{Melb} Pigdon/Canning Street Roundabout

[cfsmtb]

{puts on local advocacy hat }

A local resident has raised very serious concerns regarding cyclist/motorist conflict at this roundabout in North Carlton. To their credit, Yarra Council has installed green bikelane treatments in the last few years to attempt to minimise conflict between road users. From BV, have a look at the first five images that illustrate this roundabout:
http://www.bv.com.au/file/Examples of roundabouts.pdf

Unfortunately there are further reports of serious conflicts between road users.

Possible solutions that have been suggested:
- the removal of the roundabout and the creation of the right of way along either Pigdon Street or Canning Street,
- the implementation of traffic lights,
- the implementation of speed humps.

If you ride through this roundabout and have further possible idea/solutions please don’t hesitate to contact me. I'm volunteering this week to observe this roundabout at morning and evening peaktimes. If you want to help, have further feedback etc, please sent me a private message or email yarrabug-ownerATyahoogroupsDOTcom

While you're at it, peruse our website: (shameless free membership offer! )
http://www.yarrabug.org

Also please contact BV ([email protected]) and Yarra Council with your ideas and feedback. ([email protected])
http://www.yarracity.vic.gov.au/services/accesspoints.asp

Hopefully a satisfactory resolution can be found to deal with this *troublesome* roundabout before further serious incidents occur.


{/takes off local advocacy hat }

 

[Matt]

well they're right about one thing
that photo demonstrating the safest place for a rider on approach to a
single lane roundabout is in the middle of the road!
I've been knocked off once and cut off a number of times by drivers making a
left turn over the top of me
now they can run me down from behind!

"cfsmtb" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> {puts on local advocacy hat }
>
> A local resident has raised very serious concerns regarding
> cyclist/motorist conflict at this roundabout in North Carlton. To their
> credit, Yarra Council has installed green bikelane treatments in the
> last few years to attempt to minimise conflict between road users. From
> BV, have a look at the first five images that illustrate this
> roundabout:
> http://www.bv.com.au/file/Examples of roundabouts.pdf
>
> Unfortunately there are further reports of serious conflicts between
> road users.
>
> Possible solutions that have been suggested:
> - the removal of the roundabout and the creation of the right of way
> along either Pigdon Street or Canning Street,
> - the implementation of traffic lights,
> - the implementation of speed humps.
>
> If you ride through this roundabout and have further possible
> idea/solutions please don't hesitate to contact me. I'm volunteering
> this week to observe this roundabout at morning and evening peaktimes.
> If you want to help, have further feedback etc, please sent me a
> private message or email yarrabug-ownerATyahoogroupsDOTcom
>
> While you're at it, peruse our website: (shameless free membership
> offer! )
> http://www.yarrabug.org
>
> Also please contact BV ([email protected]) and Yarra Council with
> your ideas and feedback. ([email protected])
> http://www.yarracity.vic.gov.au/services/accesspoints.asp
>
> Hopefully a satisfactory resolution can be found to deal with this
> *troublesome* roundabout before further serious incidents occur.
>
>
> {/takes off local advocacy hat }
>
>
> --
> cfsmtb
>

 

[Gemma Kernich]

"cfsmtb" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> {puts on local advocacy hat }
>
> If you ride through this roundabout and have further possible
> idea/solutions please don't hesitate to contact me. I'm volunteering
> this week to observe this roundabout at morning and evening peaktimes.
> If you want to help, have further feedback etc, please sent me a
> private message or email yarrabug-ownerATyahoogroupsDOTcom
>

{Puts on engineer hat }
I don't ride the roundabout but I have some suggestions. Single lane, slow
speed roundabouts are good for bikes. Large, highspeed or double lanes are
bad. This one has poor attributes in relation to possible speed, sight
distance and throat geometry - it's left until the roundabout itself for
cyclists and motorsists to sort themselves out! Too many decisions all made
at the same point...

