Safe Speed Forums

Honestly Paul, I applaud your efforts to state your case over there, but I don't think you're doing much more than entertaining the deluded fantasies of a vocal minority who believe that all motorists are evil, and that all laws are just.

I'm quite certain that apart from Spindrift the mental case (and his D-wing prison cell partner Tony Tourist), the others are quite capable of seeing the valid points of the Safespeed argument, and are just arguing because they enjoy hiding behind an electronic identity.

I'm amazed that otherwise intelligent people can be so obtuse. Apart from some good posts by CometGirl I haven't really seen any members attempt to argue with you on anything other than a personal level. Even a serving police officer who posts over there is treated with derision.

The attacks seem to centre on old pages which I feel you have explained very well, ill-advised forum posts from certain members, forum smilies (the shooting GATSO ones, they seem to think that a smiley is indicative of criminal intent). The attacks on your personal appearance are completely unjustified, and demonstrate their lack of anything worthwhile to add to the discussion.

Right now I think you should just leave them to it. After all, what debate have they stirred in the national press and broadcast media?

You're doing a good job and most sane people would wish you well. You're bringing the debate to a national audience. The Cycling + forum is a place for people to rant and hide behind aliases. I wouldn't worry about it, I have very rarely met anybody who would echo their uneducated opinions.

Comet girl is our very own Lizard and yes, she does come across as a very open minded and intelligent lass.

Its wierd, I got talking (well arguing, loudly, actually) on Sunday with a bloke I know who hasn't owned a motorised vehicle since 1991 and cycles everywhere. He seemed to present a very similar attitude to some of the C+ members. He actually accused me of not being in control of my vehicle if I don't know its exact speed .

It did go some of the way to making me understand how completely blinkered some people are...

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

Is that why those conveyances without speedos appear out of control ??

Since when do speedos display the exact speed of a vehicle?

Funny -you don't give readers the opportunity to make up their own minds.

http://www.cyclingplus.co.uk/forum/topi ... _ID=116443

There you go. A thread that your leader started, offering to address flaws in his campaign. Then completely ignoring most of them. Flaws raised by a group which is made up mainly of people who drive, and certainly don't hate themselves.

I'm not inviting, by this post, a duplicate discussion over here, as that would be a complete waste of time. Anyone is welcome however to add their comments to the thread.

Oh, and I'm Mister Paul by the way, just in case Bad Company thinks he can win another couple of brownie points.

Do you ever post anything that isn't tinged with vile bile?

I'd remind you that discussions here are civilised, with ad hominem arguments banned along with libel and insults. See: http://www.safespeed.org.uk/forum/viewt ... 2225#12225

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Is that your best defence Paul? I'm disappointed.

If anyone can find a flaw in any of my work, I really want to hear about it.

your words from the OP Paul, not my bile.

Oh, and you are still ignoring the most basic of the points raised. Fancy popping over there to set the record straight, rather than claiming that lists of your exact words are lies?

Let's just give people credit and let them make up their own minds shall we?

Your subtle and insideous translations are everywhere for all to see:

flaws in my work becomes flaws in his campaign

Five year old web chat taken out of context becomes evidence of corruption and illegitimate motive.

Ignoring vile slurs becomes 'ignoring the most basic of the points raised'.

Your 'arguments' are conducted without a shread of decency, honour or integrity. Frankly, I've never seen anything like it - and it isn't a pretty sight.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Hmmm....

I'm happy with what I have written. Like I said, let's let people make up their own minds shall we?

You'll find that the rules are applied with a fair degree of latitude, because simple rules cannot account for an infinite variety of human behaviour. A minor violation is of little consequence - nevertheless sustained or blatant violations will result in a warning followed by suspension.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Deluded fantasies? All motorists are evil? (since most C+ members also drive cars thats clearly bollox). You didnt read the thread did you P o D?

Hi Mr P,

I've been following most of the threads & have got to say that some of the members across there spit nothing but bile & hatred. I notice that there are very few C+ members contributing - probably because they daren't.

