Keef

Dear God give me strength. Yes's cars are the danger, of course they are. But cars are there, and will continue to be there. My point is simply that, given the cars are there, I think the behaviour described in the OP is unwise. Can't say it any clearer, and not wanting to argue, just saying what I think, why can't you just accept that?

When they're closer to 10 IMO.

How do you do that with a broken hand, headbutt? (that was a joke) Whoa there, I've disagreed with you on a couple of threads, not sure that makes me "antsy". On this thread inparticular, I am just saying what I think about the topic (non ED Specific by the way). The original thread made a point, drivers may have been the percieved danger, but it never said to scream at the cyclist rather than the driver, it never mentioned drivers, it was just a point about little kids on bikes in the roads. Other people have made it about cyclists Vs drivers.

Brendan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Keef Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > ... when the cats had returned... > > Dude if all the cats returned this forum would > immediately lose half its traffic. LOL!

Fair enough, I obviously don't know all the stuff that goes on behind the scenes, especially with regards to legal issues. It's your baby admin, and a good one, for which I for one an gratefull. Just thought it would be interesting, and still do, but I guess interesting isn't always wise.

Brett Lee a doubt for the first test.

I have been thinking about this this afternoon, rather than thinking about the reports I should have been writing. As there have been questions asked about moderators recently, and whether bans have been fair, and what sections threads should be in, how about an experiment, whereby for a fixed amount of time, be it a week or a month, the forum is left (more or less) too it's own devises, to see how it goes. Mockney_Piers made the point recently, that it is pretty self moderating, in which case, this would be a good chance to put that to the test. A couple of posters seem to think that their bans are unfair, so if they are lifted for a fixed time, would they behave in a way that proved they deserved the lift? Obviously admin would still have to react to anything with legal implications, but other than that, I wonder how it would get on if just left alone. Would everyone just get along, would dazie and BBW suddenly feel responsible once given back their liberty, would the whole world come to an end if a thread in the ED section went way off topic???? THESE ARE QUESTIONS THAT NEED ANSWERING! :-S I would suggest, if it was to happen, a sticky thread at the top of each section, explaining what was going on, so if any new people were put off by what they saw, they'd know they could pop back the following week, when the cats had returned, and all the mice had been eaten, locked away, or were just hiding quietly and behaving themselves. Anyone like the idea?

Well it may explain it. If it's a think, straight cane, only 70cm - 1m long, then it is probably a symbol cane. I have, however, seen quite a lot of people with "long canes", which are designed as a mobility aids, not really using them, which always begs the question of why they are carrying them.

You talk like all cyclists are in accidents because people set out to run them off the road and kill them. What about those people who just don't see a cyclist weaving in and out of traffic, and can't brake in time? It's attitudes like the ones just shared by lenk and louisiana (and normally 2 such pleasant posters) that cause such rows. I hope you get spotted breaking someone's property, and nicked for it one day, that will serve you right frankly.

As I said, I've not read the whole thread, but where does the OP (in the OP) mention a driver? I totally agree with you Sean that "a)" would be a preferable option, but even if all the laws were on the side of a cyclist, and all drivers were much more considerate, and careful, I still wouldn't risk it. You're right, that it is individual parent's right to chose, but the picture painted in the OP is just too much. How does the adult keep their eyes on both kiddy bikes, whilst concentrating themself. It just seems a bit too risky for my liking, and I do think it's irresponsible. I don't think this thread should be a typical cyclist Vs motorist row, as it quickly became, I think it is just a debate as to the safety of cycling in the road with 2 under 5s in tow.

Only just looked at this thread, and haven't ploughed through all of it, so sorry if I'm duplicating anything. I always shudder when I see those plastic kids cars that attach to the back of bikes, being used on the road. I just worry that even if a cyclist is aware of their own speed and length, the trailer adds an extra couple of foot, and if someone pulled out of a junction, the little plastic car wouldn't stand much chance. Sean, you may be right about it being cars that are actually causing the danger, but surely the cyclists still need to think about it. It's not my fault that walking close to a cliff edge is dangerous, but I'm still going to give it plenty of thought! Legal or not, is not really the issue here. It's bloody safety, and I'm sorry, but surely even the most commited cyclist must see that having an under 4 on a bike in the road, is absolutely irresponsible! Yes it might be the fault of a driver who mows them down, but I don't think that would give you too much comfort when your kids is dead.

To be fair, I thought he said he does want to break records, but it's not about beating a certain person (Sampras). I think he comes across as okay, but I really wanted Roddick to win that yesterday, what a good try!

That is a classic clip Loz, love the lego men.

English aren't the only ones who don't like it.

Trying to gain the affections of lovely Moos huh?

Mondays would be great!!! What a good way to get over the misery of another working week starting! :)-D

You can't even start threads in The Lounge? Ha ha ha ha ha, f*cking hell. BAD WOLF!!!!!

The Saturday "family" idea was nice (although it was never intended to be a family thing as such", but it would seem it doesn't really work. I guess whether it's a nice idea or not, it is hard for people to commit, when it can take 2 hours to leave the house, and you are at the mercy of the weather. Perhaps we should try to organise a one off "Park Life" day, for a game of rounders, and a few cans of beer. That, I believe, was the original idea behind trying a Saturday. Don't know if it would work, but worth a try... Nice to find a bit of common ground again ;-)

Fair point regarding the fridge, I will know in future to look on the shelves first, my bad.

People should, of course, give up seats, but as dukesdenver said, you can't expect people not to sit in them if there is no one needing them at the time, just so long as these people are then willing to give them up. An interesting point regarding identification of disability. Visually Impaired people, particularly older people with macular degeneration or cataracts, will often be issued with a "symbol cane", which, as the name suggests, is there simply to show other people that there is a visual impairment, rather than to be used as an actual mobility aid (as these conditions will usually leave enough residual vision, that mobility won't become a problem). The problem with this, as with a badge or arm band, is that it can make a person appear more vulnerable which can be off putting. I am partially sighted, so I get a freedom pass, and I can't even have it in it's orange card holder, as I just don't want to advertise the fact that I am somehow "disabled" to anyone, as I don't look at myself that way, I just can't see as well as most. That is of course, my personal choice, and I would never judge anyone who chose to "advertise" their disability, particularly when it benefits them in terms of members of the public being more helpful to them. Going back the the OP, good on you for reporting the guy. A pet hate of mine is people parking in these bays without the badge. Another, even bigger, hate is when people use a badge that may belong to a family member, for their own use, when said family member is not with them!

Looks like I got it wrong too then. Kel, why do you always write "wolf*"?

I don't see the point in deleting a post, then telling everyone what it said, in an effort to shame the poster and tell him off. I don't think it was funny, and you were trying too hard for the "bad boy of the forum" shock factor. But at the same time, I kind of agree with you about the type of people that bother reporting stupid stuff like that, which is about no one inparticular. Definite feeling of division around here recently. Can see why admin must be getting p!ssed off with some stuff, but then again, there is a bit of an "us and them" thing going on. Traditionally, I would have been firmly with "us", but I am starting to feel a bit more like a "them" now.

I think The Hob would be great, they have live music on Fridays too, and it's free to get in. (speaking of which, we're playing there in November, but that's way off). Regarding Sunday drinks, I could be wrong, but I can't see it happening. People want to do family stuff, or go to the pub with their mates for a Sunday drinking session. It's a lazy day, not one for making polite chit chat. That's just my opinion, like I say, I could be very wrong about it.

I am with Hona regarding paintballing.

Have Liverpool started employing genetic scientists then? ;-)