mdavidford

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 replies - 571 through 585 (of 676 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • in reply to: Wahoo Website Warning #974901
    0
    mdavidford
    Fishpastesarnie wrote:
    How can I check whether tacxes are actually due? 

    I thought it was a Wahoo you’d ordered? 

    in reply to: New Years Resolution – Stop feeding the troll #974959
    0
    mdavidford

    Erm – as far as I can see,

    Erm – as far as I can see, there is no way to ‘like’ a post – only comments.

    I’m dubious about your hypothesis anyway.

    in reply to: Made up rules back again? #974773
    0
    mdavidford

    The triathletes just need to

    The triathletes just need to harden up – make the cycle section 24 hrs, with changeovers at midnight. 

    in reply to: Made up rules back again? #974763
    0
    mdavidford

    To be fair to them, they’ve

    To be fair to them, they’ve now corrected the article to talk about ‘a return to only being allowed one form of daily outdoor exercise’.

    in reply to: road.cc user survey 2020 #974261
    0
    mdavidford

    Nah – it’s the “how much do

    Nah – it’s the “how much do you love rod.cc how much?” survey.

    mdavidford

    If by ‘missed a trick’ you

    If by ‘missed a trick’ you mean lost the opportunity to respond to the consultation, then yes, I’m afraid so – it closed on 22 Nov.

    I don’t think it’s directly relevant to this case though. It’s already an offence to park on the pavement where a specific local order is in place against it, which it sounds like was the case here.

    The consultation was looking at options to (a) allow local authorities to enforce against ‘obstructing the pavement’ (a bit vague and subjective) without first needing a local order, which currently only the police can do, or (b) make it an offence to park on the pavement at all, regardless of whether it’s ‘obstructing’, unless it is specifically allowed by the local authority.

    in reply to: What can be the best gifts this Chritmas for cycling #974175
    0
    mdavidford

    …and a copywriter.

    …and a copywriter.

    in reply to: Fair fuel UK are at it again #974149
    0
    mdavidford

    You used your real email

    You used your real email address??

    cool

    in reply to: Road Tax time again #974101
    0
    mdavidford

    I tend to agree, but that’s a

    I tend to agree, but that’s a whole other discussion.

    mdavidford

    I’m surprised they spoke to

    I’m surprised they spoke to the driver, rather than just issuing a letter.

    in reply to: Road Tax time again #974095
    0
    mdavidford

    Exactly. And insisting on

    Exactly. And insisting on calling it VED isn’t really going to help anything, because to most people it’ll be a meaningless bunch of letters that stands for they don’t know what, and they’ll still just see ‘Road Tax’. At least ‘Vehicle Tax’ is closer to being accurate than ‘Road Tax’ and less opaque than ‘VED’.

    Perhaps we should be lobbying for them to start calling it ‘Vehicle Pollution Tax’ instead?

     

    in reply to: Software for Turbo Trainer #971305
    0
    mdavidford

    Yes – paid in dollars on the

    Yes – paid in dollars on the credit card, and didn’t have any problems at all.

    in reply to: What makes road.cc toxic? #971665
    0
    mdavidford

    Does that include these two?

    Does that include these two?

    https://road.cc/wp-content/uploads/roadcc/furry trolls.jpg

    in reply to: What makes road.cc toxic? #971653
    0
    mdavidford

    Have you seen the rest of the

    Have you seen the rest of the internet?

    in reply to: What would be normal wear and tear in 2 months? #971623
    0
    mdavidford
    don simon fbpe wrote:
    Shall we start a bottom bracket thread?

    Would that be a threaded bottom bracket thread?

Viewing 15 replies - 571 through 585 (of 676 total)