Silly commuting racing

DonDaddyD

blackworx wrote:

I don't watch it, but I'm guessing Coolio had a bit of hole digging/backpedalling moment on CBB?

Coolio is great entertainment. He's clearly bored and (exactly what I would do - in fact I do on this site sometimes....) just wants to sh*t stir to make things more 'fun'.

There is a language barrier and I think it hinders his explanations such as describing a hoe/whore/slag/slapper and a lady - which i completely understood but my girlfriend didn't...

Coolio for the win!

First I heard it was a few years ago at a party when the "but not in the good way" was tacked on after a pregnant/drunken pause when my mate remembered most folk in the room were friends of Dorothy. Classic.

Thing is gay is thrown about so much where I live and its often not meant in a homophobic way (though many many times it is)... Most times when I use it (such as Greg's dark shade of orange glasses being gay - though the Indiana Jones hat and coat was out right gangsta!) I mean it to express my thoughts that said person needs to MTFU and stop being so er fussy....

lost_in_thought

DonDaddyD wrote:

Thing is gay is thrown about so much where I live and its often not meant in a homophobic way (though many many times it is)... Most times when I use it (such as Greg's dark shade of orange glasses being gay - though the Indiana Jones hat and coat was out right gangsta!) I mean it to express my thoughts that said person needs to MTFU and stop being so er fussy....

Plus flippin 1!

I use 'gay' in the perjorative, as in 'I've got to be in plaster for how long?! Gay!' a fair bit, and my gay housemates always have little hissy fits about it.

Clearly I don't mean it in a homophobic way. Calm yourselves. Pansies.

Bassjunkieuk

I think the correct spelling for your usage should be "ghey"

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=ghey

I was on my short commute to the town centre today and saw a couple of anomalies. First was a chap on what appeared to be a Pinarello heading down towards Thornton Heath. I didn't see the bike full on as it was passing whilst I was walking the eldest to school but I'm sure I saw "rello" on the downtube.....

Second was a high vis wearing roadie on the main drag in town. He'd pulled out of a side road whilst I was waiting at lights but I'd clocked him initially as a hybrid, it wasn't until I started chasing him down on the bus lane that I spotted drop handlebars and upped the pace. He was an at least equal FCN (roadie with bag) and the lights at the top of the bus lane had just gone green! I bombed through, chomping on his back wheel only for the lights at in the bus lane a bit further ahead to change! He went straight through on the red and so lost all respect points in my book :-(

UnworthyPapaLazaru

blackworx wrote:

UnworthyPapaLazaru wrote:

blackworx wrote:

[whinge]

Where are all you SSers and shaved-like-a-girl Edinburgh roadies on my commute? I haven't even seen a potential scalp in ages. All I ever see is students on jalopies, workies on tanks and the occasional fast MTBer. No sport at all.

[/whinge]

Where's your route???

Leith to Morningside via Easter Rd/Regent Terr/Bridges/Clerk St/Grange.

It's a piddly little route really so it's no wonder I never see anyone, especially at this time of year. Very rarely see folk at the top of leith St, but they invariably head off along Princes St

Im Seafield Road, and going home up Easter Road *spit* to Arthur Seat. Your scalp is safe.

DonDaddyD

Bassjunkieuk wrote:

I think the correct spelling for your usage should be "ghey"

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=ghey

I was on my short commute to the town centre today and saw a couple of anomalies. First was a chap on what appeared to be a Pinarello heading down towards Thornton Heath.

My God! Was he lost? Or did someone break into DeVer?



So many nice bikes around makes me want to look the practicality of my current bike (fact it gets me from A - B perfectly) and 'floss' with the big boys....

cjcp

girv73 wrote:

I need to convene the SCR High Council for a ruling.

Since I've bodged my MTB commuter with rigid forks and slicks, I recalculated my FCN and it came out one higher than before at 10. What's up with that? Surely a slicked MTB would be higher up the chain than a knobbly?

