Woah, I'm pretty sure you couldn't give us a better demonstration of a
Left Brainer in action! Thanks!
The *spelling* was 100% correct. The emphasis was completely lost
(obviously / predictably).
Cheers, T i m
Sorry Tim but I have both left and right hemispheres to my brain.
Perhaps you have comprehension difficulties as you seem to believe you
only have half a brain (though you still appear to be brainless to the
Now I understand why you need to separate the letters in your name by
spaces - its because its too big a word for you to comprehend without
breaking it down.
I understand that you are a self confessed criminal who has an obsession
with their half a brain and that you like to insult those who can think
both rationally and emotionally. If you are ever lucky enough to develop
that part of the brain which influences rational thinking please come
back and we can have a further discussion on the level of your
criminality. I promise I will only use very short words which I hope you
will u n d e r s t a n d
The thing is, I think I should feel sorry for them, they are trying to
fight with one arm tied behind their back. ;-(
Imagine how weird the real analogue world must seem to someone who
only works in black and white?
But of course, the truth is, because their world is only ever in black
and white so why they appear to be happy with their lot. ;-)
You don't miss what you have never had etc. ;-(
So, round here there are loads of dual use pavements that appear to
come and go and so pedestrians and cyclist have learned to co-exist in
such places, even when some of it might not be dual use.
In many cases it's not even clear which bits are what, both because
the markings have worn away and people joining mid entry / exit not
aware that there is supposed to be some segregation.
I believe they are actually extending this 'mixed use' idea in many
cities, with pedestrians, cycles, motorcycles and cars all sharing the
exact same space with little in the way of markings even and it works
because people have to be more observant (from all sides).
The *massive* difference between that an A road is the closing speed
of cars, lorries and busses and cyclists, often making it very
dangerous when two such vehicles are side by side and then find
themselves up the back of a cycle.
So, rather than cycling many many miles beside a completely empty
pavement, many cyclists (and especially those who are old or young and
generally not wearing Lycra) seek refuge out of the way of the fast
traffic, much to the joy of both groups. 
Cheers, T i m
 We encountered one of those cycling things the other day where
there were a fair few cyclists wearing numbers and marshals at various
points and they were all fairly spread out along both sides of a
stretch of dual carriageway. It was actually causing all sort of
issues as cars overtook cyclist, sped up and then whilst being
overtaken by other cars, came up behind another cyclist (much faster
than you would come up behind most powered vehicles), then you had
(saw) the dilemma of people either going for the overtake of the cycle
and baulking someone overtaking them or coming to a rapid slow and
then being stuck there for ages as everything was overtaking you at a
rate of knots.
We have either forgotten that we are talking at Rod, it's a(/nother)
troll or it's a full blown left brainer. ;-(
How it is unable (... unwilling because it's not it's goal) to
differentiate between those two scenarios?
His scenario would only apply if because the Police didn't stop us,
their family were going to go hungry (when we all know they wouldn't
be likely to stop us) if it was *obvious* the cyclists were doing a
'sensible thing' (albeit technically 'against the law') and when seen
in light of the bigger picture (cycling on an empty footpath V
possibly catching a mugger or drug dealer).
But how can you come to such a conclusion when you can't automatically
see all these things? ;-(
Cheers, T i m
*If* I were a thief who took your possessions but caused no harm and I
then sold them for the benefit of me and my family and the chances of my
detection and hence penalty would be slim; are you saying that is alright?
Mate, you are either a very stupid troll or whisky dave with a spell
checker, given the level of your stupid assertions. ;-(
Tell me (if you can / dare), who is stolen from (a direct crime of
denying someone the permanent use of something) when someone uses an
otherwise empty footpath as a safe, cycle refuge?
Who are the children also sealing from when they cycle on the pavement
with their parents?
Please don't try to conflate theft with the (potentially) illegal use
of the pavement.
Now, you might try to say (as you dig the hole deeper) that the
cyclists are stealing the (unhindered use of the) pavement from the
pedestrians. *Except*, I have already stated it would be done with
discretion and typically on a completely empty one.
But hey, thanks for playing!
Cheers, T i m
Paraphrasing a well known quote... it has already been established that
you are a criminal Tim, what I am now attempting to do is establish the
degree of criminality you (and others who support criminality) are
willing to tolerate or participate in.
<snip> >> Please don't try to conflate theft with the (potentially) illegal use of
Aww bless. Well, you carry on Mark (/Rod), it's good to have a hobby!
Oh, and if I was 1) Cycling on the pavement (because I decided it was
appropriate) and 2) got stopped by the Police for doing so (they
wouldn't bring any other charges as I wouldn't be riding without
lights, consideration or be riding furiously) and 3) they decided to
actually apply the on-the-spot fine, I'd happily hand over my 30 quid.
Cheers, T i m
Well, financial and emotional, at least for me. Loss of utility,
inconvenience at having to replace. And for a lot of people it's the
impact of having their home, person or space violated.
As I say, you'd need to expand on what you mean by possession.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.