What Is The Main Purpose Of Pedelecs ?

[oldtom]

This thread seems to have become a gathering place for all the 'Brexit'-supporting, royalist, tory voters to vent their spleen about the anti-'Brexit' camp, comprising centrist and left-wing members of the electorate.

Short of any cogent argument to inform the readership why 'Brexit' might be a good idea, they take to finger-pointing, imploring the site owners and moderators to close the 'Brexit' thread and/or ban the main anti-'Brexit' protagonists......talk about throwing toys out of their pram!

Nobody forces them to read the posts in that thread, yet they do! Why is that I wonder? Much information on the whole business of 'Brexit', accumulated from a wide variety of sources has been channelled into that thread and the complainants about the material only whinge because they have no informed opinion to promote their cause.

'Brexit' is politics and like it or not, politics enters everything we do - it simply isn't possible to avoid it, whether it be the NHS, potholes, immigration, car tax, tuition fees, grammar schools or anything you care to think of. We live in a grown-up world and we just need to recognise that politics impinges on everything we do. Politicians have interfered in the world of electric bikes, the European ones being more accommodating than the Westminster ones ever were!

Calls to end the harmless 'Brexit' thread really need to weighed against those threads that have advocated the transformation, (frequently with descriptions of how to), of EAPCs into unregistered, uninsured motor vehicles.

Tom

 

[soundwave]

 

[mike killay]

I don't have any problems with the Brexit thread.
I am a proud Brexiteer, but have no need to indulge in the pointless banter with the remainers.
So, I never visit the thread.
Simple.

 

[tommie]

LOL !!

he must have missed the turnoff into his Brexit thread

 

[Woosh]

Short of any cogent argument to inform the readership why 'Brexit' might be a good idea, they take to finger-pointing, imploring the site owners and moderators to close the 'Brexit' thread and/or ban the main anti-'Brexit' protagonists......talk about throwing toys out of their pram!

your posts often disrespect the opposite views.
For example, you often use the word 'creatures' to label people who hold opposite political views to yours.

 

[Zlatan]

your posts often disrespect the opposite views.
For example, you often use the word 'creatures' to label people who hold opposite political views to yours.

Not to mention scum, trolls, xenophobic racists and idiots.

 

[daveboy]

Not to mention scum, trolls, xenophobic racists and idiots.

Plus brexidiots ,Fuckwits and cowards

 

[Zlatan]

And all amazingly acceptable by standards of some posters and apparently mods.. That's free speech for you I suppose..

 

[flecc]

And all amazingly acceptable by standards of some posters and apparently mods.. That's free speech for you I suppose..

Yes it is. The point escaping you is that accepting free speech doesn't imply agreement with what is expressed.

There's a huge amount in the Brexit thread I really don't approve of, but I don't favour suppressing it.

There now should be no cause for complaint about that thread.

Any member can make any contributed element of this site disappear from their view when they enter:

The posts of any individual member can be excluded.

Any individual thread can be excluded.

The Charging Post forum can be excluded from lists like New Posts.

The whole Charging Post (or any other forum) can be excluded from view in its entirety, leaving the site e-bike centric only.

That means anyone who complains now only wants to censor what others see, and that is never acceptable.
.

 

[tommie]

You talk a lot flecc but you don`t have much to say.

I notice your english dictionary is different from most other peoples.

when it comes to the Brexit thread yours seems to be missing

decency
respect
tolerance

again your narrative is to defend the indefensible just because you agree with them

i hope i`m wrong but....

clique
kliːk/
noun
plural noun: cliques
a small close-knit group of people

 

[flecc]

You talk a lot flecc but you don`t have much to say.

I notice your english dictionary is different from most other peoples.

when it comes to the Brexit thread yours seems to be missing

decency
respect
tolerance

again your narrative is to defend the indefensible just because you agree with them

i hope i`m wrong but....

clique
kliːk/
noun
plural noun: cliques
a small close-knit group of people

That has to be the most foolish post I've ever seen in this web site.

Over 38,000 highly informative posts hardly indicates "not much to say", nor does the sheer scale of valuable advice given to members over nearly 12 years.

My posts have always been decent and respectful of others, only ever hardening when I get insulted or abused unfairly.

And to say I lack tolerance when I am defending the right of free expression is ludicrous.