I'm amazed that you allow the type of behaviour from the likes of "Tourist Tony", whilst seeming so keen to ban safespeed members. This forum seems to be a lot more open than C+.

I happen to think the "debate" is useful. There are a lot of members on C+, many of whom must be motorists. It's always useful to see how others think. Unfortunately the swamping of every thread by the terrible few has not let a lot of the others comment.

What is very clear is the "speed kills" indoctrination.

_________________
Wake me up when the revolution starts
STOP the Toll Tax http://www.traveltax.org.uk

Graeme

I think the honest answer to the question why more people don't come over here from the dark side is that they don't see the point. They see, and I agree, that many people who join and contribute to this forum have already made up their minds and are here more for moral support than anything else.

As to your comment about the way that Paul has been treated over there, well many people think that some of his methods -biased surveys, standing in a window with a stopwatch, press releases that have clearly been rushed out so are poorly constructed and fail in their use of attention-grabbing comments, failure to make any concessions- to name only a few- very amusing and struggle to take him seriously. There may also be techniques behind people's approach to him, and this has seen to be very successful over the past couple of weeks as it has led to some interesting admissions (both conscious and subconscious).

Regardless of how he has been treated in the thread that he himself started and invited comment to, there now remains a record of the discussion. Paul's refusal to respond to some of the issues raised says as much as his actual responses to the other issues. As I have said, people can make up their own minds. Unfortunately for Paul it seems that some, as a response to his writings, have now changed their minds about SafeSpeed.

How about their educated opinions then?

Oh, and is "Parrot of Doom" a real name, or an alias?

This is rather a silly thread!

Since they're not members of this forum (one has been banned on several ocassions), and since the comments would seem accurate to anybody with an ounce of sense......

Its funny that you can suggest that I'm out of order for saying such things about C+ members. Spindrift has been banned again and again from the C+ forums, he keeps joining, spouting all kinds of garbage in his personal vendetta against Paul, and you haven't actually made mention of it anywhere?

Which would suggest to that you agree and condone what he says.

Now I would wage money that you're more intelligent and reserved than that, so perhaps instead of issuing mild rebukes here, you should first address the lunatics in C+ - and they are lunatics, by any stretch of the imagination.

I've been reading the C+ forums for a while, it keeps me entertained. If you wish to see the undercurrent of resentment against motorists, just find the thread regarding the deaths of the cyclists in Wales, and read the prejudice in that thread.

But of course since C+ 'archives' old threads, you can't. But take it from me, most members had the driver lynched and burnt to death, complained when a police officer gave his opinion that speed was irrelevant to the accident, and then virtually spat feathers when it came out that actually, the motorist hadn't really done anything wrong that contributed to the accident.

He has responded to every single issue you have raised, in more than one thread. What you want to do is keep raking the same coals again and again, until you finally have what you want - an admission from Paul that actually, everything he has tried to do in the name of road safety has been wrong, that speeding is an evil crime, and that he must bow down and accept his punishment from a group that seem intent on attacking the messenger, rather than listening to the message.

The simple fact is that the vocal posters on C+ aren't interested in discussing road safety. They're only interested in furthering their beliefs that the issue is beyond debate, that the science is irrefutable, and that any opposition to road safety policy in any regard is simply not to be trusted no matter how valid the argument.

I'll see your single C+ (quite entertaining) loony and raise you 3 completely barking SS trolls.

I'm not complaining about your language at all. Just pointing out Paul's hypocrisy.

There are a few lunatics on C+, and if you hung around for a while (though I suspect that you do) you would see that they receive appropriate responses.

Agreeing with some of what someone says does not mean total agreement with everything, nor with their methods.

Although as I said, recent use of some of the methods has resulted in some interesting revelations from Paul. I do agree with Yusuf'a questioning of Paul's clearly suspect motives and his refusal to address the concerns other than with counter-accusations, diversions, emotion and vitriol. And I am happy for people to keep raising the same issues until he takes proper notice. I can understand someone's frustration that Paul so desperately tries to avoid making any kind of concession at all.