Littering cyclists are their own worst enemy

On 02/06/2017 20:55, wrote:

On Friday, June 2, 2017 at 2:15:18 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 29/05/2017 18:01, wrote:
On Monday, May 29, 2017 at 4:29:54 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 29/05/2017 02:24, wrote:

[ ... ]

You are talking about organised events open to the public where litter is inevitable.
I was talking about everyday travel.

I was doing no such thing.

Yes you were

Wrong.

I was talking about litter cast into the public envirom=nment by cyclists.

No, you were trying to blame utility cyclists for the litter dropped by competitors in organised events.
I suppose you think IOM TT racers should stop and place their Rip-off visors in the nearest bin.

Read this again (but carefully this time): I was talking about litter
cast into the public environment by cyclists.

I do not distinguish one cyclist from another.

That is not "inevitable"; it is an anti-social choice made by the
cyclists concerned.

London Marathon again, should the runners have to hold on to their empty water bottles or should the organisers arrange cleanup after the event.

I am not interested in, and neither am I posting about, the London Marathon.

As it happens, I do not agree (with you) that *anyone* should be allowed
dump litter in public space (or, for that matter, in private space). I
have no difficulty in condeming it no matter who does it.

But this thread is about *cyclists*. They are not excused by the alleged
wrongdoing of others.

I do not dump litter. Do you?

Unlike motorists I dispose of me litter responsibly.

Then it isn't litter. But you rather undo that claim below...

Littering is never acceptable.
It's an offence.
Cyclists: take your rubbish home where it probably won't look out of place.

How childish.

Quite right - cyclists wantonly dropping litter are behaving like
badly-behaved children.

Maybe they get their example from motorists who think this is acceptable behaviour.

See above. This is about anti-social cyclists. Not about anyone else.

I wonder why it seems to have touched such a nerve with you.

Their litter would look much less out of place back at their homes than
it would strewn along the highway or on a village green.

I'm glad we agree.

How childish.

So you don't agree that cyclists' litter shoulkd be taken home and you
assert that they should cast it upon the roads and on village greens and
other attractive spots.

How anti-social of you.

But to an extent, you're brave to admit it, even though very few people
(other than other anti-social cyclists) will agree with you.

On 04/06/17 03:13, JNugent wrote:
On 04/06/2017 00:08, TMS320 wrote:
On 03/06/17 14:46, JNugent wrote:


Have look up at the top of the screen.
What does it say?
Ah, yes... "uk.rec.cycling".

You love precision (except in connection with vehicle tax) The word is
cycling, not cyclists.

Who does all that cycling, then?

People

On 04/06/2017 22:49, TMS320 wrote:
On 04/06/17 03:13, JNugent wrote:
On 04/06/2017 00:08, TMS320 wrote:
On 03/06/17 14:46, JNugent wrote:


Have look up at the top of the screen.
What does it say?
Ah, yes... "uk.rec.cycling".

You love precision (except in connection with vehicle tax) The word
is cycling, not cyclists.

Who said anything different?

Who does all that cycling, then?

People

....who...

On 05/06/2017 09:56, JNugent wrote:
On 04/06/2017 22:49, TMS320 wrote:
On 04/06/17 03:13, JNugent wrote:
On 04/06/2017 00:08, TMS320 wrote:
On 03/06/17 14:46, JNugent wrote:


Have look up at the top of the screen.
What does it say?
Ah, yes... "uk.rec.cycling".

You love precision (except in connection with vehicle tax) The word
is cycling, not cyclists.

Who said anything different?

Who does all that cycling, then?

People

...who...

Perhaps cyclists are not people who do cycling? Maybe we should rename
them 'cyclingers'

On 05/06/17 13:11, MrCheerful wrote:
On 05/06/2017 09:56, JNugent wrote:
On 04/06/2017 22:49, TMS320 wrote:
On 04/06/17 03:13, JNugent wrote:
On 04/06/2017 00:08, TMS320 wrote:
On 03/06/17 14:46, JNugent wrote:


Have look up at the top of the screen.
What does it say?
Ah, yes... "uk.rec.cycling".

