being complete
[censored] (TM) to be relatively high.

Tho if distance was within your estimate of 300-500m could a combination of
keeping up and looking ahead could have done the job?

On Fri, 05 May 2006 09:24:12 GMT, Mark Thompson

pleasegivegenerously@warmmail*_turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com said:

Quoted message said:

Given the above I judge the chances of the story being complete
[censored] (TM) to be relatively high.

Tho if distance was within your estimate of 300-500m could a combination of
keeping up and looking ahead could have done the job?

I bet Sniper was in a vantage point, high above the streets. Top of
Nelson's Column perhaps.

Tim

Mark Thompson said:

Quoted message said:

Given the above I judge the chances of the story being complete
[censored] (TM) to be relatively high.

Tho if distance was within your estimate of 300-500m could a combination of
keeping up and looking ahead could have done the job?

The distance is nearer 250m. Check a map.

I don't find it unbelievable in terms of being able to observe it
(knowing the area).

How anyone could be so blindly stupid is another question.

...d

Tim Hall said:

On Fri, 05 May 2006 09:24:12 GMT, Mark Thompson

pleasegivegenerously@warmmail*_turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com said:

Quoted message said:

Given the above I judge the chances of the story being complete
[censored] (TM) to be relatively high.

Tho if distance was within your estimate of 300-500m could a combination of
keeping up and looking ahead could have done the job?

I bet Sniper was in a vantage point, high above the streets. Top of
Nelson's Column perhaps.

With said idiot in his sniper's sights?

I'll get me coat.

John B

David Martin said:

How anyone could be so blindly stupid is another question.

1) "Never underestimate the power of human stupidity"

2) I refer the Hon. Gent. to the "Darwin Awards".

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

David Martin said:

Mark Thompson said:

Quoted message said:

Given the above I judge the chances of the story being complete
[censored] (TM) to be relatively high.

Tho if distance was within your estimate of 300-500m could a combination of
keeping up and looking ahead could have done the job?

The distance is nearer 250m. Check a map.

Gmap pedometer makes Northumberland Avenue 340m long. You would need
vantage points at least at both ends to see all the action. From the
description I'd estimate Sniper to have been at least 60m away from the
junction with Northumberland Avenue on first spotting the cyclist, but
with the advantage of already heading for the junction.

Quoted message said:

I don't find it unbelievable in terms of being able to observe it
(knowing the area).

Neither did I, also knowing the area.
This (without the wobbles) is what I reckon the cyclist did:
http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=164398
That's only about 600m.

The only difficulties with keeping up over that route as described would
be traffic and negotiating the right turn into Northumberland Avenue. We
already know the lane you would be in to make the junction was clear,
because the cyclist survived riding the wrong way down it. You would
stand a perfectly reasonable chance of viewing this from a bicycle or a
motorcycle up to Trafalgar Square. The Trafalgar Square manoeuvre would
be extremely evasive, but you would be able to see it happen without
having to endanger yourself.

JimP

--
Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable, let's prepare to
grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after
all. - DNA

Jim Price said:

Neither did I, also knowing the area.

Me three.

Call me naive, but I don't see anything even slightly unbelievable
about the incident and I'm bemused by the supposed "controversy" over
Sniper's description.

The way I envisage it, Sniper was also heading east along Embankment,
parallel to the idiot, then followed the idiot into Northumberland
Avenue, reached Trafalgar Square a short way behind him and watched the
rest of the idiot's antics unfold ahead of him from the vantage point
of the ASL at the top of Northumberland Avenue. But I'm sure Sniper
himself can clear this up quite easily.

It certainly wouldn't be hard for Sniper to have stayed close enough to
the idiot to view his actions as described while keeping within the law
himself, especially if the idiot was slowing himself down by
prevaricating over which way he was going at the junctions.

Quoted message said:

The only difficulties with keeping up over that route as described would
be traffic

When on my bike, I'm rarely held up by the traffic along that route.
:-)

Quoted message said:

and negotiating the right turn into Northumberland Avenue.

Heading east along Embankment would make that a left turn.

d.

Sniper8052(L96A1) wrote:
<snip good story of amazing stupidity!>

Quoted message said:

Sniper8052

Thanks for that! I saw something today that horrified me, not as bad
as your experience though.

I was cycling back from picking up miniMike from nursery school, and I
see this POB with a small girl in a child seat (I assume girl because
of the pink clothing). He crosses a junction on the wrong side of the
road and tries to go up the dropped kerb to the pavement on the corner,
right in the face of an approaching SUV. He gets it wrong and the back
end of the bike kicks around, shaking the kid violently. I saw her
head fly from side to side!

Then he heads down the pavement, and as he gets to a driveway a little
further down, he wants to swerve to the left and rejoin the road as
usual. A car driver going the same direction as he was correctly
predicted his actions and hooted and slowed down, they were being
careful and sensible. The POB, OTOH, a) didn't even know the car was
there, and b) when he did hear the beep, he carried on across the path
of the car and turned straight ahead. What an idiot!

And for those unbelievers of Sniper, yea of little faith. He's an
excellent poster and well respected here. Same goes for the over-eager
"plonker" I think.

Tony Raven said:

Danny Colyer said:

Pinky said:

and while I think about it

*plonk*

That seems unreasonable. Sniper has long been a valued contributor
to this ng, and I saw nothing in his observations in this case that
warranted plonking.

<aol>
I agree!
</aol>

That's what Simon Brooke said. 😉

--
Ambrose

davek said:

Jim Price said:

Neither did I, also knowing the area.