Finally to accuse me of defending the indefensible because I agree with what is expressed is extremely offensive when I have only just posted this:

"There's a huge amount in the Brexit thread I really don't approve of, but I don't favour suppressing it."

and have posted a little earlier that I would have preferred that no-one had added to my radio program announcement post because it was unsuitable for that purpose

Clearly it is you who is incapable of understanding English.
.

 

[tommie]

Ok flecc, you`ve danced round this long enough we don`t want you to obfuscate any longer,

Will you or will you not condemn the abuse, nastiness, harassment, disrespect shown to other forum members that have voiced their own different but valid opinion on that thread ?

So what will it be...a YES? or a NO?

 

[flecc]

Will you or will you not condemn the abuse, nastiness, harassment, disrespect shown to other forum members that have voiced their own different but valid opinion on that thread ?

So what will it be...a YES? or a NO?

Where that has occurred, and it certainly has, the answer is YES.

And I've already indicated that in various ways:

1) As above I've posted a number of times that I don't approve of much of the Brexit thread content.

2) Again as above, I've clearly indicated that I disapproved of my radio program announcement being misused.

3) I don't expect the subtlety of this one to have been noticed. Out of OldTom's huge number of Brexit thread posts there have been a very few times when I've posted a Like or Agree when I've agreed with something he has posted. But if you were to go though all his posts, you wouldn't find a single occasion when I've approved any post of his which contained any form of insult or abuse. I wouldn't do that on principle, clearly showing my disapproval of such posting.

These are my preferred ways of doing things, with subtlety and mildly without confrontation. It's not in my nature to rant as some of you seem to prefer.

So I ask that you respect my right to express myself in my own tolerant way without being insulted and accused of things I'm not guilty of.
.

 

[LeighPing]

Will you or will you not condemn the abuse, nastiness, harassment, disrespect shown to other forum members

decency
respect
tolerance

Not to mention scum, trolls, xenophobic racists and idiots.

These are all subjective issues. Individual and personal viewpoints that form part of the conflicting arguments and debates here. The 'heat in the kitchen'.

There are agree , disagree, like and dislike buttons to cast your votes on each statement or perceived outburst. The internet is one of the few remaining forums where one can still voice their opinion. Well, in some parts of it anyhow. Like it or not, we all have prejudices and biases to some degree. I'm biased and totally against losing that freedom of expression as it makes us more informed. Suppression of information is a slippery slope in my opinion.

 

[Zlatan]

That has to be the most foolish post I've ever seen in this web site.

Over 38,000 highly informative posts hardly indicates "not much to say", nor does the sheer scale of valuable advice given to members over nearly 12 years.

My posts have always been decent and respectful of others, only ever hardening when I get insulted or abused unfairly.

And to say I lack tolerance when I am defending the right of free expression is ludicrous.

Finally to accuse me of defending the indefensible because I agree with what is expressed is extremely offensive when I have only just posted this:

"There's a huge amount in the Brexit thread I really don't approve of, but I don't favour suppressing it."

and have posted a little earlier that I would have preferred that no-one had added to my radio program announcement post because it was unsuitable for that purpose

Clearly it is you who is incapable of understanding English.
.

Nobody is talking about your posts specifically.

Where that has occurred, and it certainly has, the answer is YES.

And I've already indicated that in various ways:

1) As above I've posted a number of times that I don't approve of much of the Brexit thread content.

2) Again as above, I've clearly indicated that I disapproved of my radio program announcement being misused.

3) I don't expect the subtlety of this one to have been noticed. Out of OldTom's huge number of Brexit thread posts there have been a very few times when I've posted a Like or Agree when I've agreed with something he has posted. But if you were to go though all his posts, you wouldn't find a single occasion when I've approved any post of his which contained any form of insult or abuse. I wouldn't do that on principle, clearly showing my disapproval of such posting.

These are my preferred ways of doing things, with subtlety and mildly without confrontation. It's not in my nature to rant as some of you seem to prefer.

So I ask that you respect my right to express myself in my own tolerant way without being insulted and accused of things I'm not guilty of.
.

