New petition. Ban speedophiles.

The Bosscp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems
I predict your next post will be more side-stepping irrelevant b****x
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
More side-stepping irrelevant b****x<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">[:D]

The truth is that it is you who has no argument. All you do is apply your 'Chinese whisper' tactic and base your argument on that. Let me show you your folly in clear detail:

Mr Paul: "Or how on earth you think that severe fatigue can be safely countered by flooring the accelerator. "

Smeggy: "I'll Paypal œ20 to the account of your choice if you show where I stated or implied:
"severe fatigue can be safely countered by flooring the accelerator"
Formatting preserved

To which you reply: "instantly disappeared when you accelerated away from the roadworks. (œ20 to the MNDA from you then)."

So where did the 'flooring the accelerator' go? This was the challenge, there is no room for interpretation. You have failed yet you are claiming yourself as victorious. You're back-pedalling because I have demonstrated your failed attempt at manipulation, for all to see.

Feel free to keep digging!

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
You should know, smeggy, that when you make a bet with Mister Paul, you're not betting on whether what you're saying is right, you're betting on whether what HE THINKS YOU MEAN is right.

It's a shame really, because such skills could be put to much better use down the bookies where he could bet on a horse then argue that by 'win' he didn't actually mean whether it was going to come first, but whether it would do 'quite well'...

Mister Paul · June 2007

Ooooooh! Tag team!

Two safespeeders, both of whom are desperately trying to divert away from their chosen, flawed and demolished arguments.

you're failing boys. miserably.

Come on Smeggy. Give us a laugh. Remind us how you try to convince people that you go from fully alert to severely fatigued to fully alert again. And all because you were made to drive at 40mph on a motorway for 15 minutes. It's funny. Totally ridiculous and inarguable, and very funny.

Or do you think if you try to distract again with your wager thing then we'll forget your very poor approach to driving?

__________________________________________________________
Road Safety Expert

yggems · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
So you've given up trying to justify your ridiculous and dangerous proposition then? And you're trying to distract by winning a point by complaining about poetic license, or not using the exact words?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Actually, I am highlighting your disingenuous behaviour, which was the point of my being here. It is you who has tried to divert with the fatigue issue. It was not I who gave up discussing it, remember that set of questions I left you with?

You see, you have claimed that I should pay out the œ20, but you haven't been able to show why. You have demonstrated your logical disconnect.

Remind us where I said: "severe fatigue can be safely countered by flooring the accelerator" or if you want to divert with the "exact words" show us where I implied it.

Mister Paul · June 2007

Nah, you're just trying to discredit me, and making a very poor show of that. I remind everyone of your stupid claims, and you don't like it.

You asked me questions about someone else's comments. They're not my responsibility.

Let's just remind ourselves of your stance, which you still cling to. These were your points-

You're fully alert on a motorway at night. No signs of tiredness or fatigue (if there is a difference)

You come to some roadworks with a 40mph limit for 15 minutes.

This causes you instant severe fatigue.

When the roadworks end you accelerate to your normal motorway speed (which we can safely assume is above 70mph, and your severe fatigue instantly disappears.

your answer to severe fatigue, at night, on a motorway, is to accelerate.

Admit is Smeg. You're wrong. There's no such condition. You made up a scenario to try to justify your speeding. It doesn't work!!

Instead of continuing to try to uphold your argument, you instead choose to argue about the words that I use, in the silly belief that we're all going to forget that you have such a poor, dangerous grasp of driving. It doesn't work.

Is that still what you think? Really??? Come on then -discuss it. Offer something new. Nothing you have said so far has given your position any shred of credibility.

Where's the backing for your claim? Research? Experienced, professional drivers agreeing? Or just the words of a 20-something who wants to drive as fast as he likes and has latched on a dangerous, deceitful pretend safety campaign which he stupidly thinks is going to get him his wish.

__________________________________________________________
Road Safety Expert

Mister Paul · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems

Remind us where I said: "severe fatigue can be safely countered by flooring the accelerator" or if you want to divert with the "exact words" show us where I implied it.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

The thread isn't here any more. You know that.

Did you not say that you were severely fatigued at being made to drive at 40mph for 15 minutes, and that this fatigue instantly disappeared when you accelerated away from the roadworks?

Are you really going to deny saying that?

__________________________________________________________
Road Safety Expert

yggems · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

Nah, you're just trying to discredit me, and making a very poor show of that.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Oh really? How come you can't justify your claim that I must pay the œ20 to the MNDA?

