cyclist that threw a hissy fit fined heavily for damaging anunattended parked car

On 25/08/2017 10:28, TMS320 wrote:

On 24/08/17 23:04, JNugent wrote:

TMS gets it wrong when he tries to argue that a story about what a
cyclist did with his bike (on the highway) is nothing to do with cycling.

Nugent gets it wrong when he tries to argue that the stories of a person
with a bicycle - "cyclist" - involve cycling.

Extraordinary...

On 25/08/17 13:14, JNugent wrote:
On 25/08/2017 10:28, TMS320 wrote:
On 24/08/17 23:04, JNugent wrote:

TMS gets it wrong when he tries to argue that a story about what a
cyclist did with his bike (on the highway) is nothing to do with
cycling.

Nugent gets it wrong when he tries to argue that the stories of a
person with a bicycle - "cyclist" - involve cycling.

Extraordinary...

Indeed it is. Then give us a rough idea for how long it takes for the
effect of touching a bicycle seat to wear off. 1 picosecond... 1
second... 10 minutes...?

On 25/08/2017 14:23, TMS320 wrote:

On 25/08/17 13:14, JNugent wrote:
On 25/08/2017 10:28, TMS320 wrote:
On 24/08/17 23:04, JNugent wrote:

TMS gets it wrong when he tries to argue that a story about what a
cyclist did with his bike (on the highway) is nothing to do with
cycling.

Nugent gets it wrong when he tries to argue that the stories of a
person with a bicycle - "cyclist" - involve cycling.

Extraordinary...

Indeed it is. Then give us a rough idea for how long it takes for the
effect of touching a bicycle seat to wear off. 1 picosecond... 1
second... 10 minutes...?

You're moving on from 'extraordinary' to 'bizarre'.

On Friday, August 25, 2017 at 2:23:12 PM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
On 25/08/17 13:14, JNugent wrote:
On 25/08/2017 10:28, TMS320 wrote:
On 24/08/17 23:04, JNugent wrote:

TMS gets it wrong when he tries to argue that a story about what a
cyclist did with his bike (on the highway) is nothing to do with
cycling.

Nugent gets it wrong when he tries to argue that the stories of a
person with a bicycle - "cyclist" - involve cycling.

Extraordinary...

Indeed it is. Then give us a rough idea for how long it takes for the
effect of touching a bicycle seat to wear off. 1 picosecond... 1
second... 10 minutes...?

Hush, don't wake Nugent.
He has just taken his meds and been put down for his nap with his invisible friend Roadtax.

On 25/08/17 14:25, JNugent wrote:
On 25/08/2017 14:23, TMS320 wrote:
On 25/08/17 13:14, JNugent wrote:
On 25/08/2017 10:28, TMS320 wrote:
On 24/08/17 23:04, JNugent wrote:

TMS gets it wrong when he tries to argue that a story about what a
cyclist did with his bike (on the highway) is nothing to do with
cycling.

Nugent gets it wrong when he tries to argue that the stories of a
person with a bicycle - "cyclist" - involve cycling.

Extraordinary...

Indeed it is. Then give us a rough idea for how long it takes for the
effect of touching a bicycle seat to wear off. 1 picosecond... 1
second... 10 minutes...?

You're moving on from 'extraordinary' to 'bizarre'.

Then we can take it that most cases highlighted have nothing to do with
cycling and are OT.

On 25/08/2017 20:53, TMS320 wrote:
On 25/08/17 14:25, JNugent wrote:
On 25/08/2017 14:23, TMS320 wrote:
On 25/08/17 13:14, JNugent wrote:
On 25/08/2017 10:28, TMS320 wrote:
On 24/08/17 23:04, JNugent wrote:

TMS gets it wrong when he tries to argue that a story about what a
cyclist did with his bike (on the highway) is nothing to do with
cycling.

Nugent gets it wrong when he tries to argue that the stories of a
person with a bicycle - "cyclist" - involve cycling.

Extraordinary...

Indeed it is. Then give us a rough idea for how long it takes for the
effect of touching a bicycle seat to wear off. 1 picosecond... 1
second... 10 minutes...?

You're moving on from 'extraordinary' to 'bizarre'.

Then we can take it that most cases highlighted have nothing to do with
cycling and are OT.

So we can take it that your position is that no matter what a cyclists
does, on the highway, with his bike, it's nothing to do with cycling?

Really?

On 25/08/17 23:34, JNugent wrote:
On 25/08/2017 20:53, TMS320 wrote:
On 25/08/17 14:25, JNugent wrote:
On 25/08/2017 14:23, TMS320 wrote:
On 25/08/17 13:14, JNugent wrote:
On 25/08/2017 10:28, TMS320 wrote:
On 24/08/17 23:04, JNugent wrote:

TMS gets it wrong when he tries to argue that a story about what
a cyclist did with his bike (on the highway) is nothing to do
with cycling.

