The demise of the school run

On Aug 21, 4:38 pm, Simon Mason wrote:
On Aug 20, 7:39 pm, Simon Mason wrote:



On Aug 20, 5:56 pm, "Simon Mason"
wrote:

"Bertie Wooster" wrote in message

.. .

I had an interesting email regarding Nuxxy while on holiday, I'm
inclined to believe that Simon has received the same or similar
information.

If it was during your holiday, then yes, it would seem so.

--
Simon Mason

I've found another in my Googlemail account which I rarely check.

And another one to my home account which was a very poor fake.


Now added to the blocked senders list.

--
Simon Mason

On Mon, 22 Aug 2011 00:33:06 -0700 (PDT), Simon Mason
wrote:

snip

It is now normal to see kids playing ball in the streets
and cycling and walking to school as you have also noticed in the more
affluent Home Counties.


But is it true that some cyclists ride through such areas at greater than the
speed limit - just because they can?

(For "cyclists" read "selfish *******s")
--
Simple Simon Mason - who cycles at 25mph in 20mph limits just because the limits do not apply to cyclists.
This includes exceeding the speed limit past three schools. A total disregard for the well-being of vulnerable road users.
The actions of a true psycholist.

On 22/08/2011 08:33, Simon Mason wrote:
On Aug 21, 6:27 pm, Mark ] wrote:
Jim writes:
http://www.hertfordshiremercury.co.u...xbourne/Parent...

I've 'got access to a car,', but I don't use it unless I don't have
something better available! And that's the case for most people.

Yes. Here in Hoddesdon I have `access to a car', but it stays in the
garage for350 days/ year. It's usually easier and quicker, as well as
more pleasant, to get about by bike for most journeys.

Same here, except my wife commutes in it so I don't get as much
benefit as you.

Be honest. Your 16 stone sweaty wife runs your pathetic life & tells
you she is having the car & you can't.

Still, I only have the one car, instead of two so I still save
shedloads as compared to the average two car family.

That's because a low level lab rat's wages only extend to one car - and
the 16 stone sweaty 'boss' claims it - you pathetic wimp.

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster
University

Judith wrote:
On Mon, 22 Aug 2011 00:33:06 -0700 (PDT), Simon
wrote:

snip

It is now normal to see kids playing ball in the streets
and cycling and walking to school as you have also noticed in the more
affluent Home Counties.


But is it true that some cyclists ride through such areas at greater than the
speed limit - just because they can?

That appears (on the face of it) to be irrelevant to this thread.

BugBear

On Aug 23, 8:52*am, bugbear wrote:

On Mon, 22 Aug 2011 00:33:06 -0700 (PDT), Simon
wrote:

snip

It is now normal to see kids playing ball in the streets
and cycling and walking to school as you have also noticed in the more
affluent Home Counties.

But is it true that some cyclists ride through such areas at greater than the
speed limit - just because they can?

That appears (on the face of it) to be irrelevant to this thread.

* * BugBear

As per usual.
This is more pertinent.

QUOTE:

"CHILDREN have celebrated the success of a new project that saw them
“thinking green” when travelling to and from their North Tyneside
school. The Year 5 students took part in a 12-week pilot project,
which supported daily journeys on foot and by bike and measured the
effects of encouraging such physically active travel.Bryn Dowson,
Sustrans regional director, said: “We know that there are many more
children that want to walk and cycle to school than actually do.

“We know that this is largely because parents are worried about
traffic on our busy roads. They are right, there are too many cars
travelling far too fast, but that doesn’t stop children from finding
safe ways to walk and cycle to school.

“FEAT 1st will have helped give children the skills, confidence and
knowledge to make these important journeys and it will also offer the
same help and support to their parents.

“We can easily work together to create an active travel culture in
North Tyneside which will help ease congestion, improve road safety
and make stronger and healthier local communities. There is something
in it for everyone.”

http://www.journallive.co.uk/lifesty...1634-29283453/

--
Simon Mason

On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 08:52:27 +0100, bugbear
wrote:

Judith wrote:
On Mon, 22 Aug 2011 00:33:06 -0700 (PDT), Simon
wrote:

snip

It is now normal to see kids playing ball in the streets
and cycling and walking to school as you have also noticed in the more
affluent Home Counties.