Here's the nub of it: why would I want to debate with someone insincere enough to resort to using manipulation and demonstrates logical disconnect, then refuses to accept that even though unequivocal evidence is given?

Here's an example:
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
your answer to severe fatigue, at night, on a motorway, is to accelerate.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
That's a straw man argument - a fallacy. My answer was to not have the limit set at an unreasonably low level; I had made this clear from the start.

Why should I pay out the œ20 as you claim I should?

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister PaulAdmit is Smeg. You're wrong. There's no such condition<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
If there's no such condition then why do a significant portion attendees start dozing off during unstimulating daytime management presentations, yet are wide awake as soon as it ends? How can this be....unless you are going to question the occurrence of this?

yggems · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems

Remind us where I said: "severe fatigue can be safely countered by flooring the accelerator" or if you want to divert with the "exact words" show us where I implied it.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

The thread isn't here any more. You know that.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Is this acceptence that at some point I did say it? If so then Google it!
I have already made it worth your while to dig up - that is assuming I did say it!

edit:
While you're at it, how about substantiating your claim of my supposed statement: "and denied that it would be better to pull over and take a rest!"

The Bosscp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

Did you not say that you were severely fatigued at being made to drive at 40mph for 15 minutes, and that this fatigue instantly disappeared when you accelerated away from the roadworks?

Are you really going to deny saying that?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Apologies for jumping in with smeggy's argument, but it's so blindingly obvious that his point is ever so simple and quite valid and that you are being your normal deliberately obtuse self and dancing and sidestepping and tiptoeing round it that I think he might need a little help drilling it through your thick head.
What he's denying is claiming that flooring the accelerator should be the solution to fatigue / tiredness, this appears to be an exaggerative straw man argument by you, words that you have put into his mouth in response to the, fairly correct, assertion, that there is a well known correlation between boredom / tediousness, and fatigue / tiredness.

Jaded · June 2007

Bonj, since you didn't see the original thread we can excuse your ignorance in this case.

Your ignorance in the rest of your posts is harder to excuse.

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one

Mister Paul · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems

Here's an example:
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
your answer to severe fatigue, at night, on a motorway, is to accelerate.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
That's a straw man argument - a fallacy. My answer was to not have the limit set at an unreasonably low level; I had made this clear from the start.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

It's not a straw man argument, you buffoon. It's exactly what you said. Note you haven't denied it.

It is perfectly easy for a driver with a reasonable standard to manage the situation that you couldn't. Millions of us do it every week.

You don't want to debate with me because you haven't got a leg to stand on. So your trying so hard to keep up an argument about changing words.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister PaulAdmit is Smeg. You're wrong. There's no such condition<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
If there's no such condition then why do a significant portion attendees start dozing off during unstimulating daytime management presentations, yet are wide awake as soon as it ends? How can this be....unless you are going to question the occurrence of this?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Oh, so you do think it's the case then?? Falling asleep or severe fatigue? I thought you weren't implying anything about falling asleep? But now you are. Make your mind up.

See how you're scrabbling around to try to get it right. YOu can scrabble all you like, but you'll never get it right, because you're talking nonsense. Go speak to a professional driver. Go speak to an expert. Stop trying to make up states using the mind of a young, inexperienced driver with an agenda for speed.

OK, let's look at your example then. Which BTW is a massive exaggeration. What do you mean by significant portion?

1)Have a think about the difference between sitting listening in a meeting and driving a car. Levels of stimulation of each? There's no comparison.

What do you do when you start losing concentration in a meeting? Fall asleep and blame the presenter? Call for management presentations to be banned because they cause severe fatigue? Grow up. Your alertness is your responsibility. If you're falling asleep in a meeting you most likely went to bed too late the night before.

Again, accelerating is not the right thing to do if you are tired when driving. It is dangerous and incredibly stupid. There are safe ways of anticipating and managing your waking state. And the key is anticipation. If you find yourself in the middle of roadworks at night then you've already failed. You failed when you didn't check your state of tiredness at the previous junction when you could have pulled over and rested.

You're making it all up Smeggy. You're a poor driver. Your scenario doesn't happen to those of us who do thinks properly and safely. I'm sure we'd all be happy to help you develop your driving skills. It's not difficult.