I do not think it's anything to do with whether individuals (in this case flecc) condemn posters poor behaviour IT'S whether something by mods should be done to just say the type, tone of language is unacceptable in all parts of forum.
Mods have refused to take any action against miscreants because as they see it its in"Charging Post". To my mind being able to put folk on ignore, ignore threads, stay out is irrelevant. Insulting behaviour should simply not be tolerated. Claiming free speech is misusing term and simply means the thread in question rolls on in same manner.but with those insulted absent.
Thread should be closed or individuals doing the insulting temporarily banned.
Interestingly a member used the word "waker" towards an individual and received a rebuke. Another member compares Queen to Hindley, calls leavers idiot racists and worse yet nothing is said. Quite odd. Perhaps mods agree with poster?

 

[Zlatan]

These are all subjective issues. Individual and personal viewpoints that form part of the conflicting arguments and debates here. The 'heat in the kitchen'.

There are agree , disagree, like and dislike buttons to cast your votes on each statement or perceived outburst. The internet is one of the few remaining forums where one can still voice their opinion. Well, in some parts of it anyhow. Like it or not, we all have prejudices and biases to some degree. I'm biased and totally against losing that freedom of expression as it makes us more informed. Suppression of information is a slippery slope in my opinion.

Calling posters xenophobic racists, idiots, scum trolls, **** wits etc etc etc is not a legitimate viewpoint and allowing a poster to do so has nothing g to do with maintaining right of free speech.

 

[flecc]

Nobody is talking about your posts specifically.

Tommie specifically addressed the post to me in respect of my behaviour.

I do not think it's anything to do with whether individuals (in this case flecc) condemn posters poor behaviour IT'S whether something by mods should be done to just say the type, tone of language is unacceptable in all parts of forum.
Mods have refused to take any action against miscreants because as they see it its in"Charging Post". To my mind being able to put folk on ignore, ignore threads, stay out is irrelevant. Insulting behaviour should simply not be tolerated. Claiming free speech is misusing term and simply means the thread in question rolls on in same manner.but with those insulted absent.
Thread should be closed or individuals doing the insulting temporarily banned.
Interestingly a member used the word "waker" towards an individual and received a rebuke. Another member compares Queen to Hindley, calls leavers idiot racists and worse yet nothing is said. Quite odd. Perhaps mods agree with poster?

So as I posted above, you only want to censor what others say or read, and that is never acceptable. You should be satisfied that you can personally avoid seeing what you object to.

All information is valuable, even the knowledge that some will grossly abuse others in forums. That helps us to assess the worth of their contributions and also keeps us aware of how extreme the views of some in the community are. Much better that than being kept in ignorance by universal excessive censorship and in consequence sleepwalk into possible civil crisis.

By all means censor what you see, but I don't want anything hid from me, since those doing the hiding can have ulterior motives.
.

 

[LeighPing]

Whether legitimate or illegitimate, a viewpoint is still a viewpoint. I get that some are upset, even angered, in their disagreement with those views, trolling or abuse, as they see it. However, even rapists, paedophiles and murderers, when caught and convicted, all continue to maintain their rights in today's society. They merely lose their physical freedom. Not their other freedoms, such as free speech.

My 'thoughts and prayers' go out to all their victims, whilst I treat their attackers with dignity, respect and decency because society compels me to do that.

Suffice to say that some situations are beyond our personal control and we just have to learn to live with them.

 

[flecc]

Calling posters xenophobic racists, idiots, scum trolls, **** wits etc etc etc is not a legitimate viewpoint and allowing a poster to do so has nothing g to do with maintaining right of free speech.

As my post above, it has everything to do with my right to know what others think by way of their expression, no matter how extreme.
.

 

[tommie]

Calling posters xenophobic racists, idiots, scum trolls, **** wits etc etc etc

Would anyone accept that behaviour out on the High Street... No, i think not,

so why should it be a part of a public forum, in fact this is the only forum i know of that it seems to be acceptable, simple reason is that other forum owners need to cover their a$$ in case of litigation over content.

this may be an extreme example but shows the present day trend towards online forum/Twitter abuse

.West Yorkshire police arrested and charged Newsome under the 2003 Communications Act with having sent "by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing nature". Last week Newsome was jailed for six weeks, after pleading guilty, with the judge quoting his post back to him and saying: "I can think of little that could be more upsetting or offensive."

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/jun/13/jail-someone-for-being-offensive-twitter-facebook