red means....

Zebee Johnstone said:

Saw a good redlight runner yesterday.

A pedestrian crossing near a railway station. Light goes red, I stop,
a vehicle comes up next to me and stops. Ped crosses, light stays red.
I stay stopped.

The vehicle next to me moves off through the red.

A marked police car.

The things you see when you don't have a camera!

I was waiting to turn right today in a feeder lane. lights are red,
everyone's all stopped. My arrow goes green, a tradie in a white ute,
mobile phone welded to ear, starts on the opposite side, and goes
straight through his red light, blissfully unaware of the red light
he'd just gone through. As an alert rider, I've looked before assuming
that everyone was doing the right thing, and I chose not to assert my
green arrow in the interests of self preservation.

Sometimes, I wish I drove a truck. Prying the turd out of a bullbar
with a crowbar would give some degree of satisfaction.

Bleve said:

Sometimes, I wish I drove a truck. Prying the turd out of a bullbar
with a crowbar would give some degree of satisfaction.

You want to kill people?
Hmmm......

Theo

Theo Bekkers said:

Bleve said:

Sometimes, I wish I drove a truck. Prying the turd out of a bullbar
with a crowbar would give some degree of satisfaction.

You want to kill people?
Hmmm......

Theo

With the ability to cull context like that, you'd make a
great journo, Theo.

T

quote='Tamyka Bell'Theo Bekkers said:

Bleve said:

Sometimes, I wish I drove a truck. Prying the turd out of a bullbar
with a crowbar would give some degree of satisfaction.

You want to kill people?
Hmmm......

Theo

With the ability to cull context like that, you'd make a
great journo, Theo.

T[/QUOTE]
Not the first time that Theo has ignored context - when it suits him of course...

SCotty

Theo Bekkers said:

Bleve said:

Sometimes, I wish I drove a truck. Prying the turd out of a bullbar
with a crowbar would give some degree of satisfaction.

You want to kill people?

Theo, get a clue.

scotty72 said:

Tamyka Bell said:

Theo Bekkers said:

Bleve wrote:

> Sometimes, I wish I drove a truck. Prying the turd out of a bullbar
> with a crowbar would give some degree of satisfaction.

You want to kill people?
Hmmm......

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

With the ability to cull context like that, you'd make a
great journo, Theo.

T

Not the first time that Theo has ignored context - when it suits him
of course...

Hmm.. Bleve saw someone doing something reaaly stupid (taking off when the
light was red whilst talking on his mobile) and wished he had a truck with a
bullbar so he could get the satisfaction of prying said person from his
bullbar with a crowbar. Just how did I miss the context? He thought the
person deserved to die and wishes he was the person to effect said death.

Would he want to do the same to someone on a bicycle doing something equally
silly. Like deliberately running a red light?

Theo

Theo Bekkers said:

scotty72 said:

Tamyka Bell said:

Theo Bekkers wrote:
>
> Bleve wrote:
>
>> Sometimes, I wish I drove a truck. Prying the turd out of a bullbar
>> with a crowbar would give some degree of satisfaction.
>
> You want to kill people?
> Hmmm......

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

With the ability to cull context like that, you'd make a
great journo, Theo.

T

Not the first time that Theo has ignored context - when it suits him
of course...

Hmm.. Bleve saw someone doing something reaaly stupid (taking off when the
light was red whilst talking on his mobile) and wished he had a truck with a
bullbar so he could get the satisfaction of prying said person from his
bullbar with a crowbar. Just how did I miss the context? He thought the
person deserved to die and wishes he was the person to effect said death.

Would he want to do the same to someone on a bicycle doing something equally
silly. Like deliberately running a red light?

Theo

Interesting that you interpreted it that way. I took it to
mean that if he had been driving a truck through that
intersection in the green direction and the above-mentioned
turd had pulled out in front of him as above, the
above-mentioned turd's car would have been damaged quite
nicely without too much damage to Bleve's car, and the
above-mentioned turd would maybe have some idea of why he
should not be talking on a mobile phone while driving, and
running red lights. Which seems appropriate given that the
above-mentioned turd could've easily killed someone else
with his apparent inattentiveness, and therefore he probably
shouldn't have access to a ute (or any motor vehicle) until
he fixes the problem.

Isn't it nice that that it is the youth of today that still
choose to see the best in people (not brand them as future
murderers), and not the more mature and educated members of
society that do so.

Tam

Theo Bekkers said:

scotty72 said:

Tamyka Bell said:

Theo Bekkers wrote:
>
> Bleve wrote:
>
>> Sometimes, I wish I drove a truck. Prying the turd out of a bullbar
>> with a crowbar would give some degree of satisfaction.
>
> You want to kill people?
> Hmmm......

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

With the ability to cull context like that, you'd make a
great journo, Theo.

T

Not the first time that Theo has ignored context - when it suits him
of course...