__________________________________________________________
Road Safety Expert

Mister Paul · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems

Remind us where I said: "severe fatigue can be safely countered by flooring the accelerator" or if you want to divert with the "exact words" show us where I implied it.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

The thread isn't here any more. You know that.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Is this acceptence that at some point I did say it? If so then Google it!
I have already made it worth your while to dig up - that is assuming I did say it!

edit:
While you're at it, how about substantiating your claim of my supposed statement: "and denied that it would be better to pull over and take a rest!"
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Poor, poor try Smeggy. You're hangin on the fact that C+ doesn't archive threads for long. You know you said both. We know you said both. Even Pauly Safespeeding knows you said both, because according to him he watches us closely. Go and ask him. He'll tell you, if he's got five minutes amongst his hectic thousands of hours of road safety research, which apparently involves him reading these threads to see what is being said about him.

You know that you said that you were 'severely fatigued' and that accelerating resolved it. I note you haven't denied it. You're even discussing it on this thread (read your post above). You also know that when it was put to you that you should have pulled over and rested, you said that you were wide awake before the roadworks, and were suddenly forced into severe fatigue in a matter of moments by a 40mph limit.

You're so much fun, Smeg. Line them up again if you like.

__________________________________________________________
Road Safety Expert

Mister Paul · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

Did you not say that you were severely fatigued at being made to drive at 40mph for 15 minutes, and that this fatigue instantly disappeared when you accelerated away from the roadworks?

Are you really going to deny saying that?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Apologies for jumping in with smeggy's argument, but it's so blindingly obvious that his point is ever so simple and quite valid and that you are being your normal deliberately obtuse self and dancing and sidestepping and tiptoeing round it that I think he might need a little help drilling it through your thick head.
What he's denying is claiming that flooring the accelerator should be the solution to fatigue / tiredness, this appears to be an exaggerative straw man argument by you, words that you have put into his mouth in response to the, fairly correct, assertion, that there is a well known correlation between boredom / tediousness, and fatigue / tiredness.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Yes it is simple Bonjy. But you;ve still missed it. Smeggy claims to have been wide awake, forced into severe fatigue by 15 minutes of 40mph, then instantly wide awake again when he accelerated over the limit.

Does that happen to you?

No-one has denied that driving at night brings tiredness issues. But these can be managed safely. Smeggy is pretending that a 40 mph limit forced him into a most dangerous state.

Anticipation is the key. Smeggy didn't aniticipate. Smeggy is exaggerating, to try to discredit speed limits. Smeggy is being very transparent, and very stupid.

__________________________________________________________
Road Safety Expert

bliarout · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by rothbook
Some stuff about banning...
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">How ironic. Just how many forums have you been banned from, and yes, I include C+ in that![8D]

The Bosscp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

Yes it is simple Bonjy. But you;ve still missed it. Smeggy claims to have been wide awake, forced into severe fatigue by 15 minutes of 40mph, then instantly wide awake again when he accelerated over the limit.

Does that happen to you?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Not when driving, no - because I quite enjoy driving. Can't say the same about meetings, though...

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

No-one has denied that driving at night brings tiredness issues. But these can be managed safely. Smeggy is pretending that a 40 mph limit forced him into a most dangerous state. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
You can often feel fairly awake when you're in fact on the verge of tiredness, and the boredom of having to deal with an unnecessarily imposed restraint could well be the thing that would tip someone over the edge into tiredness.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

Anticipation is the key. Smeggy didn't aniticipate. Smeggy is exaggerating, to try to discredit speed limits. Smeggy is being very transparent, and very stupid.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I'm not condoning getting behind the wheel when tired, but i think neither would smeggy, if he did it was probably to wind you up.
What it looks like has happened is that you've made a very audacious claim using sexed-up wording about something that smeggy apparently said, then he either made or accepted a bet with you as to whether he said it, when asked to proved the evidence, you did, but it was obviously very watered down and thus completely invalid as evidence supporting your supposed win of the bet. And then you tried to confuse the issue by muddying the waters with the difference between tiredness and fatigue, and other such nonsense.

