UK and Europe · Public discussion

Helmet Poll

Started by Drinky · · Last activity · 70 posts · 1,937 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
UK and Europe
Published
24 November 2004
Last activity
27 November 2004
Original author
Drinky
Posts
70
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
1,937
Views / 30 days
0
Topics

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 61–70 of 70
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 18:24:17 -0000, "John Redman"
    <[email hidden]> top-posted:

    Quoted message said:

    YES

    No we can't, it keeps breaking the threading in people's newsreaders.
    Do KUATB!

    No-one's problem but Drinky's when it comes time for him or her to
    collate the results and announce the answer. :-)

    --
    Dave...

  2. In message <[email hidden]>, Patrick Herring
    <[email hidden]> writes

    Quoted message said:

    [1] I can never remember when one should use "owing to" and when "due
    to", no doubt due to or owing to my grammar school education.

    I'd say 'because of' is probably better in both your sentences.

    --
    congokid
    Good restaurants in London? Number one on Google
    http://congokid.com

  3. In message <[email hidden]>, Patrick Herring
    <[email hidden]> writes

    Quoted message said:

    [1] I can never remember when one should use "owing to" and when "due
    to", no doubt due to or owing to my grammar school education.

    I'd say 'because of' is probably better in both your sentences.

    --
    congokid
    Good restaurants in London? Number one on Google
    http://congokid.com

  4. Patrick Herring said:

    "Woody" <[email hidden]> wrote:

    |
    | "Drinky" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    | news:[email hidden]...
    | > Can we do a straw poll
    | Why?
    It might show how representative this ng is of the cycling population
    as a whole, at least on this matter. I believe the helmet wearing %


    is

    Quoted message said:

    known though I've no idea what it is.

    it could show whether the people who respond to this thread (and its
    orphans) are definitely /un/representative of the cycling population
    who were observed during studies of helmet wearing levels (AIUI it is
    not universally accepted that this is representative of the cycling
    population as a whole).

    If you were to get the same percentage as DfT(?) helmet figures that
    would not tell you that the respondents /are/ representative only that
    it is possible that they are. And this doesn't even get into the
    question of whether the poll respondents are answering the question
    that was posed or the one that most people seem to have been assuming
    was intended. ie Yes, I don't wear a helmet or Yes I do wear a helmet
    best wishes
    james

  5. "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:
    Mark Thompson said:

    Given the huge amount of people on this ng a web
    based poll would be the only sensible way to do it.

    And one which is less simplistic. I note that there is no way of
    registering "I wear a helmet but I don't think that not doing so is
    stupid" or the equivalent. It appears to be a question designed
    solely to prove a point, which is why haven't answered it.

    You suspect a lack of scientific rigour? Why should this particular
    piece of helmet research be any different?

    --
    Dave...

  6. Clive George said:

    "Drinky" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > Can we do a straw poll of how many people don't wear a helmet compared


    to

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > those that do.
    >
    > Please reply to this post with either Yes or No in the Subject and


    let's

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    do
    > a count after a week.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Why don't you take the time to do some research of your own - you're
    clearly
    new round here, so it may be worth your while checking the newsgroup
    archives to find out what has been said many many times already.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    No need to be patronising. Do your own research and you might want to
    reconsider your definition of new!

    Quoted message said:

    Hmm, since August 2003. So how the hell have you managed to miss all the
    discussion over the past year telling you where you went wrong? Ah - you got
    ignored last time you posted your anecdote.

    Quoted message said:

    And I make no apologies for being patronising - you clearly haven't looked
    up the answers to any of the questions you're asking.

    If past discussions here are any guide, there does seem to be a
    correlation of helmet-wearing with poor mental skills. Of course we
    must recognise that does not necessarily mean that wearing a helmet
    makes you stupid.

    --
    Chris Malcolm [email hidden] +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205
    IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
    [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

  7. in message <[email hidden]>, Just zis Guy,

    you know? (') said:
    Drinky said:

    Please reply to this post with either Yes or No in the Subject and
    let's do a count after a week.

    Ah. So you don't understand Usenet threading models either, then.

    He does, you don't. Usenet messages should be threaded on the References
    header; what's in the subject line is (or should be) irrelevant.

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

    ;; may contain traces of nuts, bolts or washers.

  8. congokid <[email hidden]> wrote:

    | In message <[email hidden]>, Patrick Herring
    | <[email hidden]> writes
    |
    | >[1] I can never remember when one should use "owing to" and when "due
    | >to", no doubt due to or owing to my grammar school education.
    |
    | I'd say 'because of' is probably better in both your sentences.

    Cheat! Or swot, I'm not sure.

    --
    Patrick Herring, http://www.anweald.co.uk

  9. In message <[email hidden]>, Patrick Herring
    <[email hidden]> writes

    Quoted message said:

    congokid <[email hidden]> wrote:

    | In message <[email hidden]>, Patrick Herring
    | <[email hidden]> writes
    |
    | >[1] I can never remember when one should use "owing to" and when "due
    | >to", no doubt due to or owing to my grammar school education.
    |
    | I'd say 'because of' is probably better in both your sentences.

    Cheat! Or swot, I'm not sure.

    I vaguely remember reading that 'due to' isn't used before a noun
    (possibly Sir Ernest Gowers' Complete Plain Words). Don't really know
    about 'owing to'.

    --
    congokid
    Good restaurants in London? Number one on Google
    http://congokid.com

  10. "Drinky" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Can we do a straw poll of how many people don't wear a helmet compared to
    those that do.

    Please reply to this post with either Yes or No in the Subject and let's
    do a count after a week.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.