Nugent gets it wrong when he tries to argue that the stories of a
person with a bicycle - "cyclist" - involve cycling.

Extraordinary...

Indeed it is. Then give us a rough idea for how long it takes for
the effect of touching a bicycle seat to wear off. 1 picosecond... 1
second... 10 minutes...?

You're moving on from 'extraordinary' to 'bizarre'.

Then we can take it that most cases highlighted have nothing to do
with cycling and are OT.

So we can take it that your position is that no matter what a cyclists
does, on the highway, with his bike, it's nothing to do with cycling?

As usual, what you wrote has no connection to what the other person wrote.

On 26/08/2017 10:53, TMS320 wrote:
On 25/08/17 23:34, JNugent wrote:
On 25/08/2017 20:53, TMS320 wrote:
On 25/08/17 14:25, JNugent wrote:
On 25/08/2017 14:23, TMS320 wrote:
On 25/08/17 13:14, JNugent wrote:
On 25/08/2017 10:28, TMS320 wrote:
On 24/08/17 23:04, JNugent wrote:

TMS gets it wrong when he tries to argue that a story about what
a cyclist did with his bike (on the highway) is nothing to do
with cycling.

Nugent gets it wrong when he tries to argue that the stories of a
person with a bicycle - "cyclist" - involve cycling.

Extraordinary...

Indeed it is. Then give us a rough idea for how long it takes for
the effect of touching a bicycle seat to wear off. 1 picosecond...
1 second... 10 minutes...?

You're moving on from 'extraordinary' to 'bizarre'.

Then we can take it that most cases highlighted have nothing to do
with cycling and are OT.

So we can take it that your position is that no matter what a cyclists
does, on the highway, with his bike, it's nothing to do with cycling?

As usual, what you wrote has no connection to what the other person wrote.

You can't even remember what you wrote three posts back.

On 26/08/17 12:06, JNugent wrote:
On 26/08/2017 10:53, TMS320 wrote:
On 25/08/17 23:34, JNugent wrote:
On 25/08/2017 20:53, TMS320 wrote:
On 25/08/17 14:25, JNugent wrote:
On 25/08/2017 14:23, TMS320 wrote:
On 25/08/17 13:14, JNugent wrote:
On 25/08/2017 10:28, TMS320 wrote:
On 24/08/17 23:04, JNugent wrote:

TMS gets it wrong when he tries to argue that a story about
what a cyclist did with his bike (on the highway) is nothing to
do with cycling.

Nugent gets it wrong when he tries to argue that the stories of
a person with a bicycle - "cyclist" - involve cycling.

Extraordinary...

Indeed it is. Then give us a rough idea for how long it takes for
the effect of touching a bicycle seat to wear off. 1 picosecond...
1 second... 10 minutes...?

You're moving on from 'extraordinary' to 'bizarre'.

Then we can take it that most cases highlighted have nothing to do
with cycling and are OT.

So we can take it that your position is that no matter what a
cyclists does, on the highway, with his bike, it's nothing to do with
cycling?

As usual, what you wrote has no connection to what the other person
wrote.

You can't even remember what you wrote three posts back.

That's three posts more than you.

On 26/08/2017 13:36, TMS320 wrote:
On 26/08/17 12:06, JNugent wrote:
On 26/08/2017 10:53, TMS320 wrote:
On 25/08/17 23:34, JNugent wrote:
On 25/08/2017 20:53, TMS320 wrote:
On 25/08/17 14:25, JNugent wrote:
On 25/08/2017 14:23, TMS320 wrote:
On 25/08/17 13:14, JNugent wrote:
On 25/08/2017 10:28, TMS320 wrote:
On 24/08/17 23:04, JNugent wrote:

TMS gets it wrong when he tries to argue that a story about
what a cyclist did with his bike (on the highway) is nothing
to do with cycling.

Nugent gets it wrong when he tries to argue that the stories of
a person with a bicycle - "cyclist" - involve cycling.

Extraordinary...

Indeed it is. Then give us a rough idea for how long it takes for
the effect of touching a bicycle seat to wear off. 1
picosecond... 1 second... 10 minutes...?

You're moving on from 'extraordinary' to 'bizarre'.

Then we can take it that most cases highlighted have nothing to do
with cycling and are OT.

So we can take it that your position is that no matter what a
cyclists does, on the highway, with his bike, it's nothing to do
with cycling?

As usual, what you wrote has no connection to what the other person
wrote.

You can't even remember what you wrote three posts back.

That's three posts more than you.

We are probably going to have to leave this with the following fair summary:

I (and others) say that something - anything - a cyclist does on the
highway with his bike is something to do with cycling (hence, for one
thing, the OP's post about the strange incident of the cyclist who threw
his bike onto the bonnet of a parked car).

You, OTOH, are trying to insist that what cyclists do on the highway
with their bikes has nothing to do with cycling.

On that basis, of course, nothing in the world has anything to do with
cycling.