Safe Speed Forums

In Gear, I appreciate where you're coming from, and I'm sure you do the same for me. I'm not going to go out of my way and try to defend the indefensible.

But having said that I can see both sides of the argument on C+, and for what it's worth, behind all the gesturing, cursing, abuse etc... there are some worthwhile points to be made. Unfortunately some people get wound up very easily and a viscous circle ensues, especially when viewpoints are so entrenched.

I admit I found many of the comments made by your family infuriating, whether that's due to my own insecurities and prejudices, or to their way of phrasing their opinions, I don't know.

I'm sorry their opinion of commuting cyclists has deteriorated so rapidly, but is this a case of reinforcing existing prejudices or was the inital point of view completely neutral? Maybe an independent would provide a better answer to this than either you or me could!

Obviously I'm going to be biased towards the C+ regulars and you're going to be biased towards your family, so I don't think raking up that "debate" on this site is going to help either of the causes.

For what it's worth though, their are tw*ts on bikes and tw*ts in cars!

Kriss and Mike were both very neutral before they engaged in debate. Admittedly - Kriss and Mike were still smouldering over the danger a cyclist caused to their own daughter - and the horse incident could have killed Kriss. They mentioned the incidents to illusttrate the need to campaign for education for all - and the abuse level was ridiculous - and it seems that skills of observation, anticipation and planning do not contribute at all to safer road use - but a speed camera does!

Never read so much stupidity in my life - and if I pulled any road user and they came out with that to me - I would not be issuing a fixed penalty - I'd be letting the Mags deal with it.

They live in a remote part of the Dales and are rarely bothered by speed scams, talivans or even commuting cyclists as nobody there lives in a cyclsit-commute distance - and gather the only speed traps set around there are to cop blatting bikers tearing through the area.

But the level of abuse on that site is a disgrace - and some of those comments by those individuals could land them in trouble - and some of the things posted to Mike in particular would have resulted in his taking legal action had he disclosed his full name (Mike is his second name and used within family in any case). I mention this purely so that people know where they stand in the eyes of the law - not to score any points or fan flames.

I found the response to Krissi's suggestion to look up the link on here and sign mahali's petition the most bizarre of all. For a guy who wants tougher sentences for really dangerous drivers and other individuals to state that he will not sign a petition because a grieving parent posted a link to it on this site "and gives safespeed and motorists credibility" more than sums up the situation to me.

Like I said In Gear, I'm not going to, actually I can't, defend the indefensible. But people are always going to have different opinions and I respect yours just as much as those at C+.

I may not agree with what either of you type, but I think I have a healthy respect for them.

If those views are going to influence their behaviour outside of cyberspace, and that behaviour ends up with them putting themselves and/or others in danger, or puts them at odds with the law, then I see no problem with you taking issue with that and putting them before the Magistrates.

As for Krissi and Mike, well, as I said in my previous post, I'm sure they have some valid points to put accross, but the message was unfortunately lost in the manner in which it was put across. If they were indeed neutral then one can only assume that the "smouldering" emerged on an unconscious level.

I'm not trying to cause offence, I'm just trying to explain how the message came to be twisted to the complete opposite of it's intent.

Sorry Peyote - but I have read all comments - and those two have never sworn, used racist, anti-religious or foul language to anyone - they simply replied in a straightforward fashion to posts with another side of an argument. The reaction to a suggestion that people take responsibility for their own safety, use common sense and ensure they are visible in dark rural areas like the Dales, apply caution when approaching someone who happens to be on a horse, or if a farm animal strays on the roadway, and strongly suggest concentrating, observing, anticipating and reacting to road conditions responsibly was one of total personal abuse to those people. It would not have been tolerated on here or on any other forum.

As you say - the comments passed to those people are without defence - and really do reflect very badly on innocent people as well. The one I was very interested in - professionally - was the "throw stones at cars" one. We monitored that one closely - and I admit I told Krissi to be blunt in style and hit it with a sledgehammer - which she did!

