The advantage of cycling on the wrong side of narrow ways and one-ways

On Saturday, December 14, 2013 3:56:22 AM UTC, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Friday, December 13, 2013 7:23:57 PM UTC-5, sms wrote:

On 12/13/2013 12:59 PM, Andre Jute wrote:



On Friday, December 13, 2013 7:07:19 PM UTC, Frank Krygowski wrote:







Those who want to learn more about Sweden's experience will find it covered pretty thoroughly in the excellent book _Risk_ by John Adams. Those experiences can teach us things about other hazardous situations.







Having said that, I'm absolutely positive that Mr. Scharf will never bother to seek out a copy.











You're probably right, Franki-boy, and it demonstrates a colossal amount of self-knowledge, for you anyway, to admit at last that a recommendation from you is as good a warning-off as a declaration of anathema from the Pope is to a practising Catholic. Some people just get born negative, and you're one of them.



It's not impossible that something that he recommends might be useful.

However the authors probably would likely prefer that he not endorse

their works.



Scharf, read the book: _Risk_ by John Adams. If you're going to spout off on people's reactions to risk, you really ought to learn from sources other than your own weird imagination.



You are really _not_ the "world's greatest authority" on anything. Learn from your betters.

Who? You? Thanks for the giggle, Franki-boy. NOW we discover you're a comedian too. Have you been at the Christmas cheer early this year?

Andre Jute
A leading authority on several matters, by the judgement of his peers

On 12/14/2013 1:18 AM, Andre Jute wrote:

snip

Who? You? Thanks for the giggle, Franki-boy. NOW we discover you're a comedian too. Have you been at the Christmas cheer early this year?

Back when AM "Talk Radio" was popular (before it was hijacked by the Tea
Bagger lunatics) you'd often have people calling in and insisting that
all the listeners simply _must_ read some book or article that would
absolutely prove their position. Sometimes the caller would want to read
long passages from the book or article. The host would dispose of the
caller quickly; if the caller could not clearly and succinctly state
their case then they were plonked because the host knew that listeners
would change stations if the show became boring.

You sometimes see this sort of thing on Usenet and other forums. Even if
someone recommends a book or article that is worthwhile, if that same
person has a history of constantly referencing discredited sources then
no one is going to listen to his or her recommendations.

On Sun, 15 Dec 2013 18:19:08 -0800, SMS
wrote:

On 12/14/2013 1:18 AM, Andre Jute wrote:

snip

Who? You? Thanks for the giggle, Franki-boy. NOW we discover you're a comedian too. Have you been at the Christmas cheer early this year?

Back when AM "Talk Radio" was popular (before it was hijacked by the Tea
Bagger lunatics) you'd often have people calling in and insisting that
all the listeners simply _must_ read some book or article that would
absolutely prove their position. Sometimes the caller would want to read
long passages from the book or article. The host would dispose of the
caller quickly; if the caller could not clearly and succinctly state
their case then they were plonked because the host knew that listeners
would change stations if the show became boring.

You sometimes see this sort of thing on Usenet and other forums. Even if
someone recommends a book or article that is worthwhile, if that same
person has a history of constantly referencing discredited sources then
no one is going to listen to his or her recommendations.


And we thought you'd never learn.
--
Cheers,

John B.

Its like Kevlar…

Try ‘EYE YOGA’ …ease into it

https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bk...=eye+exercises


http://books.google.com/books?id=nYE...ects&f=fal se

https://www.google.com/#q=improving+...ined=undefined

https://www.google.com/#q=perception...ined=undefined