A question for Matt B

Don Whybrow said:

Since I would not want you to lose focus on any other discussion.

Do you cycle?

Ask him if he's a member of the ABD.

Don Whybrow said the following on 15/02/2007 20:34:

Quoted message said:

Since I would not want you to lose focus on any other discussion.

Do you cycle?

If he does, please let me know - I won't see his reply :-)

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

Don Whybrow said:

Since I would not want you to lose focus on any other discussion.

Do you cycle?

Yes.

--
Matt B

Quoted message said:

Don Whybrow said:

Since I would not want you to lose focus on any other discussion.

Do you cycle?

Ask him if he's a member of the ABD.

In what way would that be interesting to anyone? Would you like to know
if I'm a member of the AA, RAC, HPC, IAM, CTC?

I presume, given your obsession with the ABD, that you are a member
yourself.

--
Matt B

Matt B 'matt.bourke'@nospam.london.com said:

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 20:34:59 +0000, Don Whybrow
<[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Since I would not want you to lose focus on any other discussion.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Do you cycle?

Quoted message said:

Ask him if he's a member of the ABD.

In what way would that be interesting to anyone? Would you like to know
if I'm a member of the AA, RAC, HPC, IAM, CTC?

I presume, given your obsession with the ABD, that you are a member
yourself.

--
Matt B

Refuses to answer the question.

Refuses to admit his ABD membership.

Misquotes people.

Defends the perversion of justice posts on Safespeed.

Lies about road layout in London.

Encourages using dead people to duck speeding fines.

Can't name the roads he cycles on.

Pursues a relentless campaign of misinformation and dishonesty.

Defends speeding.

Refuses to name the roads shared with cyclists that he speeds on.

spindrift said:

Matt B 'matt.bourke'@nospam.london.com said:

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 20:34:59 +0000, Don Whybrow
<[email hidden]> wrote:
> Since I would not want you to lose focus on any other discussion.
> Do you cycle?
Ask him if he's a member of the ABD.

In what way would that be interesting to anyone? Would you like to know
if I'm a member of the AA, RAC, HPC, IAM, CTC?

I presume, given your obsession with the ABD, that you are a member
yourself.

Refuses to answer the question.

I've never refused to answer the question.

Quoted message said:

Refuses to admit his ABD membership.

"Admit" makes it sound like it is something one should feel guilty or
ashamed about.

Quoted message said:

Misquotes people.

Not me. Can you cite an example.

Quoted message said:

Defends the perversion of justice posts on Safespeed.

I've never defended a perversion of justice. You though have never been
able to support your smear of them by showing any evidence that they
have committed such an act.

Quoted message said:

Lies about road layout in London.

Can you substantiate that accusation? I don't lie.

Quoted message said:

Encourages using dead people to duck speeding fines.

Now you are getting seriously offensive.

Quoted message said:

Can't name the roads he cycles on.

What makes you think that?

Quoted message said:

Pursues a relentless campaign of misinformation and dishonesty.

Never.

Quoted message said:

Defends speeding.

Ha ha. Can you actually read? If so do you understand English?

Quoted message said:

Refuses to name the roads shared with cyclists that he speeds on.

Your underhand tactics, and motives are disgraceful.

Are you actually a cyclist, or an undercover agent for some extreme
anti-cycling organisation, infiltrating cycling discussion groups and
posting inflammatory and dishonest material to bring such groups into
disrepute - as you are doing here?

--
Matt B

Matt B 'matt.bourke'@nospam.london.com said:

spindrift said:

Matt B 'matt.bourke'@nospam.london.com said:

[email hidden] wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 20:34:59 +0000, Don Whybrow
> <[email hidden]> wrote:
>> Since I would not want you to lose focus on any other discussion.
>> Do you cycle?
> Ask him if he's a member of the ABD.
In what way would that be interesting to anyone? Would you like to know
if I'm a member of the AA, RAC, HPC, IAM, CTC?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I presume, given your obsession with the ABD, that you are a member
yourself.

Quoted message said:

Refuses to answer the question.

I've never refused to answer the question.

Quoted message said:

Refuses to admit his ABD membership.

"Admit" makes it sound like it is something one should feel guilty or
ashamed about.

Quoted message said:

Misquotes people.

Not me. Can you cite an example.

Quoted message said:

Defends the perversion of justice posts on Safespeed.

I've never defended a perversion of justice. You though have never been
able to support your smear of them by showing any evidence that they
have committed such an act.

