The idée fixe of the anti-helmet zealots, the vehicular cyclists, etc

It is time to reduce Krygowski's belief and policy to its core so that we can examine its fundamental inhumanity.

Krygowski's big idea, embodied in his slogan "Danger! Danger!" is that we should do nothing about avoidable cyclist deaths because to do anything at all to save cyclists from an unnecessary death sends a message to potential cyclists that cycling is dangerous and puts them off, thereby reducing the net benefit of cycling to society.

Krygowski's is an entirely fascist construction, in which the cyclist should sacrifice everything, up to and including his life, for one man's vision of the future. It is irrelevant that this murderous vision comes from the unappetizing control freak Krygowski. What is immoral and despicable about it is that Krygowski, for his personal aggrandizement, wants by inaction and silence to kill cyclists who, but for a little care, would have lived to ride another day.

The humane alternative values each individual cyclist's life equally (compare Krygowski's excuses for his callousness, for instance labeling dead cyclists as "drunks" so that he can exclude them from his grotesque statistical version of reality) and to strive mightily to reduce cycling deaths and injuries on the road to nil. Of course it is an impossible aim, but only by striving towards it will the maximum possible number of cyclist lives be saved.

Andre Jute
Relentless rigor -- Gaius Germanicus

On 12/16/2013 2:20 AM, Andre Jute wrote:
It is time to reduce Krygowski's belief and policy to its core so that we can examine its fundamental inhumanity.

Krygowski's big idea, embodied in his slogan "Danger! Danger!" is that we should do nothing about avoidable cyclist deaths because to do anything at all to save cyclists from an unnecessary death sends a message to potential cyclists that cycling is dangerous and puts them off, thereby reducing the net benefit of cycling to society.

Krygowski's is an entirely fascist construction, in which the cyclist should sacrifice everything, up to and including his life, for one man's vision of the future. It is irrelevant that this murderous vision comes from the unappetizing control freak Krygowski. What is immoral and despicable about it is that Krygowski, for his personal aggrandizement, wants by inaction and silence to kill cyclists who, but for a little care, would have lived to ride another day.

The humane alternative values each individual cyclist's life equally (compare Krygowski's excuses for his callousness, for instance labeling dead cyclists as "drunks" so that he can exclude them from his grotesque statistical version of reality) and to strive mightily to reduce cycling deaths and injuries on the road to nil. Of course it is an impossible aim, but only by striving towards it will the maximum possible number of cyclist lives be saved.

Jesus, you're obsessed. G-d created Thunderbird filters. Use them like
the rest of us do. If ignorant and obnoxious people bother you then
Usenet is the wrong place to hang out because trying to use facts and
logic to convince them of anything is pointless. Not everything in
nature has a purpose.

On Monday, December 16, 2013 2:18:55 PM UTC, SMS wrote:
On 12/16/2013 2:20 AM, Andre Jute wrote:

It is time to reduce Krygowski's belief and policy to its core so that we can examine its fundamental inhumanity.



Krygowski's big idea, embodied in his slogan "Danger! Danger!" is that we should do nothing about avoidable cyclist deaths because to do anything at all to save cyclists from an unnecessary death sends a message to potential cyclists that cycling is dangerous and puts them off, thereby reducing the net benefit of cycling to society.



Krygowski's is an entirely fascist construction, in which the cyclist should sacrifice everything, up to and including his life, for one man's vision of the future. It is irrelevant that this murderous vision comes from the unappetizing control freak Krygowski. What is immoral and despicable about it is that Krygowski, for his personal aggrandizement, wants by inaction and silence to kill cyclists who, but for a little care, would have lived to ride another day.



The humane alternative values each individual cyclist's life equally (compare Krygowski's excuses for his callousness, for instance labeling dead cyclists as "drunks" so that he can exclude them from his grotesque statistical version of reality) and to strive mightily to reduce cycling deaths and injuries on the road to nil. Of course it is an impossible aim, but only by striving towards it will the maximum possible number of cyclist lives be saved.



Jesus, you're obsessed. G-d created Thunderbird filters. Use them like

the rest of us do. If ignorant and obnoxious people bother you then

Usenet is the wrong place to hang out because trying to use facts and

logic to convince them of anything is pointless. Not everything in

nature has a purpose.