The rather unfortunate result is - now have cousin who has resolved never to allow her children near a cycling club in case it undermines all the work she has taken in instilling road discipline into them, will never commute to work on a bike in case someone thinks she's a militant nutter, (assuming this were possible - which in her case - isn't ) and a doctor who is now telling his patients to use a gym for gentle exercise as it is now better for their overall health, safety, well-being and peace of mind.

And these people ride bicycles whenever they can as well!

Not exactly convinced someone to use a bicycle or spread the word that cycling is fun and great there - have we!

It is fun - just as much fun as driving in my opinion. More so if you know what you are doing and know how to keep yourself safe. That's what those individuals should be discussing - instead of the examples per Neil's opening post.

Have to say it:

If I were a novice and chanced on that site - I would not ride a bicycle as seasoned cyclists keep telling me that it's dangerous, I would then decide to stick with my car as it would appear the safer option.

In Gear, I didn't accuse them of swearing, being racist, anti relegious or using foul language. It is possible to offend simply through the implied tone of what one posts.

I'm not going to pull up every point you've made, suffice to say there are two sides to every argument , e.g. ensuring you are visible in dark rural areas isn't the same as forcing all cyclists to wear hi-viz clothing, as well as having reflective clothing and lights.

Yeah, I heard about the throw stones thing. To be honest though I was under the impression that wasn't to be taken seriously. Just another example of how comments can be misread. Just out of interest though, how professionally did you take it? What did the forum moderators say?

I'm not in a position to judge what you cousin does or doesn't do, but I'm sure if she visited her local cycle club she'd find people, like you and me, who have an interest in riding bikes. No more, no less. If she chooses to judge a portion of society on the behaviour of one particular forum, then that's her choice, and in my limited experience of her behaviour there isn't a hope in hell of me convincing her otherwise!

Yes, obviously it wasn't meant to be taken entirely seriously. But it does indicate a certainly mentality on the part of the person who wrote it. And if he'd made similar comments about people of a particular race, religion or sexual orientation it would rightly have been considered totally out of order.

I also recall similar comments on another forum (which likewise were not meant entirely seriously) leading to accusations of "death threats" and a police investigation.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

Just took a quick squint at C+.

Looks like the "locals" are getting fed up with the ramblings of one or two posters..mainly anti car brigade.

Maybe they overlook the fact that most cyclists are probably motorists as well.

NTC may be getting a "cult" following....

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

Peyote, mate - I never said that you personally made the accusation against our Kriss - but that the same old idiots did. Now whether you agree with her point of view or not - I do not think hurling that kind of abuse at someone resolves any issues. I do know which persons on there did so -as I can read! Not done to hurl that kind of abuse at anyone. All she did was place the other side of an argument - and disple the nonsense. The problem appeared to arise when they had nothing to counter - hence the resorting to personal abuse on their part.



Given the numbers of cyclists I have had misfortune of informing relatives of their untimely deaths in the past - all were wearing dark clothing and poor lights. I think therefore there may be a case for forcing a cyclist to be visible. Certainly, I would dish out a fixed fine to any cyclist I came across without lights. That is a "MUST" in the HC 46



Professionally, I take a dim view of that kind of comment on any forum and would send a private e-mail about it.

But you are aware the Pistonheads was investigated for making so-called "death threats" - and this is another thing those same old names on that site keep dredging up - even after the event was sorted and the site completely exonerated.

An unfortuinate comment was passed in fun - and blown up into monstrous proportions. The same could be said about that stupidit on C+. But this was a chant and featured in a lot of other threads as well. If you had any idea as to what has been going on on IK roads with missiles thrown at cars and resulting accidents - then you would have an idea why this was not acceptable at all. But don't take my word for it - I'm just on of the poor sods who has to attend these kind of accidents.



That is what I have told her.

She's her own person - but after being called a racist and other forms of personal abuse - she is going to really grill those in charge of the cycling club before she will allow her kids anywhere near.

But there is a very real danger that those people on that site are not conducive to attracting people to ride bicycles whilst they are making such crass comments. You must surely admit that those people are very offputting to normal people like me and thee.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

To answer this question I think you have to take a step outside of the Safe Speed guise, and look back in on the 'debate'.