Quoted message said:

Lies about road layout in London.

Can you substantiate that accusation? I don't lie.

Quoted message said:

Encourages using dead people to duck speeding fines.

Now you are getting seriously offensive.

Quoted message said:

Can't name the roads he cycles on.

What makes you think that?

Quoted message said:

Pursues a relentless campaign of misinformation and dishonesty.

Never.

Quoted message said:

Defends speeding.

Ha ha. Can you actually read? If so do you understand English?

Quoted message said:

Refuses to name the roads shared with cyclists that he speeds on.

Your underhand tactics, and motives are disgraceful.

Are you actually a cyclist, or an undercover agent for some extreme
anti-cycling organisation, infiltrating cycling discussion groups and
posting inflammatory and dishonest material to bring such groups into
disrepute - as you are doing here?

--
Matt B

Please name the roads, sahred with cyclists, that you speed on.

Please make it clear what you think of this post:
Ideas for defeating speed measuring equipment.
"You could have made up a number plate from a similar make and colour
car
to yours seen driving around. This is called number plate cloning and
is
becoming quite common. It would be hard to justify your incorrect
cloned
plate if stopped by Police. You might fare a little better if your
number
plate incorporates a simple mistake such as two numbers changed round.
For
example A 123 ACB instead of A 123 ABC. If stopped you could simply
claim
that it must be an error."
"Don't be too keen to wash the winter filth off your car! Don't be
too
keen to remove that bike rack from the back. If your number plate
falls
off or gets broken, don't be in too much of a hurry to get it
replaced. We
hear the motorcycle chain lubricant in a spray can will make a few
usefully unreadable streaks or blobs. Or do a little mudslinging; mud
stuck on the numberplate could well obscure enough of the numbers and
letters. In some areas kids think it is funny to attach black tape to
a
number plate to make the numbers and letters different; this is a
trend
well worth encouraging."

Note the very last word. Paul Smith isn't just listing ways to avoid
detection, he's encouraging it.

Your view?

"I've never refused to answer the question."

Are you in the ABD?

"Can you substantiate that accusation?"

Yep, you claimed the Seven Dials layout was safer to cycle on, then
admitted you've never even been there! You're a liar. You have zero
evidence for your claims.

Do you or do you not think that making your car harder to detect is
"worth encouraging"?

Get ready for evasion, bluster, prevarication, subject changes and
shrill hysterical avoidance of the questions...

spindrift said:

Matt B said:

spindrift said:

Refuses to answer the question.

I've never refused to answer the question.

Quoted message said:

Refuses to admit his ABD membership.

"Admit" makes it sound like it is something one should feel guilty or
ashamed about.

Quoted message said:

Misquotes people.

Not me. Can you cite an example.

Quoted message said:

Defends the perversion of justice posts on Safespeed.

I've never defended a perversion of justice. You though have never been
able to support your smear of them by showing any evidence that they
have committed such an act.

Quoted message said:

Lies about road layout in London.

Can you substantiate that accusation? I don't lie.

Quoted message said:

Encourages using dead people to duck speeding fines.

Now you are getting seriously offensive.

Quoted message said:

Can't name the roads he cycles on.

What makes you think that?

Quoted message said:

Pursues a relentless campaign of misinformation and dishonesty.

Never.

Quoted message said:

Defends speeding.

Ha ha. Can you actually read? If so do you understand English?

Quoted message said:

Refuses to name the roads shared with cyclists that he speeds on.

Your underhand tactics, and motives are disgraceful.

Are you actually a cyclist, or an undercover agent for some extreme
anti-cycling organisation, infiltrating cycling discussion groups and
posting inflammatory and dishonest material to bring such groups into
disrepute - as you are doing here?

Please name the roads, sahred with cyclists, that you speed on.

What leads you to believe that I "speed" on /any/ roads?

Quoted message said:

Please make it clear what you think of this post:

Why? Where was it from? Where is its context? Is it selectively
quoted? Did you write it yourself?

Quoted message said:

"I've never refused to answer the question."
Are you in the ABD?

Why is the answer to that question of any interest to you?

Quoted message said:

"Can you substantiate that accusation?"

Yep, you claimed the Seven Dials layout was safer to cycle on, then
admitted you've never even been there! You're a liar. You have zero
evidence for your claims.

I said "substantiate that accusation" the one: "Lies about road layout
in London." WHEN did I lie about a road layout in London???