Mister Paul · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

No-one has denied that driving at night brings tiredness issues. But these can be managed safely. Smeggy is pretending that a 40 mph limit forced him into a most dangerous state. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
You can often feel fairly awake when you're in fact on the verge of tiredness, and the boredom of having to deal with an unnecessarily imposed restraint could well be the thing that would tip someone over the edge into tiredness.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

If that's how it is for you then well done, you have an awareness. The next step is for you to use that awareness to anticipate and counter any possible issues. And that's the way to manage tiredness when driving. Young Smeggy can't do that, according to him. Severe fatigue apparently quickly consumes him from out of nowhere. You and I, and competent drivers on the road, know that this just doesn't happen. And so does Smeg. But he's made it up to try to discredit speed limits. Speed limits do no harm, but SSers strive to find some wa of advocating blame to them.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

Anticipation is the key. Smeggy didn't aniticipate. Smeggy is exaggerating, to try to discredit speed limits. Smeggy is being very transparent, and very stupid.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss
[br
I'm not condoning getting behind the wheel when tired, but i think neither would smeggy, if he did it was probably to wind you up.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

No, it's not to wind me up. Like I said, it's a silly attempt to try to argue against speed limits from a safety point of view. It's a safespeeding mantra, and Pauly has it on his site (on a PR I think).
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss
[br
What it looks like has happened is that you've made a very audacious claim using sexed-up wording about something that smeggy apparently said, then he either made or accepted a bet with you as to whether he said it, when asked to proved the evidence, you did, but it was obviously very watered down and thus completely invalid as evidence supporting your supposed win of the bet. And then you tried to confuse the issue by muddying the waters with the difference between tiredness and fatigue, and other such nonsense.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

No. What happened is that Smeggy made his stupid w'ide awake-severe fatigue-wide awake, cured by speeding up claim'. He's made it several times, and astonishingly still stands by it. I use a bit of poetic license to raise the idiocy of the claim. Smeggy thinks that if he can bang on about my wording then he can draw attention away from his demolished argument, which also shows him as in serious need of some driver training. He is even now challenging the fact that he ignored the suggestions from us capable drivers that the safest approach to tiredness when driving is to pull over and take a rest, choosing instead his acceleration idea. He admitted that his anticipation skills are low because he seems to think that there is too much distance between motorway junctions/services for this to be a viable solution.

And these are the drivers who are requesting that they be allowed to choose their own safe speed. Worrying, isn't it?

__________________________________________________________
Road Safety Expert

Tourist Tony · June 2007

Then again, both Bonj and Knobcheese have only just finished their initial driver training..

If I had a stalker, I would hug it and kiss it and call it George...or Dick

The Bosscp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

If that's how it is for you then well done, you have an awareness. The next step is for you to use that awareness to anticipate and counter any possible issues. And that's the way to manage tiredness when driving. Young Smeggy can't do that, according to him. Severe fatigue apparently quickly consumes him from out of nowhere. You and I, and competent drivers on the road, know that this just doesn't happen. And so does Smeg. But he's made it up to try to discredit speed limits. Speed limits do no harm, but SSers strive to find some wa of advocating blame to them.
...
No. What happened is that Smeggy made his stupid w'ide awake-severe fatigue-wide awake, cured by speeding up claim'. He's made it several times, and astonishingly still stands by it. I use a bit of poetic license to raise the idiocy of the claim. Smeggy thinks that if he can bang on about my wording then he can draw attention away from his demolished argument, which also shows him as in serious need of some driver training. He is even now challenging the fact that he ignored the suggestions from us capable drivers that the safest approach to tiredness when driving is to pull over and take a rest, choosing instead his acceleration idea. He admitted that his anticipation skills are low because he seems to think that there is too much distance between motorway junctions/services for this to be a viable solution.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">I think that in the ideal world, you shouldn't drive even if you're not tired but could be vulnerable of being tipped over the brink into tiredness, so a speed limit would not affect you.
But we don't live in an ideal world, nobody's perfect and most people at some point in their lives, or even regularly - have journeys that they consider imperative, and if they were not immediatedly tired at the point of setting off but could be on the verge of being tipped over the brink into tiredness, then an artificially low speed limit could be just the trigger that is responsible for their boredom level rocketing which tips them right over the brink into tiredness, which then causes an accident. I think this is what the safespeed mantra is getting at.
Yes, I think it's a bit contrived, and I personally think that if you are feeling THAT tired, e.g. enough to possibly fall asleep involuntarily, then you should stop - but I think it does have some ground in logic.