People often base their beliefs on their experiences and what they observe. They see (or as drivers themselves experience) others doing a lot of things that are either inconsiderate, outwith the law, or downright dangerous and mentally lump everyone else together as deserving of the attention the law may bring upon them.

They believe the government' line on the issue because, perhaps, they are ready to accept the credentials of the bodies and organisations working on their behalf. More ready, I suggest, than to accept or even consider, the work of a single individual whose status within the sphere is less apparent (I don't mean any offence by this) yet whose constant pestering of the 'system' makes him easy to dismiss as a crank or zealot.

With the above in mind, the considerable content of this website and the arguments held herein become, in their own minds at least, easy to dismiss as specious or fatuous.

In sum, they don't like you Paul, and they dismiss the pro-car protagonists as being over excited, whinging, Jeremey Clarkson clones.

Apologies, I was getting a bit defensive. It's a natural reaction for any vehicular cyclist.



As far as I could tell the problem arose when neither party could accept the others argument/point of view. The personal abuse bit always appears from one side or the other in this kind of situation, humans find it very difficult to agree to disagree.



You see this is what I mean! I didn't disagree with the princicple of what either you, or Krissi were saying, cyclists already are forced to be visible! But the argument on C+ was that as well as having the legal measures we already have (i.e. lights, reflectors etc...) cyclists should be forced to wear hi-viz clothing as well. It's like saying as well as having a legally lit car they should all be flourescent colours too!



I wasn't aware of the Pistonheads situation. I am aware of what goes on, on the roads. I'm a cyclist, I've had my fair share of cigarettes, beer cans, bricks, even the odd air rifle pellet!

You have my sympathy for attending these kind of accidents.

Even so in my opinion, it was taken the wrong way. Just as I'm sure that the majority of "Pistonheads" regulars thought that the original comment on their site was relatively innocuous.



Fair enough, I'm sure if I ever have kids I'll be just as protective.



Don't get me wrong, those comments I would imagine would be very offputting. Yet on the pistonheads forum you mentioned I'm sure there are similar comments. In fact in every Internet forum there are going to be extreme views voiced. It is the nature of the beast. Tarring everyone with the same brush isn't going to help anyone (I recognise that you're not doing this but Krissi seems to be).

Sure. I suspect that's all true. But it doesn't take much in the way of critical thought to find fundamental flaws in official policy - especially when it's laid out in white and black. It's a great shame we can't interest them in a decent examination of the arguments.

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

High all, I think the C+ threads got blown out of all proportion through misunderstandings on both sides, I have been around on C+ for three or four years know and they are generally well behaved and most also own cars and drive, there are over 10,000 members it is only a few who became abusive, unfortuneatley written word without facial expressions to back them up can be easily misunderstood.
The COAST slogan contains principles that are common sense and I have driven and cycled to these all my life as do most other cyclists that I know, Krissi and FF have been preaching to the converted and some seem to have taken offence to having COAST rammed down their throat so to speak. There have been many arguments in the Campaign and Soapbox sections on C+ and tend to be frequented by those more opinionated who enjoy “heated discussion” many forummers don’t ever go there for that reason, there are many places and threads encouraging beginners and giving advice try Cakestop and Know How much friendlier “so long as you don’t mention cars” , on the forum we sometimes rant to let off steam and with adrenaline still in your system it can get a bit them and us, we know not all drivers are bad but some days it can seem that way
As a commuting cyclist I know that whilst most drivers will pass me safely and be patient I can guarantee that every day at least two or three will put me within an inch of my life I don’t know which one’s they are going to be so to survive ride defensively i.e, take the lane where necessary approaching roundabouts, narrow roads, or left bends, move out to the center to be seen by traffic waiting to pull out.
I have been knocked off twice by S.M.I.D.S.Ys “sorry mate didn’t see you”, one in broad day lightovertook me and turned left as I was alongside his rear door the second at night I had reflective waistcoat and Twin headlamps on 2.4/10 watt, he turned right across me so I went over the bonnet luckily no injuries more down to my Judo past than luck, I sometimes wonder if stealth cyclists know something we don’t, myself and colleagues have been knocked off wearing reflective gear and good quality lights, not seen, yet a kid in black no lights and all the drivers go “look at that f%^&^%g cyclist with no lights”
If you read other threads on C+ you will see that we hate law breaking cyclists as much as you if not more as they are undermining our attempts to get respect on the road, we all want safer roads so don’t let a minority of tempermental pedantic forummers spoil your view of cyclists.