- Narrow the throat of the roundabout and completely remove the bicycle lane
from the incoming throat to encourage cyclists to 'take the lane' on the
approach. This will slow traffic speed. Narrowing of throat could be
done with kerb protrubrances.
- Remove parking from close to the intersection to increase sight distance
(kerb protrubrances may fix that too)
- Remove the Green Treatment through the roundabout encouraging cyclists to
ride on the very left when they will not be seen, and where someone may be
tempted to overtake them (squeeze them out) whilst on the roundabout.
- Increase the size of the centre island, and/or install more kerb
protrubrances to reduce the amount of space the cyclists has to 'defend' and
the speed of vehicles through the roundabout (Needs to be checked with
turning radii of appropriate size vehicles for the road - ie buses etc -
could install semi-mountable kerb if required)
- increase sight distance by chopping down trees, offsetting the roundabout
perhaps to see around the verandha posts etc. if there is a particularly bad
sight distance problem. (hard to tell from pics)

bobs yer uncle. And better than the three other options suggested IMHO.

Gemm

 

[Euan]

cfsmtb wrote:
> {puts on local advocacy hat }
>
> A local resident has raised very serious concerns regarding
> cyclist/motorist conflict at this roundabout in North Carlton. To their
> credit, Yarra Council has installed green bikelane treatments in the
> last few years to attempt to minimise conflict between road users. From
> BV, have a look at the first five images that illustrate this
> roundabout:
> http://www.bv.com.au/file/Examples of roundabouts.pdf
>
> Unfortunately there are further reports of serious conflicts between
> road users.
>
> Possible solutions that have been suggested:
> - the removal of the roundabout and the creation of the right of way
> along either Pigdon Street or Canning Street,
> - the implementation of traffic lights,
> - the implementation of speed humps.

Or implement bicycle lane in the correct position; the middle of the lane.

Dictating that cyclists should `hug the gutter' around the roundabout is
sending the wrong message to cyclists and drivers. I don't use that
roundabout but have used similar ones and the safest place is the middle
of the lane. Period. Mark the road to reflect that and vehicle
operators will no longer be in doubt as to the correct course of action
for cyclists to take.
--
Cheers | ~~ __@
Euan | ~~ _-\<,
Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*)

 

[Euan]

Gemma Kernich wrote:
> "cfsmtb" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>{puts on local advocacy hat }
>>
>>If you ride through this roundabout and have further possible
>>idea/solutions please don't hesitate to contact me. I'm volunteering
>>this week to observe this roundabout at morning and evening peaktimes.
>>If you want to help, have further feedback etc, please sent me a
>>private message or email yarrabug-ownerATyahoogroupsDOTcom
>>
>
>
> {Puts on engineer hat }
> I don't ride the roundabout but I have some suggestions. Single lane, slow
> speed roundabouts are good for bikes. Large, highspeed or double lanes are
> bad. This one has poor attributes in relation to possible speed, sight
> distance and throat geometry - it's left until the roundabout itself for
> cyclists and motorsists to sort themselves out! Too many decisions all made
> at the same point...
>
> - Narrow the throat of the roundabout and completely remove the bicycle lane
> from the incoming throat to encourage cyclists to 'take the lane' on the
> approach. This will slow traffic speed. Narrowing of throat could be
> done with kerb protrubrances.
> - Remove parking from close to the intersection to increase sight distance
> (kerb protrubrances may fix that too)
> - Remove the Green Treatment through the roundabout encouraging cyclists to
> ride on the very left when they will not be seen, and where someone may be
> tempted to overtake them (squeeze them out) whilst on the roundabout.
> - Increase the size of the centre island, and/or install more kerb
> protrubrances to reduce the amount of space the cyclists has to 'defend' and
> the speed of vehicles through the roundabout (Needs to be checked with
> turning radii of appropriate size vehicles for the road - ie buses etc -
> could install semi-mountable kerb if required)
> - increase sight distance by chopping down trees, offsetting the roundabout
> perhaps to see around the verandha posts etc. if there is a particularly bad
> sight distance problem. (hard to tell from pics)
>
> bobs yer uncle. And better than the three other options suggested IMHO.

Excellent suggestions from my layman's perspective.

You talk about improving sight lines yet the Hans Mordeman (spelling)
school of thought, second generation traffic engineering, emphapsises
increasing uncertainty by decreasing sight lines. As I understand the
theory, the less pre-planning a vehcile operator is exposed to, the less
likely they are to take risky behaviour and the slower they drive.