Quoted message said:

Do you or do you not think that making your car harder to detect is
"worth encouraging"?

It's never crossed my mind - why should it?

Quoted message said:

Get ready for evasion, bluster, prevarication, subject changes and
shrill hysterical avoidance of the questions...

You speak only for yourself there. You have failed wholesale to justify
anything that you wrote in your previous post. Here you have attempted,
but failed, to give satisfactory answers to a few of my challenges, but
have ignored the others. Admit it, your accusations were /all/
unfounded weren't they. You have no answers - have you?

I think you owe everyone here an apology for your blatant refusal to
stop making these wild unsubstantiated accusations.

We all have the right to air our points of view, and to state our
opinions. We don't have to read those of others if we don't want to.
We can challenge them if we disagree with them. But what you do, the
way you misrepresent, misquote, and attempt to smear those with views
you cannot accept is TOTALLY unethical and unacceptable.

--
Matt B

Matt B 'matt.bourke'@nospam.london.com said:

spindrift said:

Matt B said:

spindrift wrote:
> Refuses to answer the question.
I've never refused to answer the question.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Refuses to admit his ABD membership.
"Admit" makes it sound like it is something one should feel guilty or
ashamed about.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Misquotes people.
Not me. Can you cite an example.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Defends the perversion of justice posts on Safespeed.
I've never defended a perversion of justice. You though have never been
able to support your smear of them by showing any evidence that they
have committed such an act.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Lies about road layout in London.
Can you substantiate that accusation? I don't lie.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Encourages using dead people to duck speeding fines.
Now you are getting seriously offensive.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Can't name the roads he cycles on.
What makes you think that?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Pursues a relentless campaign of misinformation and dishonesty.
Never.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Defends speeding.
Ha ha. Can you actually read? If so do you understand English?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Refuses to name the roads shared with cyclists that he speeds on.
Your underhand tactics, and motives are disgraceful.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Are you actually a cyclist, or an undercover agent for some extreme
anti-cycling organisation, infiltrating cycling discussion groups and
posting inflammatory and dishonest material to bring such groups into
disrepute - as you are doing here?

Quoted message said:

Please name the roads, sahred with cyclists, that you speed on.

What leads you to believe that I "speed" on /any/ roads?

Quoted message said:

Please make it clear what you think of this post:

Why? Where was it from? Where is its context? Is it selectively
quoted? Did you write it yourself?

Quoted message said:

"I've never refused to answer the question."
Are you in the ABD?

Why is the answer to that question of any interest to you?

Quoted message said:

"Can you substantiate that accusation?"

Quoted message said:

Yep, you claimed the Seven Dials layout was safer to cycle on, then
admitted you've never even been there! You're a liar. You have zero
evidence for your claims.

I said "substantiate that accusation" the one: "Lies about road layout
in London." WHEN did I lie about a road layout in London???

Quoted message said:

Do you or do you not think that making your car harder to detect is
"worth encouraging"?

It's never crossed my mind - why should it?

Quoted message said:

Get ready for evasion, bluster, prevarication, subject changes and
shrill hysterical avoidance of the questions...

You speak only for yourself there. You have failed wholesale to justify
anything that you wrote in your previous post. Here you have attempted,
but failed, to give satisfactory answers to a few of my challenges, but
have ignored the others. Admit it, your accusations were /all/
unfounded weren't they. You have no answers - have you?

I think you owe everyone here an apology for your blatant refusal to
stop making these wild unsubstantiated accusations.

We all have the right to air our points of view, and to state our
opinions. We don't have to read those of others if we don't want to.
We can challenge them if we disagree with them. But what you do, the
way you misrepresent, misquote, and attempt to smear those with views
you cannot accept is TOTALLY unethical and unacceptable.

--
Matt B- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Could you please answer the questions.

spindrift said:

Could you please answer the questions.

I did. Every last one of them. Now it is your turn.

See if you can claw-back some respect by going through my last couple of
replies. Each sentence that ends with a "?" requires an answer. Not a
snide comment, or an evasion. An ANSWER.

When you have done that, and only /when/ you have done that, then /if/
there are any outstanding issues you have with anything I have said
previously I will happily enter into a /civilised discussion/ with you
over them.

--
Matt B

Matt B 'matt.bourke'@nospam.london.com said:

spindrift said:

Could you please answer the questions.

I did. Every last one of them. Now it is your turn.

