Anti-postie vendetta

In article <417bf610.0@entanet>,

Zog The Undeniable said:

This guy posts on the C+ forum and really, really, hates Royal Mail
employees.

The Grand Trunk?

--
Nick Kew

Zog The Undeniable said:

This guy posts on the C+ forum and really, really, hates Royal Mail
employees.

His dedication is impressive, even if the picture quality is a notch
below Lomography...

http://www.stairlift.org.uk/icf/

I'm not sure whether this obsession is amusing or disturbing.

Insane would be a better word.

Still given the size of those photos he will be totally steaming when the
bandwidth bill comes in this month.

*refresh* 🙂

Steve

Zog The Undeniable said:

This guy posts on the C+ forum and really, really, hates Royal Mail
employees.

His dedication is impressive, even if the picture quality is a notch
below Lomography...

http://www.stairlift.org.uk/icf/

I'm not sure whether this obsession is amusing or disturbing.

They'll all get the sack anyway for not wearing their helmets!

Tony

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 19:34:06 GMT, Steve Peake <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

This guy posts on the C+ forum and really, really, hates Royal Mail
employees.

His dedication is impressive, even if the picture quality is a notch
below Lomography...

http://www.stairlift.org.uk/icf/

I'm not sure whether this obsession is amusing or disturbing.

Insane would be a better word.

Still given the size of those photos he will be totally steaming when the
bandwidth bill comes in this month.

???

Page seems empty, has he taken them down? I'm intrigued, what did the
photo's show?
--

"Bob"

'The people have spoken, the [censored]'

Email address is spam trapped.
To reply directly remove the beverage.

Call me Bob [email hidden] opined the following...

Quoted message said:

???

Page seems empty, has he taken them down? I'm intrigued, what did the
photo's show?

When I first looked there was something. Then I followed a link to
another page and when I tried it again it had vanished. Listing on u.r.c
obviously promotes far too much attention. ;-)

Jon

Call me Bob said:

Page seems empty, has he taken them down? I'm intrigued, what did the
photo's show?

Cached version here: www.widerworld.co.uk/postie-vendetta -- I thought it
was very funny. Won't stay there long if a UKRC posting is equivalent to the
Slashdot Effect.

Zog The Undeniable said:

This guy posts on the C+ forum and really, really, hates Royal Mail
employees.

His dedication is impressive, even if the picture quality is a notch
below Lomography...

http://www.stairlift.org.uk/icf/

I'm not sure whether this obsession is amusing or disturbing.

Having had a look at the cached site mentioned by Simonb, I think it's
highly commendable. He is dedicated to campaigning against people who
ride bikes on the pavement. Royal Mail employees tend to be among the
worst offenders, IME.

--
Danny Colyer (the UK company has been laughed out of my reply address)
<URL:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

quote='Danny Colyer'Zog The Undeniable said:

This guy posts on the C+ forum and really, really, hates Royal Mail
employees.

His dedication is impressive, even if the picture quality is a notch
below Lomography...

stairlift.org.ukicfOpen ↗

I'm not sure whether this obsession is amusing or disturbing.

Having had a look at the cached site mentioned by Simonb, I think it's
highly commendable. He is dedicated to campaigning against people who
ride bikes on the pavement. Royal Mail employees tend to be among the
worst offenders, IME.

--
Danny Colyer (the UK company has been laughed out of my reply address)
<URL:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine[/QUOTE]
The guy would go absolutely mental in Australia. The posties ride 125cc motorbikes on the pavements and my husband thinks that by law they are allowed to.:eek:
Bkay

"Zog The Undeniable" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:417bf610.0@entanet...

Quoted message said:

This guy posts on the C+ forum and really, really, hates Royal Mail
employees.

His dedication is impressive, even if the picture quality is a notch
below Lomography...

http://www.stairlift.org.uk/icf/

I'm not sure whether this obsession is amusing or disturbing.