As a driver I personally think speed limits are adequate as they are and see speed cameras as a necessary evil, I am no angel in a car but drive sensibly “I think” if ever I do get caught by a camera I know I have broken the law and pay up it is simple really but we do need more police patrolling as well to catch and prosecute Dangerous/Careless drivers and cyclists if you like and add heftier fines to make the deterent better.

Ride safely what ever your transport
Cheers Steve

http://www.justgiving.com/LELforBLISS

This is true. Unfortunately Kriss deliberately baited the main trouble maker and just attacked each time! Trouble with the Swiss - they never back away from a argument - I should know - I married one of them and she definitely has the last word in this household, My brother-in-law has the same problem!



Before I married into Wildy's family - had IAM and RoSPA already. Thus on paper - would seem I knew a thing or two about driving.

Then I met my wife - or rather she fell in love with my car first and we took it from there. Let's just say her driving standard was at a higher level. It was when they were discussing how they were taught to drive and mentioned COAST as the core in the teaching - which was classroom based before practical lessons - that the gap in UK training and German/Swiss training appeared to open up like one big crevice.

Too many drive as basingmate claims "thumb in bum" - and most of us have met them: hence she spread the word and certain odd people decided to be a bit silly over it. Don't understand the general silliness of a couple of folk on the site when I took a peek.

Gather the really offensive and nonsenical posts have been culled in any case - which is good news - and a brief lurk seems to reveal less anti-car stuff than previously as well - which is also good for cycling enthusiasts who also enjoy driving.




I usually stick to the "Pie & Piston" or "General Motoring" on PH and even then - manage to say the wrong thing to someone sometimes!. My wife on the other hand - calls cops "Liebchen", calls speed cams something rotten, calls the chief of the Cumbrian scamerati "Steviebabes" and tells people all about her lacy undies - all in one post!

We can talk about bikes, push bikes and beautiful cars on here and some of us on PH admit to - er - um - er - um - er riding a bicycle

But we are more concerned with how to improve standards and road safety really.




I meet them in the car as well - numpties who are intent on having an accident with someone. You have to be alert all the time. These people ... complete pretzels! One on the M6 tonight. Simply moved from L3 to slip road as he was passing the slip road. L2 and L1 traffic had to brake to avoid! Muppet! Then there is aloawys the one whose brake lights don't work and he does not believe in indicators either! Folllowed closely by the mobile phone nerd who very nearly wrapped himself into a lamp post. Why or why can these people NOT do the decent thing - and if they are gonna have argument with something solid - why can't they at least argue with a speed camera


]

Murphy's Law! It's the same with the chavs, uninsured and boy racers and car thieves. They never get pinged! If they do collide with something - they do not always seriously hurt themselves either!

Yet Mr Law Abdiing normally safe person - just has to go 1-5 mph above the limit and he gets hammered! He is not the one knocking people off bikes either - it's little Johnny Wide Boy Chav Numpty.

One of life's little mysteries! But then - perhaps they get their come-uppance eventually in another way.




I think m/way could be fairly safe at 80 mph now - despite the"thumb in bum"brigade. Most can cope with that speed. Some roads have daft speed limits and we need them setting better and realistically. We need our BiBs back, intelligent use of the technology - and scams to be placed only at real danger sites - and not as currently deployed at the safest stretch of roadway - just yards away from a speed limit change - as practised by some of the dodgier scammers

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !
But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.

ROFLMAO

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

Our nice tame felines have been banned for the cycling forum

They are both highly amused and the biggest laugh of all is that a French and Swiss CYCLING forum of which Krissi is an reputed member have each culled their links to C+ in protest!


Talk about own goals ....

Worry not ... there are about 50 other people in this family who will "cleanse" that site if they so much as post the rubbish they posted before. Hint - they may change from a feline image to do so!