But is it true that some cyclists ride through such areas at greater than the
speed limit - just because they can?

That appears (on the face of it) to be irrelevant to this thread.

BugBear


Good morning.

We missed you over the weekend and then your absence yesterday. Did you do
anything nice?

If you ask Papermule nicely they may get you a laptop so that you can take it
home to use at the weekends; or is it a condition of employment that you only
post here during work's time?

Judith wrote:

We missed you over the weekend and then your absence yesterday.

I'm grateful that I mean so much to you.

BugBear

On Aug 20, 5:56*pm, "Simon Mason"
wrote:
"Bertie Wooster" wrote in message

...



I had an interesting email regarding Nuxxy while on holiday, I'm
inclined to believe that Simon has received the same or similar
information.

If it was during your holiday, then yes, it would seem so.

So nice to know that so many people care. Thanks to Judith to
alerting me to this discussion.

Anyway, just to explain (since people seem to want to know) that I am
taking a temporary (possibly permanent) and voluntary break from
Usenet, because I have other (important) things on my plate, and I am
sick of dealing with "cyclists can do no wrong and must never be
restricted, while motorists can do no right and must always be
restricted" types who wilfully disregard the facts whenever it suits
them and who have the most outrageous double standards. Once you've
seen a few of their posts, you've seen them all. In particular, Simon
Mason's continued agenda-driven trolling by starting reams of anti-
motorist threads in a futile attempt to "change URC back" has made the
group practically unusable. He constantly repeats the same debunked
nonsense and seems to be doing it just to get a rise out of normal
people who don't share his car-hating leanings. I can't imagine that
he actually believes a lot of the stuff he says, and if he does, then
he's in real trouble.

I know that poor persecuted AN Other (you know, the car-hating nutter
guy who wants to forcibly replace all motorists with cyclists even if
that involves "temporarily" making the roads more dangerous) has been
doing his usual abrasive, odious ****-stirring (it's just one reason
why so many people hate him) by boasting to anyone who's bored enough
to listen that he has reported me to the police for "harassment" of
him, and he no doubt thinks that my recent absence from Usenet is a
result of that, and that the police have had "words" with me. Well, I
can categorically confirm that I have had NO contact whatsoever from
the police. They haven't arrested me, they haven't come to see me,
and they haven't even written to, phoned, or emailed me. (D'oh…bummer
for AN Other, eh? One minute he's basking in spiteful smugness, and
now this bombshell…looks like it's going to be a while longer until he
can vanquish everyone he doesn't like from the Internet….)

Perhaps this lack of action from the police is because they use the
usual definition of "harassment", and not the AN Other definition,
i.e. "posting on the same newsgroup as me, disagreeing with my stated
opinions, proving me wrong, and making me look like a hypocrite with a
highly questionable and irresponsible agenda by pointing out that I
wear a cycle helmet despite my stating that they don't improve
safety". Apparently he printed out every single one of my Usenet
postings (plus some I didn't make), whether or not they were anything
to do with him, and submitted them as "evidence". Sad, isn't it? He
sure is desperate to stop me from stating my opinions…you can draw
your own conclusions as to why. Anyway, hopefully he'll get done for
wasting police time, but at any rate, I am happy that the police
seemingly don't see things AN Other's way, and I'm sure other sane
people are too. For a start, can you imagine how unreasonable and
draconian the police would be towards motorists if they were all like
AN Other…? It makes me shudder just to think about it. And cyclists
would literally be able to get away with anything, even more so than
currently. His behaviour as a Wikipedia administrator shows how much
he abuses authority when he gets it.

(BTW I wonder if it's harassment to put up an attack web page about
someone and leave it there and keep updating it for years (lucky I
took a copy before he hurriedly removed it recently!), send out
defamatory emails about them for years, post as "Lou Knee" to call
them a "piece of ****", constantly insult them without provocation for
years, etc, etc…? At any rate, that's not remotely how you'd expect a
bona fide "victim" to behave towards their "stalker", is it? Nor is
this the first time by a long way that AN Other has played the
innocent victim when he's at least as bad as anyone is, as those who
have been around for a while will know, and this includes posters who
generally agree with him on transport issues, like Ian Smith.)