See if you can claw-back some respect by going through my last couple of
replies. Each sentence that ends with a "?" requires an answer. Not a
snide comment, or an evasion. An ANSWER.

When you have done that, and only /when/ you have done that, then /if/
there are any outstanding issues you have with anything I have said
previously I will happily enter into a /civilised discussion/ with you
over them.

--
Matt B

"Get ready for evasion, bluster, prevarication, subject changes and
shrill hysterical avoidance of the questions... "

Further comment superfluous.

spindrift said:

Matt B 'matt.bourke'@nospam.london.com said:

spindrift said:

Could you please answer the questions.

I did. Every last one of them. Now it is your turn.

See if you can claw-back some respect by going through my last couple of
replies. Each sentence that ends with a "?" requires an answer. Not a
snide comment, or an evasion. An ANSWER.

When you have done that, and only /when/ you have done that, then /if/
there are any outstanding issues you have with anything I have said
previously I will happily enter into a /civilised discussion/ with you
over them.

--
Matt B

"Get ready for evasion, bluster, prevarication, subject changes and
shrill hysterical avoidance of the questions... "

Further comment superfluous.

Not exactly the apology, or justification of your remarks that we demand
now, is it.

I assume that you have thrown in the towel. Now please refrain from
releasing any more of your ridiculous and false accusations. Life is
too short.

--
Matt B

Matt B 'matt.bourke'@nospam.london.com said:

spindrift said:

Matt B 'matt.bourke'@nospam.london.com said:

spindrift wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Could you please answer the questions.
I did. Every last one of them. Now it is your turn.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

See if you can claw-back some respect by going through my last couple of
replies. Each sentence that ends with a "?" requires an answer. Not a
snide comment, or an evasion. An ANSWER.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

When you have done that, and only /when/ you have done that, then /if/
there are any outstanding issues you have with anything I have said
previously I will happily enter into a /civilised discussion/ with you
over them.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

--
Matt B

Quoted message said:

"Get ready for evasion, bluster, prevarication, subject changes and
shrill hysterical avoidance of the questions... "

Quoted message said:

Further comment superfluous.

Not exactly the apology, or justification of your remarks that we demand
now, is it.

I assume that you have thrown in the towel. Now please refrain from
releasing any more of your ridiculous and false accusations. Life is
too short.

--
Matt B- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The question isn't really that Matt cannot even bring himself to
condemn the lawless activities encouraged by Paul Smith and other pro-
speeding websites, it's that he lacks the honesty to even acknowledge
them! Look at the evasion and obfuscation above, genetically incapable
of bringing himself into the open as a pro-speeding apologist.

Any reasonable person would have little hesitation in condemning the
perversion of justice without prevarication, yet the wriggling,
ducking and diving employed by the speedophile apologists takes your
breath away.

"Is perverting justice wrong?"

"Ah, before I answer that I need to know your inside leg, the weather
in the Cairngorms, the average weight of swallows and the menstrual
cycle of Natasha Kaplinsky".

Remember what I said about question avoidance?

Let's make it simpler.

1/

Is obscuring your number plate or arranging to have speeding tickets
sent to a dead person's address wrong?

Yes or no?

2/

Is it a bit silly to crow about the success of a road layout scheme
when you admit you have no evidence on its efficacy and have never
even seen the layout, let alone cycled it?

Yes or no?

3/

Are you a member of the ABD?

Yes or no?

Last chance.

<snip>

Why don't you take this to email?!

spindrift said:

The question isn't really that Matt cannot even bring himself to
condemn the lawless activities encouraged by Paul Smith and other pro-
speeding websites, it's that he lacks the honesty to even acknowledge
them! Look at the evasion and obfuscation above, genetically incapable
of bringing himself into the open as a pro-speeding apologist.

I think the genetic incapability is more yours than his: He is consistent in
arguing that obeying speed limits and enforcement by camera do not encourage
safety, as oft times legal speeds within the limit are too high (20mph in a
20mph limit past an urban school at kicking out time, is legal but too fast)

pk

spindrift said:

Is it a bit silly to crow about the success of a road layout scheme
when you admit you have no evidence on its efficacy and have never
even seen the layout, let alone cycled it?

What have I just told you about misrepresentation?