Kriss has forwarded a copy of the e-mail from the admin stating that her contributions "are not in keeping with the interests of cycling". So - telling people to pass on a message about the benefits of COAST, responding to anti-motorist threads on there, freedom of speech, and setting the record straight, having a strong opinion about being seen in the dark, placing the other point of view regarding parking on pavements, supporting a fine about eating apples at the wheel of a car and still pointing out the defence lawyer's line of defence (man explained all on the radio and the feral felines reported it to inform people of this line of defence. If true - I have problems accepting the justice system in this country as well.

That is a bit rich considering the nature of the postings on the site - and 90% of all posts up to the mid January were libellous in content to a sizeable chink of the population who drive cars - not to mention the thread inciting violence - which was far worse in nature than the now infamous episode wih PH last year. Neither feline involved descended to bad language, personal insult or libel. But certain regulars on that site stooped to those depths and in doing so - have really damaged C+ and cycling.

Let's put it this way - assuming any one member of this family lived within a cycling commute distance - nothing on that site would persuade us to want to do so - given that they tell the lurker that UK roads are far too dangerous .

They then tell me that EU is a lot safer. When Kriss points out that they have fewer speed cams, more police and better driver training - in which COAST is a major player - they libel her!

Proves that they have no counter argument in any case! You cannot claim EU is safer without examining why. If EU is getting safer, EU stats reveal less scams, more police and a better driver training programme - with COAST elements dominating - then Kriss is vindicated by their own rabid posters who claimed this.

My lurks on that site (and I am still a member and may start again) have not convinced me that contributors to the esite are remotely intersted in road safety.

They just convince me that t the more miltitant amonst them hate and envy people who drive cars. And they can never win - as the economy needs cars and regardless of stats - we travel miles to work in any case. Each member of this family is not within a reasonable cycling commute. Nor are our pals. And all the teachers at our kids' schools live beyond a 15 mile radius. It is too far on a daily basis - especially with marked course works and exam projects.


As I know C+ admin and members lurk on here (they must do to know so much of what goes on on this site) ....

I will issue this warning in public and intended in fairness on behalf on Mike and Kriss:

The family's lawyer is a registered member of the site C+ as well and any attacks on drivers, , attempt to libel any contributor to this site (as has been seen by me and IG on a lurk there) will be dealt with accordingly within the letter of the law!

This would also apply to incitements to violence - such as the so-called humour of throwing rocks at cars!

IG has hinted why he was concerned about this. We have agreed to spell out his concerns - and I drew the posting straw as he's at work:

In the month of December 2004 - IG was dealing with 5 cases of missiles thrown at cars in his patch. Joachim Wildkater (A&E London) as known to Cumbrian contributors and HBW to Hanbo and bogush) had dealt with 16 casualties - all involving a missile thrown at a car in the London area!

Mike, the Feral Feline knew on at least one instance on the local M1 where a stone had been thrown from a bridge and caused a car to collide with a a marker on the local A1 M's hard shoulder

The A&E department at the hospital where I work has dealt with 2 cases and Marianna WildKatze of Wales knew of a further incident of this nature.

The Stray Cat of Cambridge also reported cases involving eggs and so on thrown at cars in the last 2 months of 2004.

It is a very strange coincidence indeed that these have abated since Krissi raged about it on our orders on that site! and food for thought!

Hence - now be warned - it has atttracted some other attention!

I am not ranting for the sake of it.

This is a serious warning in the light of what was actually treated by NHS and still under investigation by the various police forces.







I mention this in fairness - and in no way wish to lay any blame onto the cyclists who are interested in furthering the intersts of road safety, especially those individuals who contribute very positvely to this site.

Those contributions further the safety-led debate and are thus valid.

C+, on the other hand, has proved yet again that they they are idealists who cannot ciope with reality.

I am a realist. I deal each day with death, as do Kriss, Mike, IG and most of the medical and police wing of this family.


Reality means that the car will remain as the main independent means of transport in our lifetime. This means we have to find ways to keep things safe. Fortunately, strange as it seems, most people drive and rely on cars and even this daft government have acknowledged this by re-engineering and improving some motorways.