Mister Paul · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss

I think that in the ideal world, you shouldn't drive even if you're not tired but could be vulnerable of being tipped over the brink into tiredness, so a speed limit would not affect you.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

That's not necessary. Fatigue is easily managed by your normal, competent driver. The only time you may have an unpredictable and unmanageable fatigue/sleep problem would be if it was medical. If it was that serious then you have a duty to report it to the DVLA (otherwise your insurance would be void and you would be driving illegally) and probably shouldn't be driving anyway. In the same way as certain people who are prone to seizures cannot hold a license.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss

But we don't live in an ideal world, nobody's perfect and most people at some point in their lives, or even regularly - have journeys that they consider imperative, and if they were not immediatedly tired at the point of setting off but could be on the verge of being tipped over the brink into tiredness, then an artificially low speed limit could be just the trigger that is responsible for their boredom level rocketing which tips them right over the brink into tiredness, which then causes an accident. I think this is what the safespeed mantra is getting at.
Yes, I think it's a bit contrived, and I personally think that if you are feeling THAT tired, e.g. enough to possibly fall asleep involuntarily, then you should stop - but I think it does have some ground in logic.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

You're right. It is contrived. And the fact remains that if your fatigue reaches a dangerous level then it is your fault, not that of a nubmer on a pole. And it is your responsiblity to manage this safely. If that should mean that you are too tired to drive then you shouldn't drive.

Suggesting that speeding up cures severe fatigue instantly, as young smeggy is, is ridiculous and most dangerous.

__________________________________________________________
Road Safety Expert

Mister Paul · June 2007

So smeggy has scurried off again?

__________________________________________________________
What we need is a new, national White Bicycle Plan

Tourist Tony · June 2007

But other tagteam members have arrived...

If I had a stalker, I would hug it and kiss it and call it George...or Dick

yggems · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems

Here's an example:
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
your answer to severe fatigue, at night, on a motorway, is to accelerate.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
That's a straw man argument - a fallacy. My answer was to not have the limit set at an unreasonably low level; I had made this clear from the start.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

It's not a straw man argument, you buffoon. It's exactly what you said. Note you haven't denied it.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">So my answer that it is a logical fallacy isn't denial enough? Where did I say that was 'the answer'? Oh wait, I didn't!
Do you even know what a straw argument is? (methinks not judging by the rest of your post)

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
It is perfectly easy for a driver with a reasonable standard to manage the situation that you couldn't. Millions of us do it every week.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">Another fallacy. You can't show that millions more don't.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems
If there's no such condition then why do a significant portion attendees start dozing off during unstimulating daytime management presentations, yet are wide awake as soon as it ends? How can this be....unless you are going to question the occurrence of this?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Oh, so you do think it's the case then?? Falling asleep or severe fatigue? I thought you weren't implying anything about falling asleep? But now you are. Make your mind up.

See how you're scrabbling around to try to get it right.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">All I see is your logical disconnect. The dozing of is what happens after the onset of fatigue, unless you believe people can doze off without first feeling fatigued? Oh wait you've been there already haha

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
OK, let's look at your example then. Which BTW is a massive exaggeration. What do you mean by significant portion?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">1/3 to 1/5. If you believe it to be a massive exaggeration then what do you reckon the portion to be? Your answer will be very telling (not just to me).

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
1)Have a think about the difference between sitting listening in a meeting and driving a car. Levels of stimulation of each? There's no comparison.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">Of course there isn't; you haven't applied the applicable conditions. Again you make with your attempts of manipulation.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
What do you do when you start losing concentration in a meeting? Fall asleep and blame the presenter? Call for management presentations to be banned because they cause severe fatigue?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">Another straw argument! You're good at setting these up huh? Pity I'm better at knocking them down.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
Again, accelerating is not the right thing to do if you are tired when driving.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">I never said it was.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
You failed when you didn't check your state of tiredness at the previous junction when you could have pulled over and rested.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">Who said I didn't?

It appears it is you who is making it all up Mr Paul.

yggems · June 2007

Well well Mr Paul, is that really the best you can come up with? You're really not man enough to admit your error are you. I know I never said such a ridiculous statement, as do you, but you don't want to be shown up in front of your peers by admitting it.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
Poor, poor try Smeggy. You're hangin on the fact that C+ doesn't archive threads for long.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
If so then Google it!<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">Funny how you can't come up with an answer to that huh? Not only can you somehow not find any reference to such a statement via any of the 3 big search engines (even though I have offered to make it worth your while) you can't even find a post from another member quoting what I had said, you would have thought that at someone else (including yourself - after all this was your interpretation of me summed up in the 1 sentence) would have quoted such a ridiculous comment. Yes it is ridiculous claim to make: 'severe fatigue can be safely countered by flooring the accelerator' is a daft claim to make - which is why I never said it.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
You know that you said that you were 'severely fatigued' and that accelerating resolved it. I note you haven't denied it.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">I didn't actually say that, you are putting words of your own interpretation into my mouth; you are again resorting to manipulation to try and catch me out. For now let's forget you said 'flooring'. My original point was that the limit was set too low and that it would have been overall disproportionately safer to have it set higher. Now let's use your own tactic against you. You suggested a way to overcome it was to stop for a break (something which I never disagreed with); using your own particular brand of logic you could well have meant decelerate, or even 'flooring the brake pedal'. Oh well!

