On 16/08/2017 23:55, TMS320 wrote:

On 16/08/17 16:45, JNugent wrote:

(b) "Not necessary for sturdy ropes to be attached to the lifebelt and
to a static point onshore"?

I have not said that sturdy ropes are not necessary. If you stopped
twisting things (amongst other faults) your opinions might get more
respect.


I have made no suggestions.

An inch is not your suggestion? Well blow me down.

For the thickness of the ropes attached to lifebelts?

The phrase was "the better part of an inch".

It was not a suggestion, it was an estimate based on direct observation.

I have said nothing derogatory about the vision of cyclists.

Oh? I am sure nobody is fooled.

Except you, obviously.

I have said something about their concentration and prioritising of
progress over safety, leading to their sometimes not looking where
they are going.

Not looking will definitely result in not seeing. Not seeing does not
imply not looking.

But not looking is a guarantee of not seeing.

There is no connection between the ill-advised behaviour of Citizen A
and that of Citizen B.

Citizen B cannot rely upon absolution because of what the bigger boys
did.

Did citizen A have absolution? If yes, then definitely yes.

"If".