Base: MTB on skinnies = 8
Adjusters: beard +1, toeclips +1

Why do topeclips give +1 to a slicked MTB but not a knobbly?

I'm not complaining, just curious about this seeming anomaly.

I think the answer lies in the fact that your conscience tells you that you should have a lower FCN. There is no way you'd let a nobblied mtb go past you, is there?

Also, I thought the High Council had ruled that there should be no adjustment for your facial hair.

girv73

From the notes:

Starting FCN 2-8 have pedal adjustments which are already accounted for in the calculator

Maybe it's because, at the rarefied heights of FCN 2-8, you're not expected to have something as ghey as toeclips and should be using proper grown-up's clipless pedals.

For me, until I go clipless at least, I think it means that I absolutely MUST hunt down and scalp all knobbly MTBs.

"None shall pass." Could that be a SCR motto?

cjcp wrote:

Also, I thought the High Council had ruled that there should be no adjustment for your facial hair.

Yes, quite right. I'd forgotten about that :oops: Adjusted now.

don_don

DonDaddyD wrote:

Oh and to all you Wolverine looking Mountain bikers, blah blah blah blah Mountain bikes suck blah blah blah.... I was once like you, then I shaved and realised the elegance of power attributed to distance at speed was a far more appealing than rolling in the mud like some sweatless pig... - what too harsh? :shock:

Don't knock it till you've tried it 8)

Don't pigs sweat?? :?

attica

Adjudication required please folks:-

This morning I had a lot of anger to work off I put it down in a strip of awesome all the way along the route of my commute.
Towards the end of my run (Cumberland Basin through to Anchor Road) I found myself almost matching speed with the traffic around me, a moped pulled onto the dual carriageway and crept past me, then slowed. I have no idea why. I took him back and kept on dropping on him, for the whole mile that is Hotwells Road (lights at the end of the dual carriageway were in our favour) I kept him behind me, got to the lights at the end and he didn't reappear - I though he must have turned off then about two sets of lights later he got the jump on me at some lights, I'd reached them first and was a stationary sitting duck as he'd lucked out and managed to cross the lights just as they went green without actually slowing much.

So, to summarise, I passed and dropped a scooter in free flowing traffic got to the lights and he didn't catch me even though I was stationary for at least 10 seconds. I know he passed me later but he used the lights to his advantage. can I claim the scalp? If not at least it was a worthy battle.

By the way, I've still got excess anger to get rid of, be warned Bristol.

DonDaddyD

don_don wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Oh and to all you Wolverine looking Mountain bikers, blah blah blah blah Mountain bikes suck blah blah blah.... I was once like you, then I shaved and realised the elegance of power attributed to distance at speed was a far more appealing than rolling in the mud like some sweatless pig... - what too harsh? :shock:

Don't knock it till you've tried it 8)

Don't pigs sweat?? :?

Pigs (like dogs) do not have sweat glands. Unlike dogs, who pant to cool themselves down, pigs roll in the mud to remain cool.

I suspect that on some genetic level Mountain Bikers share this trait.....

LOL! I amuse myself.

Seriously I have nothing against Mountain Bikers and do appreciate the skill involved. It's just that I've always been facinated with road bikes more, even when I had a mountain bike. Incidentally I find mountain bikes far easier to ride.

blackworx

Haven't seen any of Coolio's antics but I like him already. Might have a sneaky peek in between my own guilty pleasure (*cough* Will and Grace *cough*).

And yeah, the word "gay", certainly in cycling and I'm assuming in other sports too (although I wouldn't know as I can't throw, catch or run and hate kicking nasty yucky muddy balls around) is understood to mean the subject should "get a grip and be a man" (as it were) and there's nothing homophobic about it except the underlying assumption, which naturally we all know to be false, so in that sense I doubt anyone other than the most irritating PC bore would infer any nasty intent. So a big +1 from me there.