I repeat: how about substantiating your claim of regarding my supposed statement: "and denied that it would be better to pull over and take a rest!"

Yet again, no-one can show me where I laid claim to 'flooring the accelerator'. People can be forgiven for concluding that you're nothing more than a lying troll, as well as understanding why I don't bother wasting any significant time here.
I've got better things to do (especially as the company insists that I go to two international tourist resorts), don't expect me back here anytime soon.

Mister Paul · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
It is perfectly easy for a driver with a reasonable standard to manage the situation that you couldn't. Millions of us do it every week.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">Another fallacy. You can't show that millions more don't.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Oh come now young smeggy. Now you're just being stupid.

My point is proved by the fact that there aren't any motorway roadworks clogged up with smashed cars.
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems
If there's no such condition then why do a significant portion attendees start dozing off during unstimulating daytime management presentations, yet are wide awake as soon as it ends? How can this be....unless you are going to question the occurrence of this?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Oh, so you do think it's the case then?? Falling asleep or severe fatigue? I thought you weren't implying anything about falling asleep? But now you are. Make your mind up.

See how you're scrabbling around to try to get it right. YOu can scrabble all you like, but you'll never get it right, because you're talking nonsense. Go speak to a professional driver. Go speak to an expert. Stop trying to make up states using the mind of a young, inexperienced driver with an agenda for speed.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">All I see is your logical disconnect. The dozing of is what happens after the onset of fatigue, unless you believe people can doze off without first feeling fatigued? Oh wait you've been there already haha<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I can see it, silly. You're the one who was trying to argue that there is a difference.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems

If there's no such condition then why do a significant portion attendees start dozing off during unstimulating daytime management presentations, yet are wide awake as soon as it ends? How can this be....unless you are going to question the occurrence of this?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
OK, let's look at your example then. Which BTW is a massive exaggeration. What do you mean by significant portion?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">1/3 to 1/5. If you believe it to be a massive exaggeration then what do you reckon the portion to be? Your answer will be very telling (not just to me).<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

So in every management meeting you attend (taking minutes presumably) a third of the attendees start dozing off?

I don't think we need to say anything else about that do we?
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
1)Have a think about the difference between sitting listening in a meeting and driving a car. Levels of stimulation of each? There's no comparison.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">Of course there isn't; you haven't applied the applicable conditions. Again you make with your attempts of manipulation.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I can't manipulate what words of yours are still here for all to see.
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
What do you do when you start losing concentration in a meeting? Fall asleep and blame the presenter? Call for management presentations to be banned because they cause severe fatigue?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">Another straw argument! You're good at setting these up huh? Pity I'm better at knocking them down.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
That's not an argument. That's an illustration of your ridiculous position. The fact that you choose to respond shows that you are desperately grasping.
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
Again, accelerating is not the right thing to do if you are tired when driving.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">I never said it was.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

You said that it was the cure. we all know you did. You know you did. You're stupidly trying to argue what you said while still denying that you said it.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
You failed when you didn't check your state of tiredness at the previous junction when you could have pulled over and rested.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">Who said I didn't?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

If you had have then you would have sensed some fatigue. You're telling porkies. You claimed that it came out of the blue as soon as the roadworks started. You said you were completely wide awake going into them, and returned to this state immediately on accelerating away from them.

You carry on making a fool of yourself young smeg. It's great to watch.

Mind you, what else can we expect from someone who defended the ponytails comments about it not being fair that disabled drivers get special privileges?

Some advice for you smeggy. You're sucking up to the wrong person. He's not going to get you what you want. He's just losing credibility more and more as days go by. Even on Friday he was banging out a press release about a Daily Wail story on a road safety report, without even having read the report. Fascinating.