Anyway, sincere thanks to JNugent for saying he hoped nothing bad had
happened to me. I would also thank Simon Mason for saying the same
thing, but I am not sure if he was being sarcastic or not: would you
care to let me know please Simon? If you meant it then thank you to
you also; if it was sarcastic then shame on you for stooping to AN
Other's level (I wouldn't wish you any harm…I would hope that no-one
here except AN Other (the "Christian") would wish harm on others
simply because of their opinions).

Right, I'm off again for the time being (though I may read replies to
this thread, and may respond to them if any of them particularly merit
it). If anyone wishes to email me then I'll be checking my "from"
address from time to time, or if you want to get hold of me quicker
then you can ask Judith to email me at the address I check more often
(assuming that she's able and willing to do so of course!) But
frankly, I can't imagine why most of you would want to contact me for
any legitimate reason (although I will still probably reply to anyone
except AN Other).

Oh, and if anyone says anything unpleasant about me then they
shouldn't be surprised if Judith (or someone else) notifies me and I
reappear as a result. So if you want the Nuxx Monster to stay away
(not that anyone except AN Other and Squashme (on some days) actually
does, according to my recent "Who Wants Me to Stop Posting?" thread)
then don't say its name. You know, like the Devil, or Candyman, or
something.

"Glorious rant" (© 2011 Crispy "Crisp Man" Crispin) over. Bye!

On Aug 22, 8:33*am, Simon Mason wrote:
On Aug 21, 6:27*pm, Mark Williams ] wrote:

Jim Newman writes:
http://www.hertfordshiremercury.co.u...xbourne/Parent...

I've 'got access to a car,', but I don't use it unless I don't have
something better available! And that's the case for most people.

Yes. *Here in Hoddesdon I have `access to a car', but it stays in the
garage for 350 days/ year. *It's usually easier and quicker, as well as
more pleasant, to get about by bike for most journeys.

Same here, except my wife commutes in it so I don't get as much
benefit as you.
Still, I only have the one car, instead of two so I still save
shedloads as compared to the average two car family.



It was surprising that the figure for schools is as high as 70% (up ~10%
in 10 years), but for whatever reason there is definitely a lot more
walking and cycling in Hertfordshire these days. *Even kids playing in
the streets (with/ without their bikes). *Almost civilised, sometimes..

Agreed.
15 years ago, Hull was in thrall to rat runners and commuters who used
to plague residential streets.
Since then, these roads have been carpeted with severe humps which has
vastly reduced the problem and given the streets back to the
residents. It is now normal to see kids playing ball in the streets
and cycling and walking to school as you have also noticed in the more
affluent Home Counties. It is *much* more civilised now and the high
fuel taxes have helped as well.

You see, this is the kind of malevolent nonsense that I'm going to be
very glad not to have to read anymore. I don't know why I've put
myself through it for so long. It's not as though people like you are
remotely amenable to reason or correction of your misinformed views.

"Nuxx Bar" wrote in message
...

On Aug 20, 5:56 pm, "Simon Mason"
wrote:
"Bertie Wooster" wrote in message

...



I had an interesting email regarding Nuxxy while on holiday, I'm
inclined to believe that Simon has received the same or similar
information.

If it was during your holiday, then yes, it would seem so.

So nice to know that so many people care. Thanks to Judith to
alerting me to this discussion.

Anyway, just to explain (since people seem to want to know) that I am
taking a temporary (possibly permanent) and voluntary break from
Usenet, because I have other (important) things on my plate, and I am
sick of dealing with "cyclists can do no wrong and must never be
restricted, while motorists can do no right and must always be
restricted" types who wilfully disregard the facts whenever it suits
them and who have the most outrageous double standards. Once you've
seen a few of their posts, you've seen them all. In particular, Simon
Mason's continued agenda-driven trolling by starting reams of anti-
motorist threads in a futile attempt to "change URC back" has made the
group practically unusable. He constantly repeats the same debunked
nonsense and seems to be doing it just to get a rise out of normal
people who don't share his car-hating leanings. I can't imagine that
he actually believes a lot of the stuff he says, and if he does, then
he's in real trouble.