Me three.

The way I envisage it, Sniper was also heading east along Embankment,
parallel to the idiot,

I got the idea he was travelling towards Sniper to start with from the
first sentence, but it is a little open to interpretation.

JimP

--
Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable, let's prepare to
grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after
all. - DNA

Tim Hall said:

I bet Sniper was in a vantage point, high above the streets. Top of
Nelson's Column perhaps.

So all that wrapping round it at the moment is police camouflage then?
Nelson's Column is a central London watchtower now ;-)

--
Tony

"The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right."
- Lord Hailsham

Squashme said:

David Martin said:

Pinky said:

>> Sniper8052
and while I think about it

*plonk*

????
Sniper would be one of the last I would killfile. His posting history
is generally well thought out and a positive contribution to the group
(not to mention entertaining about how he actively improves safety for
us on the road).

Definitely more light than heat, even if I don't agree with him at
times.

Can someone tell me why this account is generally seen as more
trustworthy than the attempted (racist) murder of a cyclist reported in
this group last December?

It would appear that Pinky didn't believe it. At least, I assume that
why he's killfiled the OP.

Ambrose Nankivell said:

That's what Simon Brooke said. 😉

No, Simon pre-emptively copied me ;-)

--
Tony

"The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right."
- Lord Hailsham

Tom Crispin said:

Squashme said:

David Martin said:

Pinky wrote:
> >> Sniper8052
> and while I think about it
>
> *plonk*

????
Sniper would be one of the last I would killfile. His posting history
is generally well thought out and a positive contribution to the group
(not to mention entertaining about how he actively improves safety for
us on the road).

Definitely more light than heat, even if I don't agree with him at
times.

Can someone tell me why this account is generally seen as more
trustworthy than the attempted (racist) murder of a cyclist reported in
this group last December?

It would appear that Pinky didn't believe it. At least, I assume that
why he's killfiled the OP.

Somebody should take that plonk-stick away from Pinky, before someone
gets hurt (maybe a child). He's already winged me with it. And I was
right mostly. And nice to him mostly.

Tony Raven said:

Squashme said:

Can someone tell me why this account is generally seen as more
trustworthy than the attempted (racist) murder of a cyclist reported in
this group last December?

Because Sniper is a known and generally trusted poster here. Can
someone tell me why you are so fixated on extracting apologies for the
scepticism around the original Sheffield report?

I don't like people shooting the messenger. And now I've been plonked.

"The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right."
Ummm, yeeesss, but it doesn't always work, does it? I tried that and
still get called a troll.
Is everybody taking lessons from Tony Blair now?

David Martin said:

Squashme said:

David Martin said:

Pinky wrote:
> >> Sniper8052
> and while I think about it
>
> *plonk*

????
Sniper would be one of the last I would killfile. His posting history
is generally well thought out and a positive contribution to the group
(not to mention entertaining about how he actively improves safety for
us on the road).

Definitely more light than heat, even if I don't agree with him at
times.

Can someone tell me why this account is generally seen as more
trustworthy than the attempted (racist) murder of a cyclist reported in
this group last December?

You mean 'the account of an attempted racist murder'?

If I used the expression "Whatever", then I would use it here. But I
don't.

Quoted message said:

1. All the geography matches up. I know the area (used to commute
through there) and the names and places are congruent with reality.

But are you? (congruent etc). Sorry, disregard it. Just slipped out.

Quoted message said:

2. It doesn't have the impression (albeit unintended) of an
inflammatory posting trolling for a knee-jerk repsonse with no
contemporary support where support would have been expected.

Despite the size of the Web, many accounts of events seem to turn up
only once. Last time that I looked there was only one account of the
trial of the Sheffield assailant. Oh no, have we been had?

Quoted message said:

3. Sniper is well known in the group and could be regarded as a
'reliable witness'.

Do we have proof that "Sniper" is indeed "Sniper"?

The other account was from someone almost

Quoted message said:

completely unknown to most in the group.

To most! Not from round here eh?

Quoted message said:

4. The implications of the event are not as significant. i.e. it
doesn't matter if it was true or not. Therefore less weight is put on
to assessing the validity.

Not worth discussing then? What are the important implications, if any,
of the Sheffield attacK?

Quoted message said:

The responses so far have been 'OK, it was essentially true but given a
similar posting today I'd have the same response' seems entirely proper

So nothing learned then.

Quoted message said:

(I can throw maths at it if you wish).

Throw as much as you wish, but if you so much as mention dx/dy, I'll
fold.

in message <[email hidden]>,

Squashme (') said:

Quoted message said:

2. It doesn't have the impression (albeit unintended) of an
inflammatory posting trolling for a knee-jerk repsonse with no
contemporary support where support would have been expected.

Despite the size of the Web, many accounts of events seem to turn up
only once. Last time that I looked there was only one account of the
trial of the Sheffield assailant. Oh no, have we been had?

This isn't the Web. This is Usenet. A completely different and much older
beast. And before you say 'oh, well, I meant the Internet', Usenet is
older than that, too.

Simon, still knows how to set up a UUCP node.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

There are no messages. The above is just a random stream of
bytes. Any opinion or meaning you find in it is your own creation.

Squashme said:

Somebody should take that plonk-stick away from Pinky, before someone
gets hurt (maybe a child). He's already winged me with it. And I was
right mostly. And nice to him mostly.

I haven't seen you being particularly pleasant to anyone here.