I was describing the Seven Dials scheme to another poster - I said of
it: "...where there are no lines, signs, or signals. Cars, lorries,
taxis stop half-way round the roundabout to wait for cyclists or
pedestrians taking the shortest route across the junction, or taking
photos, or talking. Why is that? The same motorist would toot his horn
or make obscene gestures, or even be aggressive with his vehicle if you
walked in front of him at another roundabout. It proves the link
between granted power and the use of power."[1]

You chipped-in with: "You've clearly never negotiated this roundabout by
bike. This junction is a nightmare, cars and vans edge out and block the
roundabout so that you have to slam your brakes on in the middle of the
roundabout. There is anarchy at this roundabout, no driver takes a blind
bit of notice of cyclists here and accidents are common, including the
florist's van that sideswiped me."[2]

I told you later in the exchange: "I've seen it - but never seen the
dangers you describe".[3]

Note: The /Camden Cycling Campaign/ say in their report on a talk they
received from John Adams, an expert in "Risk Compensation" theory, about
the scheme there: "But John also showed us views of Seven Dials where
pedestrians, cycles and vehicles were successfully intermingling..." and
"... people negotiate by means of eye contact instead of obeying signs.
John stated that at Seven Dials there had been only one minor pedestrian
accident in five years."[4]

I welcome your comments on this, and your answers to my previous questions.

[1]http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.rec.cycling/msg/b9b2a2c6c30f9e24?hl=en&
[2]http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.rec.cycling/msg/b66d09e2d1a35209?hl=en&
[3]http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.rec.cycling/msg/a353905f7720c9f4?hl=en&
[4]http://www.camdencyclists.org.uk/newsitems/ccc/2005/johnadams0605

--
Matt B

Matt B 'matt.bourke'@nospam.london.com said:

spindrift said:

Is it a bit silly to crow about the success of a road layout scheme
when you admit you have no evidence on its efficacy and have never
even seen the layout, let alone cycled it?

What have I just told you about misrepresentation?

I was describing the Seven Dials scheme to another poster - I said of
it: "...where there are no lines, signs, or signals. Cars, lorries,
taxis stop half-way round the roundabout to wait for cyclists or
pedestrians taking the shortest route across the junction, or taking
photos, or talking. Why is that? The same motorist would toot his horn
or make obscene gestures, or even be aggressive with his vehicle if you
walked in front of him at another roundabout. It proves the link
between granted power and the use of power."[1]

You chipped-in with: "You've clearly never negotiated this roundabout by
bike. This junction is a nightmare, cars and vans edge out and block the
roundabout so that you have to slam your brakes on in the middle of the
roundabout. There is anarchy at this roundabout, no driver takes a blind
bit of notice of cyclists here and accidents are common, including the
florist's van that sideswiped me."[2]

I told you later in the exchange: "I've seen it - but never seen the
dangers you describe".[3]

Note: The /Camden Cycling Campaign/ say in their report on a talk they
received from John Adams, an expert in "Risk Compensation" theory, about
the scheme there: "But John also showed us views of Seven Dials where
pedestrians, cycles and vehicles were successfully intermingling..." and
"... people negotiate by means of eye contact instead of obeying signs.
John stated that at Seven Dials there had been only one minor pedestrian
accident in five years."[4]

I welcome your comments on this, and your answers to my previous questions.

[1]http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.rec.cycling/msg/b9b2a2c6c30f9e24?...
[2]http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.rec.cycling/msg/b66d09e2d1a35209?...
[3]http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.rec.cycling/msg/a353905f7720c9f4?...
[4]http://www.camdencyclists.org.uk/newsitems/ccc/2005/johnadams0605

--
Matt B

No answer to my questions then?

On Seven Dials:

Through Traffic: this was identified as a problem particularly in the
Seven Dials and St Catherine Street areas. Pedestrian-vehicle
conflicts were reported by both pedestrians and by taxi drivers

http://www3.camden.gov.uk/templates/committees/documents/13190.doc

There is a large conflict between pedestrians and vehicles, this is
most acute around the Seven Dials Monument and at the junction points
that Monmouth Street has with this circus.

spindrift said:

No answer to my questions then?

I think I've answered them all, apart from any that might be awaiting
clarification from yourself.

On the other hand, are you going to answer /any/ of mine???

--
Matt B

Matt B 'matt.bourke'@nospam.london.com said:

spindrift said:

No answer to my questions then?

I think I've answered them all, apart from any that might be awaiting
clarification from yourself.

On the other hand, are you going to answer /any/ of mine???

--
Matt B

1/

Is obscuring your number plate or arranging to have speeding tickets
sent to a dead person's address wrong?

Yes or no?