You love precision (except in connection with vehicle tax) The word
is cycling, not cyclists.

Who said anything different?

Who does all that cycling, then?

People

...who...

Perhaps cyclists are not people who do cycling? Maybe we should rename
them 'cyclingers'

You have it the wrong way round. People who do cycling are often called
"cyclists".

A bit like vehicle tax being called "road tax". Rather different to
calling a dog a "dog" or a cat a "cat".

On 05/06/2017 20:52, TMS320 wrote:
On 05/06/17 13:11, MrCheerful wrote:
On 05/06/2017 09:56, JNugent wrote:
On 04/06/2017 22:49, TMS320 wrote:
On 04/06/17 03:13, JNugent wrote:
On 04/06/2017 00:08, TMS320 wrote:
On 03/06/17 14:46, JNugent wrote:


Have look up at the top of the screen.
What does it say?
Ah, yes... "uk.rec.cycling".

You love precision (except in connection with vehicle tax) The
word is cycling, not cyclists.

Who said anything different?

Who does all that cycling, then?

People

...who...

Perhaps cyclists are not people who do cycling? Maybe we should
rename them 'cyclingers'

You have it the wrong way round. People who do cycling are often called
"cyclists".

A bit like vehicle tax being called "road tax". Rather different to
calling a dog a "dog" or a cat a "cat".


Totally bizarre.

On 05/06/2017 20:52, TMS320 wrote:
On 05/06/17 13:11, MrCheerful wrote:
On 05/06/2017 09:56, JNugent wrote:
On 04/06/2017 22:49, TMS320 wrote:
On 04/06/17 03:13, JNugent wrote:
On 04/06/2017 00:08, TMS320 wrote:
On 03/06/17 14:46, JNugent wrote:


Have look up at the top of the screen.
What does it say?
Ah, yes... "uk.rec.cycling".

You love precision (except in connection with vehicle tax) The
word is cycling, not cyclists.

Who said anything different?

Who does all that cycling, then?

People

...who...

Perhaps cyclists are not people who do cycling? Maybe we should
rename them 'cyclingers'

You have it the wrong way round. People who do cycling are often called
"cyclists".

So what were you talking about when I had quoted the name of this NG as
uk.rec.cycling and you said: "The word is cycling, not cyclists".

I had (correctly) *written* the word "cycling".

A bit like vehicle tax being called "road tax". Rather different to
calling a dog a "dog" or a cat a "cat".

Road Tax had its official name changed (though not for everyday
purposes) for some reason which was either unclear (if no reason at all
was given) or was regrettable (in order to give the deceitful impression
that Road Tax wasn't paying for the roads (or more than paying for them).

On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 11:55:32 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 05/06/2017 20:52, TMS320 wrote:
On 05/06/17 13:11, MrCheerful wrote:
On 05/06/2017 09:56, JNugent wrote:
On 04/06/2017 22:49, TMS320 wrote:
On 04/06/17 03:13, JNugent wrote:
On 04/06/2017 00:08, TMS320 wrote:
On 03/06/17 14:46, JNugent wrote:


Have look up at the top of the screen.
What does it say?
Ah, yes... "uk.rec.cycling".

You love precision (except in connection with vehicle tax) The
word is cycling, not cyclists.

Who said anything different?

Who does all that cycling, then?

People

...who...

Perhaps cyclists are not people who do cycling? Maybe we should
rename them 'cyclingers'

You have it the wrong way round. People who do cycling are often called
"cyclists".

So what were you talking about when I had quoted the name of this NG as
uk.rec.cycling and you said: "The word is cycling, not cyclists".

I had (correctly) *written* the word "cycling".

A bit like vehicle tax being called "road tax". Rather different to
calling a dog a "dog" or a cat a "cat".