__________________________________________________________
What we need is a new, national White Bicycle Plan

Mister Paul · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems

I've got better things to do (especially as the company insists that I go to two international tourist resorts), don't expect me back here anytime soon.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

hahahaha

The facts are that-

-You claim that you were wide awake on a motorway, when you got to a 40mph limit.

-On entering the limit you were immediately overcome by 'severe fatigue'

-At the end of the 15 minute restriction, you accelerated away from the roadworks, and this increase in speed immediately cured your 'severe fatigue'.

Your claims are laughable every time I remind you of them. And I can completely understand that you have no retort but denial, or trying the SS defence flannel of talking rubbish.

And I suppose we should allow you your pride and let you try and glam up your withdrawal from the discussion. Ok, if you really have to go abroad then we understand, young smeg. We wouldn't for a second think that you've made a complete buffoon of yourself for as many times as you have crossed over here. Of course not.

Do have a good sleep on the plane son[;)]

__________________________________________________________
What we need is a new, national White Bicycle Plan

pzycoman · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
Do have a good sleep on the plane son[;)]
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Only when the plane is taxi'ing to the runway, when it takes off, he'll be wide awake! [:p]

The Bosscp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

Mind you, what else can we expect from someone who defended the ponytails comments about it not being fair that disabled drivers get special privileges?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I personally don't know why they do, most of them aren't even disabled anyway. The amount of people you see WALKING quite capably to the disabled spaces in tesco's defies belief - in fact it's pretty much all of them - it's literally the most abused thing in the world, they might aswell scrap it. I however am one of the few who respect the disabled, and never park in a disabled space (although I do often use the parent and child).

<hr noshade size="1">
CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpath GenericPath

Mister Paul · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

Mind you, what else can we expect from someone who defended the ponytails comments about it not being fair that disabled drivers get special privileges?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I personally don't know why they do, most of them aren't even disabled anyway. The amount of people you see WALKING quite capably to the disabled spaces in tesco's defies belief - in fact it's pretty much all of them - it's literally the most abused thing in the world, they might aswell scrap it. I however am one of the few who respect the disabled, and never park in a disabled space (although I do often use the parent and child).
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

To qualify for a disabled badge, the main condition is that you must be unable to walk more than 100m without experiencing significant pain. Which is why they are closer to the shops. Many disabled people can walk you know Bonjy. And they can also, amazingly, tell you whether they take sugar or not.

The discussion about the abuse of disabled parking has no link with Paul Smith's printed comments about it not being fair.

__________________________________________________________
What we need is a new, national White Bicycle Plan

rothbook · June 2007

More humiliation for small pith:

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/list/open?sort=signers

We already knew that Pith is an obscure, mysterious single-issue-obsessed malcontent with way too much time on his hands.

We know he refuses to discuss his "qualifications".

We know he refuses to name the "independent experts" who claim to have studies his work.

We know too that he refuses even to allow a single page of his beer mat scribbles, I mean research, to be independently scrutinised and we know that his desperation for recognition leads him to allow posts on his self-moderated forum (where dissent is banned) from people who claim to be police officers.

With humiliation after humiliation one wonders whether his mental state is robust enough to withstand further embarrassment. His campaign has failed. His absurdly self-important press releases are getting increasingly hysterical. I think he's cracking up- witness the banning of Jub Jub for the sin of being slightly sarcastic whist at the same time Small Pith allows posts on his forum that label people who disagree with him as "drug dealers" or "terrorists".

What a singularly dishonest stance to take- abuse people as much as you like if you agree with me but if you argue I'll invent an excuse to ban you.

What's the man so terrified of?

Surely his "research" should be robust enough to withstand criticism?

Tourist Tony · June 2007

Don't forget, chaps, that Smith has made his opinion of the disabled abundantly clear. Baby Bonj is just following His Master's Voice.

Rothbook, I believe you may have an apposite quote from the grate man.....

If I had a stalker, I would hug it and kiss it and call it George...or Dick

The Bosscp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

To qualify for a disabled badge, the main condition is that you must be unable to walk more than 100m without experiencing significant pain. Which is why they are closer to the shops. Many disabled people can walk you know Bonjy. And they can also, amazingly, tell you whether they take sugar or not.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Well they've all just walked at least 100 metres round tescos getting their shopping, and they don't look to be in any pain.
Don't forget there's a very buoyant market in knock-off disabled badges. Most of the people who apply for disabled badges don't actually drive, and are just doing it for somebody else.

<hr noshade size="1">
CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpath GenericPath

New petition. Ban speedophiles.

Comments

Categories