Have you any thoughts on that?
--
Cheers | ~~ __@
Euan | ~~ _-\<,
Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*)

 

[TimC]

On 2006-04-26, Euan (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> cfsmtb wrote:
>> {puts on local advocacy hat }
>> Possible solutions that have been suggested:
>> - the removal of the roundabout and the creation of the right of way
>> along either Pigdon Street or Canning Street,
>> - the implementation of traffic lights,
>> - the implementation of speed humps.
>
> Or implement bicycle lane in the correct position; the middle of the lane.
>
> Dictating that cyclists should `hug the gutter' around the roundabout is
> sending the wrong message to cyclists and drivers. I don't use that
> roundabout but have used similar ones and the safest place is the middle
> of the lane. Period. Mark the road to reflect that and vehicle
> operators will no longer be in doubt as to the correct course of action
> for cyclists to take.

Ooh, I wonder if I have a way of "encouraging" cars to yield:

ASCII art warning -- may need a non-proportional font to view this:

||| \_____________/
====\\\ ///
-------_ \\\==================/// _-----------
\__ _\\\_ _ _________ /// __/
\ \\\ \ / /// /
\ \\\ \ / ||| /
\ \\\ \ / ||| /
\ \\\ \ / ||| /
| ||| | \\\ |
| //|| | \\\ |
| ///|| | \\||
green treatment --->///|| | ||||
||||||| | ||||
||||//
|||/ <--- painted dashed "give way" markings
||//
|/|n <---traffic island with a give way sign turned slightly to face cars
|||u
|||

Sometimes I get the feeling I make too much use of ascii art.

Plenty of green treatment, a bicycle lane with a small traffic
island/second curb to the right, to the left of the main part of the
lane approaching the roundabout, just before the bicycle lane moves
out. Give way markings and sign on curbing (curbing would naturally
be some of that sloping bicycle friendly stuff rather than a sudden
gutter) between bicycle lane and "car lane", turned slightly to face
cars to the right of the sign.

Make the green treated part where bicycles move out fairly sizeable,
to give them plenty of room to move if a car does blow the give way
sign. Then green treatment throughout the roundabout, in the middle
of the lane. Dual lane roundabouts would require some more thought,
perhaps a green lane in middle of each lane, with joining bits at each
entry/exit pair, with "give way" marking on the leading car side.

--
TimC
This message consists entirely of true bits and false bits!

 

[cfsmtb]

I was down there this morning, counted 370 cyclists through the roundabout & witnessed several "unsure" incidents, ie: not a stack but pretty damn close.

Chopping down trees would probably get the locals ****** off enough to shove your head on stick. Poor sight lines, poor placement of existing signage, green bike lane has faded badly and the traffic is utilising this roundabout as a ratrun alternative parallel to Princes/Brunswick Rd. I'll be down there again tomorrow for the arvo peak commute & further recces are planned. Good point tho, Jackie the Yarra Mayor came down for a visit and took on board most of my criticisms. Now it's up to following up a report / suggestions / further site visits and getting the traffic engineers onside. Which may not be all that difficult. As for Mordeman's theories, there's inadequate signage anyway to let road users know whats looming. Roundabouts promote aggression regardless of *nice* signage or not.

 

[AndrewJ]

Hmm. Lots of interesting suggestions here.

To me this looks like a clear case for putting bicycles in the middle
of the lane.

Old people tell the same story over and over, so stop me if you've
heard this one before. On my first week riding to work in Japan, I had
a bit of a wobble and fell off in front of a car. No way was it the
driver's fault. But he stopped and rushed over to me and made sure I
was alright.

When I got to work I told my work colleagues "Hey, isn't it wonderful
here in Japan, people are so polite." then recounted this story. They
looked at me as if I was a complete moron, and said "You do realise
that there is a mandatory jail sentence for any driver that injures a
cyclist ?"

Too much with the "encouragement", not enough with the whacking stick.
Stupid motorist, lose your license. Dangerous motorist, go to jail for
a long time.

 

[Zebee Johnstone]

In aus.bicycle on Wed, 26 Apr 2006 09:50:24 GMT
Euan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> You talk about improving sight lines yet the Hans Mordeman (spelling)
> school of thought, second generation traffic engineering, emphapsises
> increasing uncertainty by decreasing sight lines. As I understand the
> theory, the less pre-planning a vehcile operator is exposed to, the less
> likely they are to take risky behaviour and the slower they drive.

Only if a) they realise there's poor sight and b) there's enough
traffic so that poor sight matters.