I think one of the subjects has a good case for libel. Possibly also
stalking. I don't have much issue with him taking photos of them riding on
the pavement, but taking photos of them while not at work is pretty bad.

Note also he's advocating beating up pavement cyclists. He's crossed the
line from amusing to disturbing a long time ago.

cheers,
clive

Tony Raven <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

They'll all get the sack anyway for not wearing their helmets!

They are running that risk which us strange as their requirement to
wear helmets is supposedly a uniform issue and nothing to do with
safety. Now posties are notorious for their relaxed attitude to
wearing the compnay uniform. Most of the helmeted ones would appear to
be risking the sack for some uniform infringement or other. The Post
Office appears to be highly selective in its enforcement of uniform.

--
Dave...

Danny Colyer said:

Zog The Undeniable said:

This guy posts on the C+ forum and really, really, hates Royal Mail
employees.

His dedication is impressive, even if the picture quality is a notch
below Lomography...

http://www.stairlift.org.uk/icf/

I'm not sure whether this obsession is amusing or disturbing.

Having had a look at the cached site mentioned by Simonb, I think it's
highly commendable. He is dedicated to campaigning against people who
ride bikes on the pavement. Royal Mail employees tend to be among the
worst offenders, IME.

and there was me thinking they were just employed to distribute elastic
bands everywhere...

Seems they are not covered by the litter laws either.

R.

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 22:43:10 +0100, "Simonb"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Cached version here: www.widerworld.co.uk/postie-vendetta -- I thought it
was very funny. Won't stay there long if a UKRC posting is equivalent to the
Slashdot Effect.

If the guy was serious he'd be working with the police and the Post
Office not sticking pictures of posties taking their kids shopping on
the web.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

Hi folks,

This loonie has been posting on the 'Cycling Plus' forum (home of ABD
trolls) under the name 'Zeb' (Who might actually be P.W. Baker,
registraint of the stairlifts site).

As the reposted page takes ages to download and might not be around
for long I reproduce the text from it below:

'Illegal Cycling

Below are some pictures of people cycling illegally on the road, on
the pavement, and in a pedestrian areas where cycling is prohibited by
law.

The pictures show Royal Mail employees who were at work at the time
the pictures were taken.

[Image]

Three Royal Mail employees riding during a time of natural darkness
and rain. Two bicycles were not showing lights.

[Image]

After passing a junction on the left one of them started riding
illegally on the pavement. A woman sitting under a bus shelter at the
top of the rise was struck by the right pedal.

[Image]

This Royal Mail employee chose to ride illegally in a narrow part of a
pedestrian precinct where cycling was prohibited by a local authority
Traffic Order.

Notice his hands are not covering the brake levers or the bell. He
didn't look at the shop doorway either.

How would you feel if it was your small child or grandchild who ran
out of the Robert Dyas store and was hit by that heavy load?

[Image]

This Royal Mail employee was spotted from a distance by the
photographer who caught up with him on foot.

then the Royal Mail employee was overtaken when he left the Royal Mail
bicycle in the middle of the pavement where it caused an obstruction
and was also prone to vandalism, mail theft, planting of letter bombs,
etc, etc. [Letter bombs???!!!]

[Image]

Highway Code: "You MUST NOT cycle on a pavement. Do not leave your
cycle where it would endanger or obstruct road users or pedestrians,
for example, lying on the pavement. Use cycle parking facilities where
provided. Laws HA 1835 sect 72 & R(S)A sect 129"

He then continued to cycle illegally on the footpath (pavement). It
can be seen that he was carrying mail in his right hand and was not in
a position to use the front brake. In other words, in addition to
cycling illegally on a footpath/pavement alongside a road, he was not
in proper control of the vehicle.

[Image]

but he chose to ignore the photographer and continued to ride
illegally on the pavement around a blind bend regardless.

[Image of busy road and approaching lorry.]