Hmm.. Bleve saw someone doing something reaaly stupid (taking off when the
light was red whilst talking on his mobile) and wished he had a truck with a
bullbar so he could get the satisfaction of prying said person from his
bullbar with a crowbar. Just how did I miss the context? He thought the
person deserved to die and wishes he was the person to effect said death.

I don't recall mentioning death at all, that's your take. Given that
the collision would have been at low speed (context, remember? the turd
was only doing maybe a maximum of 20km/h, he'd just accelerated from a
stop and would have traveled maybe 10 metres) the prying from a bullbar
would have been panel damage and a rude shock, and a significant impact
on the turd's day, but no injury.

On the other hand, if I'd not been paying attention, this turd would
have seriously, or fatally, injured me on my bike and done a lot more
than just give me a bit of a bad day. Under the circumstances, he
risked my life, and all I wanted to do was to administer a significant
delay and inconvenience for his trouble. Perhaps you can engage your
brain before you accuse me of wishing death upon someone.

Quoted message said:

Would he want to do the same to someone on a bicycle doing something equally
silly. Like deliberately running a red light?

If some nong deliberately runs a red light and crashes through their
own fault, I'd say that was poetic justice. The consequences of same
are their responsibility. Beit hitting a truck or a pedestrian, riding
a bike or driving a car.

In aus.bicycle on Thu, 12 Oct 2006 15:48:09 +1000

Tamyka Bell said:

Quoted message said:

Theo

Interesting that you interpreted it that way. I took it to
mean that if he had been driving a truck through that
intersection in the green direction and the above-mentioned
turd had pulled out in front of him as above, the
above-mentioned turd's car would have been damaged quite

I dunno, I took it the same way Theo did. Probably because the
mention was all man and not machine.

If he'd said "crunch the car" or something about the car maybe. As it
was all about the man, I took him at his word.

Zebee

Zebee Johnstone said:

In aus.bicycle on Thu, 12 Oct 2006 15:48:09 +1000

Tamyka Bell said:

Quoted message said:

Theo

Interesting that you interpreted it that way. I took it to
mean that if he had been driving a truck through that
intersection in the green direction and the above-mentioned
turd had pulled out in front of him as above, the
above-mentioned turd's car would have been damaged quite

I dunno, I took it the same way Theo did. Probably because the
mention was all man and not machine.

If he'd said "crunch the car" or something about the car maybe. As it
was all about the man, I took him at his word.

Zebee

<sarcasm>Of course, because Bleve has been such an advocate
in the past of killing people.</sarcasm>

Now I thought it was a well established fact that people in
cars identify the cars as an extension of themselves, hence
language like "you hit me" rather than "you hit my car" and
so on. Or does such usage not pertain to Bleve?

T

Bleve said:

Theo Bekkers wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Hmm.. Bleve saw someone doing something reaaly stupid (taking off
when the light was red whilst talking on his mobile) and wished he
had a truck with a bullbar so he could get the satisfaction of
prying said person from his bullbar with a crowbar. Just how did I
miss the context? He thought the person deserved to die and wishes
he was the person to effect said death.

I don't recall mentioning death at all, that's your take. Given that
the collision would have been at low speed (context, remember? the
turd was only doing maybe a maximum of 20km/h, he'd just accelerated
from a stop and would have traveled maybe 10 metres) the prying from
a bullbar would have been panel damage and a rude shock, and a
significant impact on the turd's day, but no injury.

Interesting that you put this spin on your remarks just seven minutes after
Tam posted this "context". :-)
I took it from your initial post that you felt this person, not his vehicle,
deserved serious injury, and Zebee had the same understanding. If I
misunderstood you, I apologise. It appears now that you only wanted to
seriously damage his property.

Cheers
Theo

Tamyka Bell said:

Isn't it nice that that it is the youth of today that still
choose to see the best in people (not brand them as future
murderers), and not the more mature and educated members of
society that do so.

Ahh, the youf of today. I like them. They have learnt to think for
themselves. All they need is some maturity and edumication.

:-)

Theo

Theo Bekkers said:

Bleve said:

Theo Bekkers wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Hmm.. Bleve saw someone doing something reaaly stupid (taking off
when the light was red whilst talking on his mobile) and wished he
had a truck with a bullbar so he could get the satisfaction of
prying said person from his bullbar with a crowbar. Just how did I
miss the context? He thought the person deserved to die and wishes
he was the person to effect said death.

I don't recall mentioning death at all, that's your take. Given that
the collision would have been at low speed (context, remember? the
turd was only doing maybe a maximum of 20km/h, he'd just accelerated
from a stop and would have traveled maybe 10 metres) the prying from
a bullbar would have been panel damage and a rude shock, and a
significant impact on the turd's day, but no injury.

Interesting that you put this spin on your remarks just seven minutes after
Tam posted this "context". :-)
I took it from your initial post that you felt this person, not his vehicle,
deserved serious injury, and Zebee had the same understanding. If I
misunderstood you, I apologise. It appears now that you only wanted to
seriously damage his property.