It has to be clear that there's bad sightlines, so the fact there's
road they can't see has to be obvious, and that cars are hidden has to
be obvious. People still pass on the crest of a hill if they don't
realise there's a dip that hides cars. I've been on plenty of roads
where I thought the double white lines were silly until a car appeared
"from nowhere" hidden in a dip I didn't realise was there. IT has to
be obvious that the visibility is poor well before bad decisions will
bite - the road user has to have the chance to realise they had better
slow down and look, and a good reason to. No good hiding everything at
the roundabout itself if the approaches look good so the driver goes in
too hard.

There has to be enough traffic so that the road user thinks "OK, there
is likely to be something" and they will behave accordingly.

As I've experienced my bike stopping at the same time my conscious
mind saw the car I would have hit had the subconscious not activated
the brake hand, because the conscious mind wasn't expecting a car
where cars never had been before, I'm very aware of expectations
driving behaviour.

A roundabout with bad sightlines that isn't often used will breed
carelessness in people who do use it.

Zebee

 

[TimC]

On 2006-04-26, AndrewJ (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> Hmm. Lots of interesting suggestions here.
>
> To me this looks like a clear case for putting bicycles in the middle
> of the lane.
>
> Old people tell the same story over and over, so stop me if you've
> heard this one before. On my first week riding to work in Japan, I had
> a bit of a wobble and fell off in front of a car. No way was it the
> driver's fault. But he stopped and rushed over to me and made sure I
> was alright.
>
> When I got to work I told my work colleagues "Hey, isn't it wonderful
> here in Japan, people are so polite." then recounted this story. They
> looked at me as if I was a complete moron, and said "You do realise
> that there is a mandatory jail sentence for any driver that injures a
> cyclist ?"
>
> Too much with the "encouragement", not enough with the whacking stick.
> Stupid motorist, lose your license. Dangerous motorist, go to jail for
> a long time.

That's letter-to-the-editor material you have there

--
TimC
Bad command. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaay. -- unknown

 

[TimC]

On 2006-04-26, Euan (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> Excellent suggestions from my layman's perspective.
>
> You talk about improving sight lines yet the Hans Mordeman (spelling)
> school of thought, second generation traffic engineering, emphapsises
> increasing uncertainty by decreasing sight lines. As I understand the
> theory, the less pre-planning a vehcile operator is exposed to, the less
> likely they are to take risky behaviour and the slower they drive.
>
> Have you any thoughts on that?

Won't work in Australia. Given the number of drivers *per* BR that
overtake us when we are doing 50km/h, and they are doing greater
(hence any impact with a vehicle coming the opposite direction is
going to *hurt*) around blind corners (and double white lines of
course) is greater than 1, I doubt these drivers (OK, so they are from
Diamond Creek, and hence aren't really human, more human-bogan
hybrids) would think much of a lack of sightlines around some piddly
little roundabout.

--
TimC
load "linux",8,1

 

[John Pitts]

On 2006-04-26, Euan <[email protected]> wrote:
> You talk about improving sight lines yet the Hans Mordeman (spelling)
> school of thought, second generation traffic engineering, emphapsises
> increasing uncertainty by decreasing sight lines. As I understand the
> theory, the less pre-planning a vehcile operator is exposed to, the less
> likely they are to take risky behaviour and the slower they drive.

That might explain the tendency around here (Dubbo NSW) to build
shrubberies in the middle of large roundabouts. Certainly generates
uncertainty in sedan drivers (eg me, when I'm in the car), but the 4WD
and truck drivers can see over the top, and zoom on through.

--
John
Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no
account be allowed to do the job. - Douglas Adams

 

[John Pitts]

> --
> TimC
> load "linux",8,1

Ooh, that takes me back...

--
John
"She's not a tramp! Her name is JUDY!"
(That's a nice name) "Yeah, she's a nice girl."

 

[rooman]

On 2006-04-26, Euan <[email protected]> wrote:
> You talk about improving sight lines yet the Hans Mordeman (spelling)
> school of thought, second generation traffic engineering, emphapsises
> increasing uncertainty by decreasing sight lines. As I understand the
> theory, the less pre-planning a vehcile operator is exposed to, the less
> likely they are to take risky behaviour and the slower they drive.