When someone comes along who behaves exactly like they agree with the assumption (casting smoochy come hither glances and fluttering eyelashes at no recently-banned member in particular) it's oh so very easy to tell the difference.

UnworthyPapaLazaru wrote:

Im Seafield Road, and going home up Easter Road *spit* to Arthur Seat. Your scalp is safe.

Not a Hibee then? I've noticed myself that "scum junction" (as my gf so aptly put it) halfway up Easter Rd is roughly where you start to see people walking around with their mouths closed again.

DonDaddyD

Attica wrote:

Adjudication required please folks:-

This morning I had a lot of anger to work off I put it down in a strip of awesome all the way along the route of my commute.
Towards the end of my run (Cumberland Basin through to Anchor Road) I found myself almost matching speed with the traffic around me, a moped pulled onto the dual carriageway and crept past me, then slowed. I have no idea why. I took him back and kept on dropping on him, for the whole mile that is Hotwells Road (lights at the end of the dual carriageway were in our favour) I kept him behind me, got to the lights at the end and he didn't reappear - I though he must have turned off then about two sets of lights later he got the jump on me at some lights, I'd reached them first and was a stationary sitting duck as he'd lucked out and managed to cross the lights just as they went green without actually slowing much.

So, to summarise, I passed and dropped a scooter in free flowing traffic got to the lights and he didn't catch me even though I was stationary for at least 10 seconds. I know he passed me later but he used the lights to his advantage. can I claim the scalp? If not at least it was a worthy battle.

By the way, I've still got excess anger to get rid of, be warned Bristol.

I nominate you for SCR player of 2009!

You clearly scalped the scooter! The stuff legends are made of!

Why are you so angry?

don_don

DonDaddyD wrote:

Pigs (like dogs) do not have sweat glands. Unlike dogs, who pant to cool themselves down, pigs roll in the mud to remain cool.

I suspect that on some genetic level Mountain Bikers share this trait.....

LOL! I amuse myself.

Well, I didn't know that... I think I'll go along with the suggestion that I have Pig genes then, although I can't say I don't sweat a bit. The mud-rolling thing can be fun with the right person though :shock:

I'll shut up about MTBs now. Sorry for going off on a tangent

attica

DonDaddyD wrote:

I nominate you for SCR player of 2009!

You clearly scalped the scooter! The stuff legends are made of!

Why are you so angry?

Woah, high praise indeed, thanks DDD
The anger - I'm afraid that's something I can't share.

cjcp

Attica wrote:

Adjudication required please folks:-

This morning I had a lot of anger to work off I put it down in a strip of awesome all the way along the route of my commute.
Towards the end of my run (Cumberland Basin through to Anchor Road) I found myself almost matching speed with the traffic around me, a moped pulled onto the dual carriageway and crept past me, then slowed. I have no idea why. I took him back and kept on dropping on him, for the whole mile that is Hotwells Road (lights at the end of the dual carriageway were in our favour) I kept him behind me, got to the lights at the end and he didn't reappear - I though he must have turned off then about two sets of lights later he got the jump on me at some lights, I'd reached them first and was a stationary sitting duck as he'd lucked out and managed to cross the lights just as they went green without actually slowing much.

So, to summarise, I passed and dropped a scooter in free flowing traffic got to the lights and he didn't catch me even though I was stationary for at least 10 seconds. I know he passed me later but he used the lights to his advantage. can I claim the scalp? If not at least it was a worthy battle.

By the way, I've still got excess anger to get rid of, be warned Bristol.

Scalp. He's got an engine for cryin' out loud. He shouldn't even be giving you a sniff of a chance.

Littigator

+1 if only out of fear of the apocolyptic rage that would eminate from the Bristol area if we said No to him :shock:

cjcp

Indeed! Gotta watch these Wurzels, ya know.

