hawkinspeter

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 replies - 2,026 through 2,040 (of 3,248 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • in reply to: Bristol Chocolate Path crumbled into river #955507
    0
    hawkinspeter

    And just spotted that the

    And just spotted that the Downs Committee have given their approval to creating a new path on the Downs: https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/new-23-mile-leisure-loop-3768393

     

    in reply to: Helmet compulsion… #955495
    0
    hawkinspeter

    He’s realised that high

    He’s realised that high density cities and personal cars don’t really work that well. I think it’d be a lot of fun if he did implement mandatory helmets for all car occupants – it’d spark a good few arguments about safety and hairstyles at the very least.

    in reply to: Cycle safety #955499
    0
    hawkinspeter

    Thanks for posting that.

    Thanks for posting that.

    Since the site redesign, I’m having issues with some links that go through skimresources.com, though I’m running AdBlock Plus and NoScript on a Firefox on Linux install, so I’m not the most typical user. Your link doesn’t work for me whether or not I allow scripts on skimresources, so I’m going to try posting a working link here to see if it works in my browser:

    https://ecf.com/news-and-events/news/road-safety-and-road-user-behaviour-how-can-we-make-cycling-safer

    Edit: my link doesn’t work for me either.

    Edit2: I tried it on windows VM running chrome and that has exactly the same issue with go.skimresources.com reporting ERR_TUNNEL_CONNECTION_FAILED. I think it’s something to do with accessing the internet through a Squid proxy server.

    in reply to: New website? #955405
    0
    hawkinspeter

    Minor quibble, but the

    Minor quibble, but the “Latest Comments” section only shows 3 and a bit comments (on my screen anyway) and the little dots to navigate are a terrible idea unless you want to ensure that only accurate mousers can use them.

    in reply to: New website? #955375
    0
    hawkinspeter

    Like this:

    Like this:

     ,;;:;,
       ;;;;;
      ,:;;:;    ,’=.
      ;:;:;’ .=” ,’_
      ‘:;:;,/  ,__:=@
       ‘;;:;  =./)_
         `”=_  )_”`
              “'”`

    in reply to: New website? #955369
    0
    hawkinspeter

    Looks like the username on

    Looks like the username on the top right is the name of the last commenter and is a link to the last commented article.

    in reply to: New website? #955367
    0
    hawkinspeter

    There’s only one level of

    There’s only one level of indenting for replies to replies – is that intentional?

    (I’m with you on the “oldest first” option, but it’s easy enough to use the drop down)

    in reply to: New website? #955361
    0
    hawkinspeter

    And me!

    And me!

    in reply to: New website? #955357
    0
    hawkinspeter

    Yeah, I’m getting that too.

    Yeah, I’m getting that too.

    in reply to: Bristol Post demonstrates bias (again!) #955327
    0
    hawkinspeter

    They were wearing helmets?

    They were wearing helmets?

    in reply to: Victim Blame #955149
    0
    hawkinspeter
    Pilot Pete wrote:
    hawkinspeter wrote:
    Pilot Pete wrote:
    FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
    I just don’t agree with using such titles when not relevant.

    I wish to be referred to as Captain on these fora from now on! 

    Captain PP

    Only if you select a nautical based profile picture.

    Which would be equally as irrelevant as I can’t sail a boat!!!yes

    Captain PP (with four stripes and two wings) – there you go, a profile picture!

    Aye aye, Cap’n.

    in reply to: Victim Blame #955145
    0
    hawkinspeter

    Pilot Pete]

    Pilot Pete wrote:
    FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
    I just don’t agree with using such titles when not relevant.

    I wish to be referred to as Captain on these fora from now on! 

    Captain PP

    Only if you select a nautical based profile picture.

    in reply to: Victim Blame #955139
    0
    hawkinspeter
    Cycloid wrote:
    I’m not that bothered about the credibility of the author’s qualifications, it’s what he’s actually saying that is important. What is especially annoying is that he mixes some credible data from academic papers mixed with his own vitriol and believes that he has made a coherent argument.

    My analogy, for shark read motorist.

    “if you swim in shark infested waters, you must expect to be eaten, don’t blame the sharks or expect them to change their behaviour, they’re just being sharks. You must wear a hi-viz jacket, but it won’t help. Whatever you do don’t antagonise the sharks, you’ll only make things worse for yourself”

    Hmmm…

    Firstly, the sharks have to do a certain amount of training and then pass both a practical and written test on how to not eat swimmers (not everyone is cut out to be a shark). The sharks then have to notify the authorities if they subsequently have an illness that make them less able to see and identify swimmers.

    I certainly wouldn’t recommend wearing hi-viz or anything reflective around sharks – that’ll just make them curious. I’d recommend that you stay below them in the water as their prey is usually found above them.

     

    in reply to: Victim Blame #955131
    0
    hawkinspeter

    I’m just glad that no-one

    I’m just glad that no-one mentioned being a doctor of squirrel related studies.

    https://phys.org/news/2020-01-strongly-squirrels-good.html

    (Seems a good deal – get a PhD in psychology and then spend most of your time watching squirrels)

    in reply to: Kick Start #955167
    0
    hawkinspeter

    Nope. I might start doing

    Nope. I might start doing that now, though.

Viewing 15 replies - 2,026 through 2,040 (of 3,248 total)