That might explain the tendency around here (Dubbo NSW) to build
shrubberies in the middle of large roundabouts. Certainly generates
uncertainty in sedan drivers (eg me, when I'm in the car), but the 4WD
and truck drivers can see over the top, and zoom on through.

--
John
Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no
account be allowed to do the job. - Douglas Adams

shrubbery...shrubbery...a SHRUBBERY

hey give em all coconuts they wont miss their cages if they rub them together will sound like a diff whine...how would they know they wen't driving a cage...would solve all our roundabout hassles...

"wun day ladd orll this 'l be yors!!!!! ( points at draped window)

"owot!, the cuurt'ins?"

(runs away) clippety clup, clippety clippety clup clippety clup

 

[TimC]

On 2006-04-26, John Pitts (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>> --
>> TimC
>> load "linux",8,1
>
> Ooh, that takes me back...

There is actually a project called Lunix, (presumably used by
loonies), that is a minimal port to the C=64.

> John
> "She's not a tramp! Her name is JUDY!"
> (That's a nice name) "Yeah, she's a nice girl."

(Big deal. Did you get in her pants?)
No way - she's not that kind of a girl, Booger!

I loove that song. Alas, I donut have a copy.

--
TimC
"Legacy (adj): an uncomplimentary computer-industry epithet that
means 'it works'." -- Anthony DeBoer in ASR

 

[Euan]

TimC wrote:
> On 2006-04-26, Euan (aka Bruce)
> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>
>>Excellent suggestions from my layman's perspective.
>>
>>You talk about improving sight lines yet the Hans Mordeman (spelling)
>>school of thought, second generation traffic engineering, emphapsises
>>increasing uncertainty by decreasing sight lines. As I understand the
>>theory, the less pre-planning a vehcile operator is exposed to, the less
>>likely they are to take risky behaviour and the slower they drive.
>>
>>Have you any thoughts on that?
>
>
> Won't work in Australia. Given the number of drivers *per* BR that
> overtake us when we are doing 50km/h, and they are doing greater
> (hence any impact with a vehicle coming the opposite direction is
> going to *hurt*) around blind corners (and double white lines of
> course) is greater than 1, I doubt these drivers (OK, so they are from
> Diamond Creek, and hence aren't really human, more human-bogan
> hybrids) would think much of a lack of sightlines around some piddly
> little roundabout.

I disagree. The roads you're talking about encourage driver stupidity.
There are defined lanes each way, lots of signs telling them what to
do and while the corner may be blind there aren't enough visual cues to
make it obvious that the corner's blind. Introduce more uncertainty by
removing the centre line, warning signs etc. and drivers are forced to
think.

These principals have been employed in accident black spots in the past
in Europe with startling results. There's nothing to suggest that
European drivers are substantially different to Australian drivers.

Be that as it may, you're comparing apples with oranges. Second
generation traffic calming (engineering) is more about urban
environments so your observation is somewhat irrelevant.

In summation you have presented no compelling evidence that Australian
drivers are substantially different from European or American drivers.
Second generation traffic calming has worked for them, why not Australians?

I'm not saying that second generation traffic calling's magic bullet
and should be employed in every situation but do dismiss it out of hand
without any scientific basis is stupid.
--
Cheers | ~~ __@
Euan | ~~ _-\<,
Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*)

 

[Gemma_k]

"Zebee Johnstone" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In aus.bicycle on Wed, 26 Apr 2006 09:50:24 GMT
> Euan <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > You talk about improving sight lines yet the Hans Mordeman (spelling)
> > school of thought, second generation traffic engineering, emphapsises
> > increasing uncertainty by decreasing sight lines. As I understand the
> > theory, the less pre-planning a vehcile operator is exposed to, the less
> > likely they are to take risky behaviour and the slower they drive.
>
> Only if a) they realise there's poor sight and b) there's enough
> traffic so that poor sight matters.

