Big Tone wrote:
dcbwhaley wrote:
I cannot help forming the impression that the knifes are out for anyone who dares to challenge he views of the established members.
I respectfully dissagree dcbwhaley.
SS examines the facts which many treat as fiction. But the truth fears no question and I have
never seen SS shy from any
genuine question/er concerning road safety with opposing views.
That is true. You do allow that. But nevertheless posters whose views do not accord with the majority can expect a savage response.
I have been called a "neo-Nazi corporate-fascist" for extolling the environmental advantages of public transport (and called precious and over-sensitive when I complained to the moderator who declined to admonish the poster who said that).
My professional standing and work ethic was impugned when I tried to defend the public sector's involvement in road safety ( and was castigated by the moderator when I mounted a vigorous defence)
I have been called a "Freak" for discussing, in General Chat, the local level of rainfall (and again been admonished for returning the insult)
But what prompted the quote at the top was this. I said that I thought that I differed from many on what I considered a safe speed. Steve invited me to expand on that and I did so, albeit not very well. In return I was savaged by RobinXe whom accused me of an
ad hominem attack on him.
That does sound like I am whingeing but not so. My back is broad and , wrapped in the cloak of righteousness, I can take a lot of flak

( I wish that certain other posters could take criticism with the same ease as they give it). But it does rather give the lie to your protestations of tolerance.