Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Wed Oct 16, 2019 09:18

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Proof
PostPosted: Mon Nov 22, 2010 17:04 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 21:17
Posts: 3734
Location: Dorset/Somerset border
Big Tone wrote:
Starbrick wrote:
P.S. I'm beginning to think that by the end of this I'm gonna wish I chosen any other topic than this to write about! :lol:
:D

Well you did come in with guns blazing, which didn’t help, but no matter… :welcome: Starbrick


I feel it's only fair to explain to Starbrick that this is exactly what Big tone did. :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Proof
PostPosted: Mon Nov 22, 2010 17:23 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
Johnnytheboy wrote:
I feel it's only fair to explain to Starbrick that this is exactly what Big tone did. :lol:

The truth hurts :oops: (What a grass! ;) )

Actually, I think I used a Gatling Gun. :D

Well, my motto is if you're going to do something wrong, do it right! :P I’m a much quieter person these days… Image

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Proof
PostPosted: Mon Nov 22, 2010 19:09 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
Johnnytheboy wrote:
Big Tone wrote:
Well you did come in with guns blazing, which didn’t help, but no matter… :welcome: Starbrick


I feel it's only fair to explain to Starbrick that this is exactly what Big tone did. :lol:

... towards a different user within a different thread?
<confused>

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Proof
PostPosted: Wed Dec 22, 2010 10:33 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 13:03
Posts: 685
Starbrick wrote:
Thanks for replying to my post everybody, I really appreciate your comments.

Yes, you're right. I'm sure you do have plenty of excellent valid points that I would agree with. I do believe there should be better driver training for instance, as there are plenty of idiots on the road. I did go off on one a bit in the last post, partly because I was overtired, but mainly because this site kept continually popping up when I was trying to find useful information. Let's be honest, there aren't many actual facts and statistics that I can use for my assignment on this website.

malcolmw wrote:
As JTB implies, research should be undertaken with an open mind. If you think about what we say you will see that we have some useful points to make.

I'm not researching public opinion on speed cameras, so as interesting as your view may be, it isn't relevant to my paper.

malcolmw wrote:
Why do you think you can't find any "genuine reliable data" to support your pre-formed point of view? It's because the official statistics are deliberately obscured by words like "at camera sites".

I can find reliable data, just not from this site. Using this website as a source in my assignment would be like putting wikipedia in my bibliography. My work wouldn't be taken seriously.

malcolmw wrote:
We do have a better idea. Better driver training and an improvement in the attitude of all road users to each other.

I mentioned before that I think this is a good idea. Having said that, deliberately breaking the speed limit isn't exactly a respectful way of treating other road users.

malcolmw wrote:
Please could you give us an idea of your age and the driving experience which has led you to this viewpoint.

I sincerely hope that you aren't the type to dismiss a person's opinion because of their age Malcolm. I'd be so disappointed if you were, because then I'd be forced to think less of you, which I'm sure is an outcome none of us wants :)

Johnnytheboy wrote:
Sounds like you've already made your mind up, so further "serious research" is clearly not necessary.

Johnny. I'm doing a degree... my own opinion doesn't enter into the equasion in any way.

Steve wrote:
vague and over-simplistic attacks

You're right, Steve, I was pretty vague. The main reason was because I couldn't be bothered to open up a new window with the website proper whilst writing the post. A shoddy excuse :(. In my defense, it was mainly a rant and not really planned ahead. As I said, I didn't expect anybody to even read it, so I was surprised to see so many replies.

At the time, I had just been looking at the argument called "A proof by logical induction that speeding does not kill." The "interesting conclusions" drawn seem to be taken from nothing. For instance the argument "10,207 vehicles in accidents with child pedestrians use a free travelling speed of more than 30mph". This assumption is based on the statement "65% of cars in 30mph zones free-travel at over 30mph". Just because 65% of cars are breaking the speed limit, doesn't mean that 65% of cars involved in accidents had been doing the same. There's a higher chance that cars travelling at 20 or 30mph would have time to stop therefore completely avoiding the child. No accident = no statistic. From that you could assume that more than 65% of children were hit by cars where the driver had been speeding. But even then, you just don't know. Unless you have actual tangible data the calculation doesn't make sense. You can't just guess at the figure then draw up a conclusion from it!

Even if that entire argument was true, and even if I agreed with everything that page says, I still wouldn't be able to use it in my assignment because the data just isn't there to back it up. That's the main reason this website has annoyed me so much. It's irrelevant whether it's true or false because it's just opinions disguised as fact. If your opinion is genuinely based on arguments like that, then you should probably have a rethink. And if not, then why don't you share the real reason why you think the way you do. At least then you're being honest about it!

Starbuck :)

P.S. I'm beginning to think that by the end of this I'm gonna wish I chosen any other topic than this to write about! :lol:

An accurate summing up of the integrity of the "research"!

If your assignment was on reporting efficacy of web-based campaigns you would get full marks for that observation.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Proof
PostPosted: Wed Dec 22, 2010 10:53 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
GreenShed wrote:
An accurate summing up of the integrity of the "research"!

If your assignment was on reporting efficacy of web-based campaigns you would get full marks for that observation.

That could so easily be applied to the SCPs et al, except they have (or used to have) huge budgets for PR and supposedly analysis.
They will never live down the RTTM issue, no matter how much they and their associates and beneficiaries try to play it down – and they do try, don’t they greenshed?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Proof
PostPosted: Wed Dec 22, 2010 17:09 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7355
Location: Highlands
GreenShed wrote:
An accurate summing up of the integrity of the "research"!
If your assignment was on reporting efficacy of web-based campaigns you would get full marks for that observation.

That might be your opinion and you have a right to that, but how about justifying it ?

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.557s | 12 Queries | GZIP : Off ]