Even more fortunately - they do not really take that much notice of the muesli munchers either!

So please - fixed wheelnut, Peyote, Cunobelin and our Chirpy chap - I certainly do do wish to offend you at all and regard you as being as committed to road safety as we all are on this site -even if you believe the spin over speed cams. I am not taken in and I speak as ex Brake member with personal reason to be angry with BRAKE as they wanted to use my wife's injuries and her cousin's death in their campaigns.

My wife's and her cousins's acicidents were each freak occurrences and had nothing to do with any speeding driver!

I and my in-laws will not be party to A BLATANT LIE!

I find it very enlightening that the forum thinks two persons who tell people to pass on a safety message, posts a lot of advice and tips regarding cycling in France, Italy and Switzerland has nothing to contribute. OK - so they have strong views on safety, high visibility and a very low tolerance of people who try to shift their responsibilities onto a motorist. The Swiss grew up in a culture where taking responsibility for personal safety is the way of life: that country prosecutes all at 3 mph above a speed limit with a smallish fine; fines j-walkers,; cyclists without appropriate lights and clothing and who cycle on the pavement - and woe betide you if you ski down a mountain without a torch after dusk!

This is a family which has suffered more than its fair share of trauma from freak incidents. The Yorkshire "felines" have been unfortunate enough to encounter some very dangerous cyclists as well - hence their attack to force a focus on safety issues on the part of cyclists as well as drivers.

But if C+ is not prepared to address some serious faults and think of ways to improve safety for all (including the numpty cyclist brigade) - then they are not going to persuade people to take up cycling.


Indeed, they say that the UK is far to dangerous and EU is safer,. EU teaches COAST skills in driving school and C+ contributors shut their ears!

Attitude to mahali's petition also told me everything I needed to know about the general C+ attitude to road safety in any case.


Petty, spiteful and vicious. The person who posted that particualr comment gave safespeed credibilty in any case.


They rant about our esteemed host on this site.

Well, in his defence - he does a damned site more to promote road safety awareness than anyone on C+, - as does every person who contributes to this super-excellent site and to the al motoring enthusiast sites.

If C+ muesli munchers wish to continue to bury their heads in the sand - then they are their own worst enemies and will attract accidents!

Banning the Yorkshire felines is actually a VICTORY to the motorist as it really PROVES they had nothing to argue against!

And their banning has cost me a contribution to my own lurgy charity
(I bet a small fortune the Yorkshire felines would last another month or so! )

In addition to the tsunami thing - which we decided on as it bacame apparent Kriss was going to pass 200. She actually clocked up more posts in one month than I have managed in one year on here!

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !
But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.

I'm glad you got that off you chest MM. It doesn't do to hold these things inside.

The new issue of C+ magazine is out now, it's actually a very good mag. Covers a wide range of cycling issues including road safety and usually without the anti-motorist bias. I've grown out of MBUK now and it's a bit like progressing from Radio 1 to Radio 2 (sh*te, I've just realised, I'm getting old!).

They would not be able to sell magazine if they did this - Liebchen

While he ist getting my tea ready - I am now going to see how many people I can call Liebchen und upset!

C-ya!

Wildy Cat ( who ist gonna get told off by a very Mad Moggie when he sees what I have been up to! -again.

Well - if he will leave his machine running ....whilst he get my tea ready.

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !
But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.

Sorry Wildy, I'm not sure I undertstand. They would not be able to sell magazine if they did what?

What's liebchen?

Sorry, languages were never my forte.

I think she meant if they carried anti -motoring bias in the magazine She's more petrolheaded than Krissi!


"Liebchen" is German for "sweetheart", "dear" and so on.

Apparently part of the vernacular in her part of the world

I once called an NHS manager by this term in a meeting - after taking a call from Wildy! It gets under your skin after a while!

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !
But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.

Cheers MM, got slightly confused then! I supposed I should take it as a compliment that she feels able to refer to me in such an informal manner...

...or was it a deliberate attempt to wind me up, methinks the comparison to Krissi don't just end in their relative petrolheadedness*!



*Don't know if this is actually a word, but I'm sure you get the gist.