Road Tax had its official name changed (though not for everyday
purposes) for some reason which was either unclear (if no reason at all
was given) or was regrettable (in order to give the deceitful impression
that Road Tax wasn't paying for the roads (or more than paying for them).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial_Bay

You seem to be there mentally, why not move there physically.

On 05/06/17 23:55, JNugent wrote:
On 05/06/2017 20:52, TMS320 wrote:
On 05/06/17 13:11, MrCheerful wrote:
On 05/06/2017 09:56, JNugent wrote:
On 04/06/2017 22:49, TMS320 wrote:
On 04/06/17 03:13, JNugent wrote:
On 04/06/2017 00:08, TMS320 wrote:
On 03/06/17 14:46, JNugent wrote:


Have look up at the top of the screen. What does it
say? Ah, yes... "uk.rec.cycling".

You love precision (except in connection with vehicle
tax) The word is cycling, not cyclists.

Who said anything different?

Who does all that cycling, then?

People

...who...

Perhaps cyclists are not people who do cycling? Maybe we should
rename them 'cyclingers'

You have it the wrong way round. People who do cycling are often
called "cyclists".

So what were you talking about when I had quoted the name of this NG
as uk.rec.cycling and you said: "The word is cycling, not cyclists".

I had (correctly) *written* the word "cycling".

No disagreement about "cycling".

A bit like vehicle tax being called "road tax". Rather different to
calling a dog a "dog" or a cat a "cat".

Road Tax had its official name changed (though not for everyday
purposes) for some reason which was either unclear (if no reason at
all was given) or was regrettable (in order to give the deceitful
impression that Road Tax wasn't paying for the roads (or more than
paying for them).

There has never been a tax officially called "road tax" and it is not
possible to rename something that never existed. On the other hand,
vehicle excise has been around for a long time. For a brief period an
amount was taken from vehicle taxes to put into a "road fund". It must
be this that confuses you.

On 07/06/2017 10:43, TMS320 wrote:

On 05/06/17 23:55, JNugent wrote:
On 05/06/2017 20:52, TMS320 wrote:
On 05/06/17 13:11, MrCheerful wrote:
On 05/06/2017 09:56, JNugent wrote:
On 04/06/2017 22:49, TMS320 wrote:
On 04/06/17 03:13, JNugent wrote:
On 04/06/2017 00:08, TMS320 wrote:
On 03/06/17 14:46, JNugent wrote:

Have look up at the top of the screen. What does it
say? Ah, yes... "uk.rec.cycling".

You love precision (except in connection with vehicle
tax) The word is cycling, not cyclists.

Who said anything different?

[ ... ]

TMS320:
You have it the wrong way round. People who do cycling are often
called "cyclists".

So what were you talking about when I had quoted the name of this NG
as uk.rec.cycling and you said: "The word is cycling, not cyclists".
I had (correctly) *written* the word "cycling".

No disagreement about "cycling".

So where lay this imprecision to which you referred?

A bit like vehicle tax being called "road tax". Rather different to
calling a dog a "dog" or a cat a "cat".

Road Tax had its official name changed (though not for everyday
purposes) for some reason which was either unclear (if no reason at
all was given) or was regrettable (in order to give the deceitful
impression that Road Tax wasn't paying for the roads (or more than
paying for them).

There has never been a tax officially called "road tax" and it is not
possible to rename something that never existed. On the other hand,
vehicle excise has been around for a long time. For a brief period an
amount was taken from vehicle taxes to put into a "road fund". It must
be this that confuses you.

The tax's official name was "Road Fund Licence", and there has always
been a minority who continued to refer to it as a "licence" with no
further adornment.

I do not object to your reminding us of any of that, especially since it
merely confirms that the colloquial "Road Tax", a term which dates from
the period when the tax was called "Road Fund Licence" anyway, is just
as correct now as it was in (say) 1926.

But for some reason, cyclists didn't cpomplain about "Road Tax" when the
correct term was "Road Fund Licence".

Why the change of heart? :-)