Charmed life ...

Discussion in 'UK and Europe' started by Sniper8052(L96A1), May 4, 2006.

  1. Simon Brooke

    Simon Brooke Guest

    in message <[email protected]>,
    Squashme ('[email protected]') wrote:

    >
    > David Martin wrote:
    >> 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?


    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 protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

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


  2. Tony W

    Tony W Guest

    "Sniper8052(L96A1)" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >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 bullshit
    (TM) to be relatively high.

    T
     
  3. > Given the above I judge the chances of the story being complete
    > bullshit (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?
     
  4. Tim Hall

    Tim Hall Guest

    On Fri, 05 May 2006 09:24:12 GMT, Mark Thompson
    <[email protected]*_turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com> wrote:

    >> Given the above I judge the chances of the story being complete
    >> bullshit (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
     
  5. David Martin

    David Martin Guest

    Mark Thompson wrote:
    > > Given the above I judge the chances of the story being complete
    > > bullshit (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
     
  6. John B

    John B Guest

    Tim Hall wrote:

    > On Fri, 05 May 2006 09:24:12 GMT, Mark Thompson
    > <[email protected]*_turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com> wrote:
    >
    > >> Given the above I judge the chances of the story being complete
    > >> bullshit (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
     
  7. Peter Clinch

    Peter Clinch Guest

    David Martin wrote:

    > 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 protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
     
  8. Jim Price

    Jim Price Guest

    David Martin wrote:
    > Mark Thompson wrote:
    >>> Given the above I judge the chances of the story being complete
    >>> bullshit (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.

    > 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
     
  9. davek

    davek Guest

    Jim Price wrote:
    > 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.

    > 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.
    :)

    >and negotiating the right turn into Northumberland Avenue.


    Heading east along Embankment would make that a left turn.

    d.
     
  10. LSMike

    LSMike Guest

    Sniper8052(L96A1) wrote:
    <snip good story of amazing stupidity!>
    >
    > 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.
     
  11. Tony Raven wrote:
    > Danny Colyer wrote:
    >> Pinky wrote:
    >>> 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
     
  12. Jim Price

    Jim Price Guest

    davek wrote:
    > Jim Price wrote:
    >> 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
     
  13. Tony Raven

    Tony Raven Guest

    Tim Hall wrote:
    >
    > 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
     
  14. Tom Crispin

    Tom Crispin Guest

    On 5 May 2006 00:28:14 -0700, "Squashme" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >
    >David Martin wrote:
    >> 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.
     
  15. Tony Raven

    Tony Raven Guest

    Ambrose Nankivell wrote:
    >
    > 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
     
  16. Squashme

    Squashme Guest

    Tom Crispin wrote:
    > On 5 May 2006 00:28:14 -0700, "Squashme" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >
    > >David Martin wrote:
    > >> 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.
     
  17. Squashme

    Squashme Guest

    Tony Raven wrote:
    > Squashme wrote:
    > >
    > > 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?
     
  18. Squashme

    Squashme Guest

    David Martin wrote:
    > Squashme wrote:
    > > David Martin wrote:
    > > > 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.
    >
    > 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.

    > 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?

    > 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
    > completely unknown to most in the group.


    To most! Not from round here eh?

    > 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?
    >
    > 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.

    > (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.
     
  19. Simon Brooke

    Simon Brooke Guest

    in message <[email protected]>,
    Squashme ('[email protected]') wrote:

    >> 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 protected] (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.
     
  20. Tom Crispin

    Tom Crispin Guest

    On 5 May 2006 10:40:46 -0700, "Squashme" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >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.
     
Loading...