The common cyclists' excuse "it was too dangerous on the road" hardly
applies in any of these pictured scenes, does it?

[Image apparently taken from photographers bedroom]

The one shown below looked innocent enough initially:

[Image]

Then he joined another Royal mail employee who was riding illegally on
the footpath: and they both chose to ride illegally on the footpath:

[Image]

The Royal Mail employee shown below had been seen on earlier occasions
riding illegally on the same footpath and had caused injury to a
pedestrian who was carrying bags of shopping home from the town
centre.

[Image]

Obviously thought it was highly amusing!

Some pictures not shown on this page but submitted to various
authorities show examples of narrow footpaths alongside roads and
women with twin baby buggies. Royal Mail employees have been seen
inconveniencing young mother in such circumstances when, for example,
they suddenly appeared from a blind corner riding illegally on the
footpath.

The Royal Mail employee shown in the pictures immediately above this
text was seen pushing a twin baby buggy containing two young children,
one of whom was wearing a pink bonnet. He was seen pushing the buggy
just a few metres from the Robert Dyas store outside which one of the
other Royal Mail employees was seen cycling illegally, as near the top
of this page. Perhaps an ironical but foreseeable accident waiting to
happen and separated only by time (two days in that real life
example)!

[Image taken from the top of a shop]

That's him above, pushing the buggy into the store after his partner
picked the child up.

.... and after coming out:

[Image]

The woman's bag in his left hand was thought to be the proceeds of
theft in the store.

[Accusations of theft are a serious matter]

The photographer who took the picture shown below walked around a
corner and was confronted by this Royal Mail employee who chose to
ride illegally on the pavement. The photographer managed to take a
camera out of the case in time to record these images but wasn't quick
enough to get a mug shot..

[Image]

The pictures below show another Royal Mail employee riding illegally
on the footpath.

[Lots of images, including 'head shots' of the cyclist]

The Royal Mail employee shown below rode illegally on the footpath,
jumped a red light and continued to ride illegally on the footpath.

Note the youngster behind him learning bad habits!

[Lots more images]

The one shown below rode illegally on the footpath on the west side,
crossed the road, cycled illegally on the footpath on the east side,
jumped a red pedestrian light, crossed the road diagonally, then rode
illegally on the footpath on the west side. Look at the traffic light
sequence and traffic movement and see how much time you think he
really gained. Note the innocent pedestrians who were at risk from his
selfish and negligent acts.

[Images]

How many of the reckless, "couldn't care less" Royal Mail employees
shown in the pictures were wearing safety helmets?

Would you let a toddler out on the footpath with people like that
around?

One of the pictures on the national database is an X-ray taken at
Mayday Hospital in Croydon and shows a greenstick fracture of a bone
in the arm of young girl who was knocked down in Oakfield Road, West
Croydon, by a Royal Mail employee who was cycling illegally on the
footpath.

Many of the images shown above were purposefully recorded during times
when there were few pedestrians about. They show a very small sample
of illegal cycling by Royal Mail employees near the centre of a small
postal town.

The Royal mail illegal cycling issue is nationwide and there are many
other pictures showing Royal Mail employees cycling illegally in much
more crowded conditions, some show collisions with pedestrians and may
be used as evidence in personal injury claims and prosecution.

We are in the age of outlawing disability discrimination and of
improving access for disabled persons. This includes signage and safe
passage. People need to get to shops and are entitled to walk on the
footpath without being injured by irresponsible cyclists using items
of work equipment as offensive weapons. [Offensive weapons??]

Those people who do not use motor vehicles, present no threat to the
environment, conduct themselves legally and properly, take the
shortest reasonable route, and are engaged in the simple process of
walking to a shop to buy food to sustain life are being put at risk
too often by the illegal and unreasonable actions of Royal Mail
employees.

These factors all support the existing legal requirement NOT to ride
bicycles on the footpath.

