View Single Post
  #11  
Old April 18th 19, 03:00 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_11_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 56
Default Reckless cyclist has to pay compo to pedestrian he mowed down.

On 17/04/2019 19:03, TMS320 wrote:
On 17/04/2019 10:28, JNugent wrote:
On 17/04/2019 09:24, TMS320 wrote:
On 17/04/2019 00:28, JNugent wrote:
On 16/04/2019 22:01, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
Simon Jester wrote:
Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
MrCheerful wrote:


https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/news/stoke-on-trent-news/cyclist-fined-hitting-pedestrian-town-2767779


But, he will be on the dole and won't have the £50.
As for writing a letter, most cyclists can't even spell their first
name. Stupid does as stupid rides.

You two should share Onanism tips with Nugent.

They seem to think it "fun" to post annoyinfg stuff in a cycling
NG. Sad.

Why does it annoy you to be told of the exploits of cyclists?

This NG is called uk.rec.CYCLING.


Very good!

That, of course, is the very reason for my question. Whatever else you
may think of Messrs Pounder and Cheerful and their posts here, you
have to admit that they are almost always on-topic for a cycling
newsgroup. Not every one of their opponents are as punctilious in
staying on-topic, are they?

Well, unless you have a different explanation - perhaps along the
lines that cyclists' misdeeds are somehow off-topic in "uk.rec.CYCLING".


If the misdeed (or other event of note) happened in the course of riding
the bike it is clearly on topic.

Otherwise, when the bicycle is used for transport but takes no part in
the event described it is plainly not on topic.


Says who?

This is not a difficult distinction.


It isn't.

But neither is it a relevant one.

Ads
 

Home - Home - Home - Home - Home