Calls for SUVs to be BANNED from towns and cities to reducepedestrian and cyclist deaths

On Tuesday, 11 February 2020 09:22:15 UTC, TMS320 wrote:

Unobservant road users usually suffer consequences so your reply has a
logical flaw.


Usually it is pedestrians and cyclists who suffer the consequences of unobservant road users.

On 11/02/2020 12:20, Mike Collins wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 February 2020 09:22:15 UTC, TMS320 wrote:

Unobservant road users usually suffer consequences so your reply
has a logical flaw.

Usually it is pedestrians and cyclists who suffer the consequences of
unobservant road users.

Indeed, but remember this is a newsgroup for cycle haters, where
cyclists are always the authors of their own demise and drivers "suffer"
from having to buff out a scratch and do some paperwork.

On 11/02/2020 12:11, JNugent wrote:
On 11/02/2020 09:22, TMS320 wrote:
On 10/02/2020 02:01, JNugent wrote:
On 09/02/2020 20:14, TMS320 wrote:
On 09/02/2020 18:11, JNugent wrote:

What's a militant cyclist?

You are well aware of the existence of militant cyclists.

The dictionary has a definition for militant but you apply the label
subjectively.

Such definitions are bound to be subjective.

Then when subjective labels are applied, it is helpful to explain the
parameters when questioned.

Saying or implying that they don't exist just makes you look siller.

It is beyond you to stop twisting. Asking a question about something
does not say or imply the thing does not exist.

So we agree that the "militant cyclist" exists.
It is not possible to prove the absence of something.

Excellent.

I don't agree.

Do you never read news reports either?

I often look at the links in Mr Cheerful's posts, if that's what you
mean. You should have noticed this by the number of times I have
flagged them off topic.

Really?

You must have forgotten that you have replied to me on several occasions
to disagree (as you do about everything) that they are off-topic.

On 11/02/2020 17:57, TMS320 wrote:
On 11/02/2020 12:11, JNugent wrote:
On 11/02/2020 09:22, TMS320 wrote:
On 10/02/2020 02:01, JNugent wrote:
On 09/02/2020 20:14, TMS320 wrote:
On 09/02/2020 18:11, JNugent wrote:

What's a militant cyclist?

You are well aware of the existence of militant cyclists.

The dictionary has a definition for militant but you apply the label
subjectively.

Such definitions are bound to be subjective.

Then when subjective labels are applied, it is helpful to explain the
parameters when questioned.

Saying or implying that they don't exist just makes you look siller.

It is beyond you to stop twisting. Asking a question about something
does not say or imply the thing does not exist.

So we agree that the "militant cyclist" exists.
It is not possible to prove the absence of something.

Excellent.

I don't agree.

Do you never read news reports either?

I often look at the links in Mr Cheerful's posts, if that's what you
mean. You should have noticed this by the number of times I have
flagged them off topic.

Really?

You must have forgotten that you have replied to me on several occasions
to disagree (as you do about everything) that they are off-topic.

What is this process of "flagging" a post as off-topic?

It does not show up in Thunderbird.

On 11/02/2020 20:43, JNugent wrote:
On 11/02/2020 17:57, TMS320 wrote:

You must have forgotten that you have replied to me on several
occasions to disagree (as you do about everything) that they are
off-topic.

What is this process of "flagging" a post as off-topic?

It does not show up in Thunderbird.

Grow up.

On 11/02/2020 23:42, TMS320 wrote:

On 11/02/2020 20:43, JNugent wrote:
On 11/02/2020 17:57, TMS320 wrote:

You must have forgotten that you have replied to me on several
occasions to disagree (as you do about everything) that they are
off-topic.

What is this process of "flagging" a post as off-topic?

It does not show up in Thunderbird.

Grow up.

So it doesn't mean anything?

fair enough.