Camera phones are very clever. If you are a cyclist and give a
pedestrian a hard time your picture could be received by that person's
pals waiting for you at the other end of the path. Guess what ...
there were no witnesses to what happened next!

[Incitement to violence is a very serious matter...]

The pictures shown above are part of a collection of over 57,000
pictures taken around Britain since 2001. As readers know, the
Limitations Act places a time limit on issuing a writ in personal
injury cases. Because the time limit hasn't expired yet and some cases
are sub judice, pictures of injured persons are not shown here, but
many exist and will be used in lawsuits.

[57,000? obsessive behaviour or what?]

Every police officer in Britain who witnesses Royal Mail employees
performing illegal acts such as those shown in the pictures is
corrupt: meaning the majority of police officers are corrupt. They
know they are acting illegally by condoning it but ignore it anyway.
But they are being watched and evidence is mounting.

Many relations of injured persons are no longer prepared to be fobbed
off and will take direct action against Royal Mail criminals in
retaliation and for prevention.

An elderly man was seriously injured in Rutland when struck from
behind by a Royal Mail employee who was cycling illegally and failed
to stop. His daughter branded the hit and run cyclist a coward and has
started selling yellow paint bombs so other Royal Mail cowards will
arrive back at the sorting office with a yellow streak down their
back.

Another injury caused by a Royal Mail employee in Sunderland did not
go unnoticed and family members took direct action.

Some individuals advocate the use of bicycle stingers. They reckon
lengths of carpet gripper do a good job. Royal Mail claims to have
37,000 bicycles. I wonder how it would like 74,000 punctured tyres
every day!

[Who are the real criminals here, one might ask..]

Below is a copy of a letter published in the Worthing Herald in late
1999, the year the fixed penalty notice scheme came into force.

This illegal cycling is not funny or clever. It needs to be stopped
now Adam Crozier.'

Hi folks,

Reading the above it seems that were are quite possibly dealing with a
dangerous fanatic here.

I provide links to two images taken from the above page. One might
well be assumed to be of 'Zeb's' home town and another sems to be
taken from his bedroom window. Anyone recognise the location of these
images? (Could they actually be somewhere around Coventry). We might
need to pass the details on to the relavant authorities if this
fanatic takes his obsession any further...

http://www.thebikezone.org.uk/downloads/ZebsHomeTown.jpg

http://www.thebikezone.org.uk/downloads/ZebsBedroom.jpg

On 25/10/04 3:13 pm, in article
[email hidden], "Howard"

Quoted message said:

Three Royal Mail employees riding during a time of natural darkness
and rain. Two bicycles were not showing lights.

Of course there was plenty of light to allow him to take clear enough
photos..

...d

On 25 Oct 2004 07:13:27 -0700 someone who may be
[email hidden] (Howard) wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

This loonie has been posting on the 'Cycling Plus' forum (home of ABD
trolls) under the name 'Zeb' (Who might actually be P.W. Baker,
registraint of the stairlifts site).

As the reposted page takes ages to download and might not be around
for long I reproduce the text from it below:

Quoted message said:

The woman's bag in his left hand was thought to be the proceeds of
theft in the store.

Quoted message said:

[Accusations of theft are a serious matter]

Agreed. The woman would presumably have grounds to sue for this
accusation.

Quoted message said:

How many of the reckless, "couldn't care less" Royal Mail employees
shown in the pictures were wearing safety helmets?

Ah, another "crime".

Quoted message said:

The Royal mail illegal cycling issue is nationwide and there are many
other pictures showing Royal Mail employees cycling illegally in much
more crowded conditions, some show collisions with pedestrians and may
be used as evidence in personal injury claims and prosecution.

That rather depends on the photograph.

Quoted message said:

Those people who do not use motor vehicles, present no threat to the
environment, conduct themselves legally and properly, take the
shortest reasonable route, and are engaged in the simple process of
walking to a shop to buy food to sustain life are being put at risk
too often by the illegal and unreasonable actions of Royal Mail
employees.

