"Cyclists Cause Less Than 10% of Bike/Car Accidents".

Judith M Smith wrote:
On Tue, 08 Sep 2009 01:58:10 -0500, Nobby Anderson
wrote:

Judith M Smith wrote:
On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 17:57:53 -0500, Nobby Anderson
wrote:

[crap snipped]

Anyway, bearing in mind how thick I am, please do explain.


I trust I have now done that.

Is there anything else I may help you with?

(Must go - I work in Tesco's as a shelf-stacker)

Toodle pip.

No, sorry love, you've failed again. Thankfully I don't seem to have your
kind of intelligence. Not many do, though

You're quite right.


Anyway - I'm back now.

Filled the shelves - a quick twenty quid for the pub tonight.

Have you thought of seeking employment?

Anyway - back to the thread - I thought you were looking for someone
to talk to and to help with your education.

Didn't you like my explanation?

Sorry for pointing out all those mistakes in your email - did you make
them just to test me?

That's all right, sweetheart, there were plenty in yours but it seemed
somehow petty to point them out - punctuation missing, spelling errors.
You see I don't equate the way you say something with the message. You
can make as many gramatical errors, typos, spelling mistakes as you like.

Only people with nothing of substance to say get tied up with the
presentation. Like you, for instance. It is sad, though, that you
feel you need to criticise others for faults you quite clearly have
yourself. It's a sign of insecurity really, but in your case it's
quite understandable.

As for your explanation, couldn't find it, dear.

And as for seeking employment - why? I've got a perfectly good job that
I'm perectly happy with. Oh, it's dawning on me - is that your problem?
General dissatisfaction with your job and life? Is *that* why you feel
the need to lash out at all the perfectly happy people here? Not happy
with your own education, so you've got to belittle that of those you
choose to surround yourself with? You have nothing but criticism for
everybody around you, and it's all because you don't have any self-worth
yourself! That explains why you ally yourself with people you have so
little in common with, like Nuxxy and one or two others - not because
you agree with them, or like them, but because they too feel the need to
despise those around them, and they're just like you!

Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry I've taken the **** so much, particularly when
you probably can't help it. I'll try to refrain in future.

Group hug!

Nobby xx

On 8 Sep, 13:08, Simon Brooke wrote:
On 6 Sep, 17:22, Ian wrote:

On 4 Sep, 07:41, Doug wrote:

The third involved a motorist opening a door onto an
oncoming cyclist.

In those cases, however, the cyclist is at fault. Like all other road
users, cyclists should be able to stop if a foreseeable obstruction
appears.

H'mmm....

Someone else who needs to resit his driving test.

But my dear fellow, I was only paraphasing your own previous
contributions here. Don;t you believe that all road users should able
to stop in the distance they can see to be clear?

Ian

On Tue, 08 Sep 2009 15:48:36 +0100, Judith M Smith wrote:


A thick layer of glutinous slime (hence specific name) covers the whole body
of the hagfish and can be sloughed in copious amounts.

snip

"Tom Crispin" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 14:48:26 +0100, Judith M Smith
wrote:

On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 06:35:12 +0100, Tom Crispin
wrote:

snip


Fortunately, I usually pass stationary vehicles on the outside.
Unfortunately, this led to my worst ever injury. A van stationary at
the red light decided to turn right to get to a newly vacant loading
bay just as I was passing. I suffered an acromioclavicular shoulder
separation.


Any particular reason why you were overtaking the other traffic
queuing at the lights rather than waiting your turn?

Because I could.

But you took the risk and discovered that taking risks doesn't pay.

"Tom Crispin" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 18:15:44 +0100, JNugent
wrote:

Tom Crispin wrote:
On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 14:48:26 +0100, Judith M Smith
wrote:

On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 06:35:12 +0100, Tom Crispin
wrote:

snip


Fortunately, I usually pass stationary vehicles on the outside.
Unfortunately, this led to my worst ever injury. A van stationary at
the red light decided to turn right to get to a newly vacant loading
bay just as I was passing. I suffered an acromioclavicular shoulder
separation.

Any particular reason why you were overtaking the other traffic
queuing at the lights rather than waiting your turn?

Because I could...

...at a certain amount of risk to yourself.

Generally, passing slow moving or stationary traffic, which has
stopped at lights, is a safe act. A passing cyclist should not have
to expect a stationary van to pull out of the traffic queue, drive on
the wrong side of the road for some distance, and ram a cyclist which
has already passed the van which had been stationary.

You should always expect the unexpected.