Apology accepted. I didn't even want to seriously damage his property,
just seriously inconvenience him such that he might learn a lesson.

Theo Bekkers said:

Tamyka Bell said:

Isn't it nice that that it is the youth of today that still
choose to see the best in people (not brand them as future
murderers), and not the more mature and educated members of
society that do so.

Ahh, the youf of today. I like them. They have learnt to think for
themselves. All they need is some maturity and edumication.

Then they'll be the youf of yesterday :P (where yesterday is
used in a sense more like yesteryear...)

T

Bleve said:

Theo Bekkers said:

Bleve said:

Theo Bekkers wrote:

Quoted message said:

> Hmm.. Bleve saw someone doing something reaaly stupid (taking off
> when the light was red whilst talking on his mobile) and wished he
> had a truck with a bullbar so he could get the satisfaction of
> prying said person from his bullbar with a crowbar. Just how did I
> miss the context? He thought the person deserved to die and wishes
> he was the person to effect said death.

I don't recall mentioning death at all, that's your take. Given that
the collision would have been at low speed (context, remember? the
turd was only doing maybe a maximum of 20km/h, he'd just accelerated
from a stop and would have traveled maybe 10 metres) the prying from
a bullbar would have been panel damage and a rude shock, and a
significant impact on the turd's day, but no injury.

Interesting that you put this spin on your remarks just seven minutes after
Tam posted this "context". :-)
I took it from your initial post that you felt this person, not his vehicle,
deserved serious injury, and Zebee had the same understanding. If I
misunderstood you, I apologise. It appears now that you only wanted to
seriously damage his property.

Apology accepted. I didn't even want to seriously damage his property,
just seriously inconvenience him such that he might learn a lesson.

There, now we're all happy again!

Tam

In aus.bicycle on Thu, 12 Oct 2006 16:13:10 +1000

Tamyka Bell said:

<sarcasm>Of course, because Bleve has been such an advocate
in the past of killing people.</sarcasm>

IT did surprise me I admit. But the words and tone were so similar to
comments by others which were meant, that it looked meant to me.

Quoted message said:

Now I thought it was a well established fact that people in
cars identify the cars as an extension of themselves, hence
language like "you hit me" rather than "you hit my car" and
so on. Or does such usage not pertain to Bleve?

IN the way spoken? Nope. I honestly read it as an attack on the
person, as a desire to hurt.

Two people have misread it. So there's a failure to communicate.
Happens a lot of course, especially on usenet.

But it is a failure to communicate on the part of the writer.

Zebee

Zebee Johnstone said:

In aus.bicycle on Thu, 12 Oct 2006 16:13:10 +1000

Tamyka Bell said:

<sarcasm>Of course, because Bleve has been such an advocate
in the past of killing people.</sarcasm>

IT did surprise me I admit. But the words and tone were so similar to
comments by others which were meant, that it looked meant to me.

Who has ever threatened or desired death here on this newsgroup? (apart
from the trolls, who don't count)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Now I thought it was a well established fact that people in
cars identify the cars as an extension of themselves, hence
language like "you hit me" rather than "you hit my car" and
so on. Or does such usage not pertain to Bleve?

IN the way spoken? Nope. I honestly read it as an attack on the
person, as a desire to hurt.

Two people have misread it. So there's a failure to communicate.
Happens a lot of course, especially on usenet.

But it is a failure to communicate on the part of the writer.

This is USENET, I'm not trying to win the Booker, cut me some slack
please. That you assumed the worst is not entirely my fault
*especially* given that you know who I am and you have cultural context
as well as a history of interaction with me in multiple online forums,
as does Theo.

I also read it as kill.

Purely because that is what I would want to do.

I think we are missing ther point which is "using mobiles phones is
dangerous while driving". Clearly demonstrated by said law brekaer being
too busy breaking the law while chatting on the phone to obey a traffic
control signal (why stop at one broken law hey!).

P

"Bleve" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Zebee Johnstone said:

In aus.bicycle on Thu, 12 Oct 2006 16:13:10 +1000

Tamyka Bell said:

<sarcasm>Of course, because Bleve has been such an advocate
in the past of killing people.</sarcasm>

IT did surprise me I admit. But the words and tone were so similar to
comments by others which were meant, that it looked meant to me.

Who has ever threatened or desired death here on this newsgroup? (apart
from the trolls, who don't count)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Now I thought it was a well established fact that people in
cars identify the cars as an extension of themselves, hence
language like "you hit me" rather than "you hit my car" and
so on. Or does such usage not pertain to Bleve?

IN the way spoken? Nope. I honestly read it as an attack on the
person, as a desire to hurt.

Two people have misread it. So there's a failure to communicate.
Happens a lot of course, especially on usenet.

But it is a failure to communicate on the part of the writer.

This is USENET, I'm not trying to win the Booker, cut me some slack
please. That you assumed the worst is not entirely my fault
*especially* given that you know who I am and you have cultural context
as well as a history of interaction with me in multiple online forums,
as does Theo.