Showing some good early season form here, Attica.

attica

My first scooter scalp wahey

biondino

Hi all. Did I hear a request for the politically correct pinko liberal voice of morality to make an appearance on the board to explain that if you use the word "gay" to mean "bad" then you're reinforcing a negative stereotype of homosexuals whether you mean to or not? Of course you can argue (like Prince Harry and the Paki incident - any thoughts on that, DDD?) that in a context where it's understood to be not offensive then that's not a problem. I can see the logic in that - though I'm uncomfortable with agreeing it's justifiable.

Unfortunately, a public messageboard where you don't know who might be reading is far from that context. And if LiT's gay friends have a problem with it, then that's not an appropriate context either (unless of course their hissy fits are just as bantertastic as LiT's comments, it's hard to tell).

This has been the voice of the fun-hating left, signing off.

blackworx

+1 nice one! That's cheered me up no end to hear one of the noisy two-stroke brigade got their come-uppance!

Put it this way - will he be off bragging to his mates about how he managed to leave a cyclist for dead by zipping past as the lights changed? No danger. Scalp.

UnworthyPapaLazaru

biondino wrote:

Hi all. Did I hear a request for the politically correct pinko liberal voice of morality to make an appearance on the board to explain that if you use the word "gay" to mean "bad" then you're reinforcing a negative stereotype of homosexuals whether you mean to or not? Of course you can argue (like Prince Harry and the Paki incident - any thoughts on that, DDD?) that in a context where it's understood to be not offensive then that's not a problem. I can see the logic in that - though I'm uncomfortable with agreeing it's justifiable.

Unfortunately, a public messageboard where you don't know who might be reading is far from that context. And if LiT's gay friends have a problem with it, then that's not an appropriate context either (unless of course their hissy fits are just as bantertastic as LiT's comments, it's hard to tell).

This has been the voice of the fun-hating left, signing off.

Thats so gay.

:shock:

blackworx

Half the cycling fraternity are so far back in the closet they're in Narnia anyway...

*ducks*

attica

blackworx wrote:

Half the cycling fraternity are so far back in the closet they're in Narnia anyway...

*ducky*

I fixed that for you, no need to thank me

DonDaddyD

Oh boy. You know Biondino, I like you, even if I do regularly disagree (with a passion)with some of the stuff you say. When someone previously called for the PC brigade, unfortunately I did immediately think of you. I don't want you in any way to take offence. I like you, we debate and outright argue but that's me by nature and your strength of opinion and ability to voice your opinions make for interesting debates/conversation.

Right!

<< Cracks knuckles >>

biondino wrote:

Hi all. Did I hear a request for the politically correct pinko liberal voice of morality to make an appearance on the board to explain that if you use the word "gay" to mean "bad" then you're reinforcing a negative stereotype of homosexuals whether you mean to or not? Of course you can argue (like Prince Harry and the Paki incident - any thoughts on that, DDD?) that in a context where it's understood to be not offensive then that's not a problem. I can see the logic in that - though I'm uncomfortable with agreeing it's justifiable.

Unfortunately, a public messageboard where you don't know who might be reading is far from that context. And if LiT's gay friends have a problem with it, then that's not an appropriate context either (unless of course their hissy fits are just as bantertastic as LiT's comments, it's hard to tell).

This has been the voice of the fun-hating left, signing off.

Prince Harry: Regardless of the context of what he said. It is a derogative term of a racist nature. No excuse in my book.

It’s the whole ‘black people say nigger to each other so much it must be ok?’ Calling me nigger is the quickest way to finding out whether I can fit my foot in your ass.

My dissertation ‘The development of the black identity on British TV’ would argue that the connotations/denotations of a word are intricately tied to the historical development of what the word means.

Which brings me to ‘gay’ the original use of the word gay is to mean happy (or thereabouts). It was adopted by Homosexuals and Lesbians as arguably a means of defiance to those opposed to their sexuality.