Kygowski is a piece of **** that should be flushed down the loo. If you don't want to help, don't get in my way.

Andre Jute

On 12/16/2013 7:30 AM, Andre Jute wrote:
If you don't want to help, don't get in my way.

snip

In reality, you're the one that's not helping.

Have you heard of the Westboro Baptist Church in the U.S.?

They thrive on the reaction of the public to their antics. When no one
shows up to challenge them they pack up and leave because there's no
publicity. When they showed up at my kids' school the entire student
body ignored them, entering the school through a side entrance so no one
even saw their signs. There was no response. There was no media
coverage. WBC left in utter defeat after ten minutes.

Your crusade against one particular poster achieves nothing. No one
believes anything he posts anyway, you're just giving him a reason to
continue being obnoxious. A great many of us have filtered him out. We
feel sorry for him, but there's nothing that can be done. Usenet is like
that. You feel compelled to continue in this crusade even though the
battle has already been won. And by being vulgar you are the one that
ends up looking bad.

Since when do you tell me what I can and cannot say, Scharfie? Just who do you think you are?

On Monday, December 16, 2013 6:58:13 PM UTC, SMS wrote:
On 12/16/2013 7:30 AM, Andre Jute wrote:

If you don't want to help, don't get in my way.



snip



In reality, you're the one that's not helping.



Have you heard of the Westboro Baptist Church in the U.S.?



They thrive on the reaction of the public to their antics. When no one

shows up to challenge them they pack up and leave because there's no

publicity. When they showed up at my kids' school the entire student

body ignored them, entering the school through a side entrance so no one

even saw their signs. There was no response. There was no media

coverage. WBC left in utter defeat after ten minutes.



Your crusade against one particular poster achieves nothing. No one

believes anything he posts anyway, you're just giving him a reason to

continue being obnoxious. A great many of us have filtered him out. We

feel sorry for him, but there's nothing that can be done. Usenet is like

that. You feel compelled to continue in this crusade even though the

battle has already been won. And by being vulgar you are the one that

ends up looking bad.

On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 13:04:32 -0800, Andre Jute wrote:

Since when do you tell me what I can and cannot say, Scharfie? Just who
do you think you are?

fetches popcorn, gets comfy
--
davethedave

On 17/12/13 08:12, davethedave wrote:
On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 13:04:32 -0800, Andre Jute wrote:

Since when do you tell me what I can and cannot say, Scharfie? Just who
do you think you are?

fetches popcorn, gets comfy


right clicks newsgroup and clicks "Mark Newsgroup Read" and wishes the
cross posting ******s would bugger off

--
JS

On Monday, December 16, 2013 9:12:54 PM UTC, davethedave wrote:
On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 13:04:32 -0800, Andre Jute wrote:



Since when do you tell me what I can and cannot say, Scharfie? Just who

do you think you are?



fetches popcorn, gets comfy

--

davethedave

Scharfie's a sideshow, Dave.

James writes:

On 17/12/13 08:12, davethedave wrote:
On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 13:04:32 -0800, Andre Jute wrote:

Since when do you tell me what I can and cannot say, Scharfie? Just who
do you think you are?

fetches popcorn, gets comfy


right clicks newsgroup and clicks "Mark Newsgroup Read" and wishes
the cross posting ******s would bugger off

You've got the right. Fortunately I configured my news reader (gnus)
to reject all posts with alt.* in the distribution. I thought
the cross-posting would eventually die out, but it hasn't.

--
Joe Riel

Joe Riel writes:

James writes:

On 17/12/13 08:12, davethedave wrote:
On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 13:04:32 -0800, Andre Jute wrote:

Since when do you tell me what I can and cannot say, Scharfie? Just who
do you think you are?

fetches popcorn, gets comfy


right clicks newsgroup and clicks "Mark Newsgroup Read" and wishes
the cross posting ******s would bugger off

You've got the right. Fortunately I configured my news reader (gnus)
to reject all posts with alt.* in the distribution. I thought
the cross-posting would eventually die out, but it hasn't.

I meant to type: "you've got *that* right. As in, "I agree".

--
Joe Riel