AND that just one 'poor' location amoungst all the other more 'predictable'
sections of road surrounding the area is what will catch people out. Which
is probably what is happening here.
Whilst the so-called 'Second Generation Traffic Engineering' is really just
the outcome of just one paper from the UK (and not really recognised as
second-generation traffic engineering!) it is well-recognised, accepted and
documented that traffic speeds ARE influenced by the urban environment. And
increase in traffic speeds greatly increases the severity (and liklihood in
urban areas) of a crash. What Ewan is referring is but one very narrow
method of 'traffic calming' - for example Woonerfs (ie streets like in
Amsterdam) or 'New Urbanism' are similar concepts - wher the streets are
'open space' for people, and valued by the local community. There's a good
example of current thinking/best practice here
http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm4.htm which explains it all pretty well -
especially that a mix of treatments is important, not just the use of one.
Nothing Second Generation about modern traffic engineering - traffic
engineering has been evolving and constantly changing probably from the
Romans to now.
>
> It has to be clear that there's bad sightlines, so the fact there's
> road they can't see has to be obvious, and that cars are hidden has to
> be obvious. People still pass on the crest of a hill if they don't
> realise there's a dip that hides cars. I've been on plenty of roads
> where I thought the double white lines were silly until a car appeared
> "from nowhere" hidden in a dip I didn't realise was there. IT has to
> be obvious that the visibility is poor well before bad decisions will
> bite - the road user has to have the chance to realise they had better
> slow down and look, and a good reason to. No good hiding everything at
> the roundabout itself if the approaches look good so the driver goes in
> too hard.
>
One of the hard things about engineering is deciding what is an appropriate
treatment in relation to a location, and the crash effects it will have.
For example, at the roundabout in question it is NOT up with modern
roundabout design (nor does it comply with Part 14-Bicycles of the Traffic
Engineering Guidelines). Throttling it down to physically restrict vehicle
speed, and reducing the opportunity for a bicycle to get 'lost' in all the
spare space will improve things. However, with people being people there
will still be some crashes there, a few cyclists might get some grazes and
bumps or maybe their arms or legs broken once in a while.... it's not
perfect and we dont' live in a perfect world. But because vehicle speeds
are physically contrained the liklihood of the crash being severe is low.
So - calls from advocacy to rip it out to put in traffic lights will occur.
However at traffic signals speeds are high, and when an error is made the
liklihood of the crash being severe (serious casualty/death) is high. A hard
trade-off to make...

For what it's worth I think Vicroad's cycle notes provide very poor advice
in the area of roundabouts
http://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/vrpdf/trum/TR2005253v2.pdf
I don't know why anyone would recommend a bicycle lane to continue right up
to the roundabout in single lane roundabouts - I suspect BV been calling for
this to occur?!?!?! Most everyday cyclists know the safest place to ride in
a single-lane roundabout is in the middle of the lane on the approach and in
the middle of the lane in the circulation area. Only scaredy cat nutters
who 'think' it's safer would mistakenly ride on the very left in the bicycle
lane area. That is, until they get hit and give up riding altogether...

Crazy I say! I can see no benefit to providing a lane right up to the
circulation area, and even less reason to provide one within the circulation
area.

Gemm
ps the only roundabout I personally think looks OK from the photos on BV's
page is the Grove and Barrow St one.
http://www.bv.com.au/file/Examples of roundabouts.pdf The rest I either
dislike (ranging from mildly dislike to vehmently hate). Bicycle Lanes in
Vic have gone crazy :-(

 

[John Pitts]

On 2006-04-26, rooman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> John Pitts Wrote:
>> That might explain the tendency around here (Dubbo NSW) to build
>> shrubberies in the middle of large roundabouts.

> shrubbery...shrubbery...a SHRUBBERY
>
> hey give em all coconuts they wont miss their cages if they rub them
> together will sound like a diff whine...how would they know they wen't
> driving a cage...would solve all our roundabout hassles...
>
> "wun day ladd orll this 'l be yors!!!!! ( points at draped window)
>
> "owot!, the cuurt'ins?"
>
> (runs away) clippety clup, clippety clippety clup clippety clup

Let's not go to aus.bicycles. It is a silly place.

--
john
I think fish is nice, but then I think that rain is wet, so who am I to
judge? - President of the Galaxy, HHGG

 

[John Pitts]

On 2006-04-26, TimC <[email protected]> wrote:
> There is actually a project called Lunix, (presumably used by
> loonies), that is a minimal port to the C=64.

Cool. I used to have a FORTH cartridge for mine. Which included the
FORTH reverse-Polish assembler. Good times.

> No way - she's not that kind of a girl, Booger!
>
> I loove that song. Alas, I donut have a copy.

Me too.

--
John
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's
too dark to read. - Groucho Marx