I know that poor persecuted AN Other (you know, the car-hating nutter
guy who wants to forcibly replace all motorists with cyclists even if
that involves "temporarily" making the roads more dangerous) has been
doing his usual abrasive, odious ****-stirring (it's just one reason
why so many people hate him) by boasting to anyone who's bored enough
to listen that he has reported me to the police for "harassment" of
him, and he no doubt thinks that my recent absence from Usenet is a
result of that, and that the police have had "words" with me. Well, I
can categorically confirm that I have had NO contact whatsoever from
the police. They haven't arrested me, they haven't come to see me,
and they haven't even written to, phoned, or emailed me. (D'oh…bummer
for AN Other, eh? One minute he's basking in spiteful smugness, and
now this bombshell…looks like it's going to be a while longer until he
can vanquish everyone he doesn't like from the Internet….)

Perhaps this lack of action from the police is because they use the
usual definition of "harassment", and not the AN Other definition,
i.e. "posting on the same newsgroup as me, disagreeing with my stated
opinions, proving me wrong, and making me look like a hypocrite with a
highly questionable and irresponsible agenda by pointing out that I
wear a cycle helmet despite my stating that they don't improve
safety". Apparently he printed out every single one of my Usenet
postings (plus some I didn't make), whether or not they were anything
to do with him, and submitted them as "evidence". Sad, isn't it? He
sure is desperate to stop me from stating my opinions…you can draw
your own conclusions as to why. Anyway, hopefully he'll get done for
wasting police time, but at any rate, I am happy that the police
seemingly don't see things AN Other's way, and I'm sure other sane
people are too. For a start, can you imagine how unreasonable and
draconian the police would be towards motorists if they were all like
AN Other…? It makes me shudder just to think about it. And cyclists
would literally be able to get away with anything, even more so than
currently. His behaviour as a Wikipedia administrator shows how much
he abuses authority when he gets it.

(BTW I wonder if it's harassment to put up an attack web page about
someone and leave it there and keep updating it for years (lucky I
took a copy before he hurriedly removed it recently!), send out
defamatory emails about them for years, post as "Lou Knee" to call
them a "piece of ****", constantly insult them without provocation for
years, etc, etc…? At any rate, that's not remotely how you'd expect a
bona fide "victim" to behave towards their "stalker", is it? Nor is
this the first time by a long way that AN Other has played the
innocent victim when he's at least as bad as anyone is, as those who
have been around for a while will know, and this includes posters who
generally agree with him on transport issues, like Ian Smith.)

Anyway, sincere thanks to JNugent for saying he hoped nothing bad had
happened to me. I would also thank Simon Mason for saying the same
thing, but I am not sure if he was being sarcastic or not: would you
care to let me know please Simon? If you meant it then thank you to
you also; if it was sarcastic then shame on you for stooping to AN
Other's level (I wouldn't wish you any harm…I would hope that no-one
here except AN Other (the "Christian") would wish harm on others
simply because of their opinions).

Right, I'm off again for the time being (though I may read replies to
this thread, and may respond to them if any of them particularly merit
it). If anyone wishes to email me then I'll be checking my "from"
address from time to time, or if you want to get hold of me quicker
then you can ask Judith to email me at the address I check more often
(assuming that she's able and willing to do so of course!) But
frankly, I can't imagine why most of you would want to contact me for
any legitimate reason (although I will still probably reply to anyone
except AN Other).

Oh, and if anyone says anything unpleasant about me then they
shouldn't be surprised if Judith (or someone else) notifies me and I
reappear as a result. So if you want the Nuxx Monster to stay away
(not that anyone except AN Other and Squashme (on some days) actually
does, according to my recent "Who Wants Me to Stop Posting?" thread)
then don't say its name. You know, like the Devil, or Candyman, or
something.
========================================

Was it you who posted Guy Chapman's personal details on usenet recently?