It could be argued, successfully, that using the term gay in a negative sense is just reinforcing the whole stigma against gays. We, I am not using the word to mean 'happy'. I'm using the term gay to reinforce (no matter how slightly) things attributed to the negative stereotypes of homosexuality.

Therefore in some ways (though secretly I struggle to admit it and have tried to argue this from every possible angle to come to the opposite outcome) Biondino is right.

<< Runs screaming >>

lost_in_thought

biondino wrote:

This has been the voice of the fun-hating left, signing off.

The fun-hating left is, like, totally gay (in the perjorative despite your love of pink jerseys).

However the above reminded me of 'this is the voice of the mysterons'... so I'll let you off.

don_don

Which brings me to ‘gay’ the original use of the word gay is to mean happy (or thereabouts). It was adopted by Homosexuals and Lesbians as arguably a means of defiance to those opposed to their sexuality.

Apparently it means 'Good As You', which seems appropriate enough to me

fatgrimpeur

Which brings me to ‘gay’ the original use of the word gay is to mean happy (or thereabouts). It was adopted by Homosexuals and Lesbians as arguably a means of defiance to those opposed to their sexuality.

You could shoot me down in flames here, I could be falling victim to an urban myth but I thought gay was an acronym used during protest marches in the U.S to mean good as you.

blackworx

Warning: this story contains nudity; those of a prudish disposition should skip to the end.

I apologise in advance for flogging the subject, and I promise not to regale you with any more of these boring stories, but while we're on it I had a HILarious encounter in the changing rooms at the gym last week. Some big rugger bugger had a go at me for not having any pants on (yes, in the changing rooms). Rough transcript follows:

RB: Aw put it away mate.
Me: ... [Takes me a while to figure out what he's on about, and then a few moments to realise he's actually being serious] ...Eh?
RB: Come on man, I'm no a homophobe but you're attracting the wrong sort of person.
Me: Hang on, I don't understand. So you ARE a homophobe?
RB: Eh?
Me: Well if you're not a homophobe then what do you mean "wrong sort of person"?
RB: You tell me, what do YOU mean "wrong sort of person"?
Me: That's what I'm asking you - you said it.
RB: No I didn't; don't put words in my mouth. I've got gay friends.
Me: [barely suppressed laughter]
RB: Look mate I don't care if you're homosexual or, or, or... what's the other one? (obviously scrabbling around in his head for the word "heterosexual")
Me: Bisexual?
RB: [Eyes bulge] No! Well yeah, that too, but I mean the main one, like, into women.
Me: Let me put it another way. Are you scared you might catch gay or something? Cos it looks to me like you've already got it...


At this point, when he didn't respond straight away I made the mistake of adding a lispy "...but you really need to work on your chat-up lines sailor", which made him quite angry. I'd love to say it was settled by some good old fashioned naked fireside wrestling a la Olly Reed and the other guy in that famous scene (possibly followed by manly hugs and some constitutional pipe smoking) but in reality it just descended into a good old bout of passive-aggressive verbal until one of us (me) was ready to leave.

fatgrimpeur

P.S I have no idea how to use this forum, or actually my computer!

itboffin

biondino wrote:

Hi all. Did I hear a request for the politically correct pinko liberal voice of morality to make an appearance on the board to explain that if you use the word "gay" to mean "bad" then you're reinforcing a negative stereotype of homosexuals whether you mean to or not? Of course you can argue (like Prince Harry and the Paki incident - any thoughts on that, DDD?) that in a context where it's understood to be not offensive then that's not a problem. I can see the logic in that - though I'm uncomfortable with agreeing it's justifiable.

Unfortunately, a public messageboard where you don't know who might be reading is far from that context. And if LiT's gay friends have a problem with it, then that's not an appropriate context either (unless of course their hissy fits are just as bantertastic as LiT's comments, it's hard to tell).

This has been the voice of the fun-hating left, signing off.

Interesting....

But it's still okay to call someone a



Right?