Employees who are not using motor vehicles:-)

I wonder why the vendetta is not against Royal Mail employees
driving motor vehicles as well?

Quoted message said:

Camera phones are very clever. If you are a cyclist and give a
pedestrian a hard time your picture could be received by that person's
pals waiting for you at the other end of the path. Guess what ...
there were no witnesses to what happened next!

[Incitement to violence is a very serious matter...]

It is indeed. The web page is evidence of such incitement.

Quoted message said:

Because the time limit hasn't expired yet and some cases
are sub judice, pictures of injured persons are not shown here, but
many exist and will be used in lawsuits.

Really.

Quoted message said:

Every police officer in Britain who witnesses Royal Mail employees
performing illegal acts such as those shown in the pictures is
corrupt: meaning the majority of police officers are corrupt. They
know they are acting illegally by condoning it but ignore it anyway.
But they are being watched and evidence is mounting.

Ah, police officers as well.

Quoted message said:

Some individuals advocate the use of bicycle stingers. They reckon
lengths of carpet gripper do a good job. Royal Mail claims to have
37,000 bicycles. I wonder how it would like 74,000 punctured tyres
every day!

[Who are the real criminals here, one might ask..]

Indeed. Stingers are not used on two wheeled vehicles for obvious
reasons.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

David Hansen said:

Quoted message said:

How many of the reckless, "couldn't care less" Royal Mail employees
shown in the pictures were wearing safety helmets?

Ah, another "crime".

Actually a "health and safety at work" issue. It's a bit like
construction workers having to wear safety boots and hard hats.

In theory continued refusal to wear a helmet at work by a Royal Mail
employee performing a cycle based delivery will lead to a conduct code
warning and eventually to dismissal. At least most of them are wearing
Hi-Vis clothing.
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks"

I think this page is very disturbing.

Phil Cook <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

How many of the reckless, "couldn't care less" Royal Mail employees
shown in the pictures were wearing safety helmets?

Ah, another "crime".

Actually a "health and safety at work" issue. It's a bit like
construction workers having to wear safety boots and hard hats.

In theory continued refusal to wear a helmet at work by a Royal Mail
employee performing a cycle based delivery will lead to a conduct code
warning and eventually to dismissal. At least most of them are wearing
Hi-Vis clothing.

Not this load of nonsense again! It is NOT a 'health and safety at
work issue'. Cycle helemets are specifically excluded from HSE
definitions of what constitutes PPE. Posties can only be 'required' to
wear a 'helmet' as part of their uniform, and given that many of them
dress like tramps enforcing this particular item of 'uniform' seems to
be little more than discrimination against cycling posties.

The following is the official line on this very issue from the HSE. It
is to Colin Clarke of the Uk cycle helmet forum.

Dear Colin,

Thank you for your report on the effect cycle helmets have on cycle
safety. Unfortunately HSE are able to offer you little help in this
area as we only have responsibility towards cyclists while they are
engaged in a work activity. These cyclists will represent a very small
number of the total. HSE has no remit with regards to workers cycling
to and from work. Furthermore cycle helmets used on the public highway
are specifically excluded from the Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)
at work regulations. This means that it would be very hard for an
employer to force an employee to wear a cycle helmet on health and
safety grounds, they will however be free to require employees to wear
cycle helmets as part of their uniform.

HSE has no remit to dictate the uniform policy of a company unless it
falls within the scope of PPE. Ultimately the wearing of cycle helmets
is a matter on individual choice, any stance to the contrary could
potentially be challenged on human rights
grounds. With regards to the use of cycle helmets on the public roads
by members of the public, this is a policy area that falls totally
within the remit of the Department for Transport.

Yours,
Jon Windeatt
Health & Safety Executive
Safety Policy Directorate
Workplace Transport & Special Hazards Section.

30 Sept 2002