Gotta keep it from The Children

"Nathan Nagel" wrote in message
...

oh nathan, i wasn't talking about *you*.
in fact, i was making it up completely!!!!!!!!!!!!! --- whoops, there
goes
a week of lunches
so stop stomping all over my joke.


I'll buy ya dinner next time you're in DC-land then.

at this rate you'll owe me 27 courses.

So how's archy, anyway?

who?


Now we're even apparently.

http://www.donmarquis.com/archy/index.html

Somehow it's less funny with an explanation (I *knew* I should have gone
with an e.e.cummings reference.)

hahaha, yes you SHOULD.

I'm just practicing to be a curmudgeon someday.

i would like to be a fractious old biddy with a polyester dress, a drinking
habit, & a hairy chin. i shall elbow young & muscular people out of the way
in my furious attempts to claim the best seat on the bus. once i get it,
i'll sit there having a spit-flyingly animated conversation with myself in
order to keep the seat next to me free as well.
kylie

0tterbot wrote:

"Nathan Nagel" wrote in message
...

You have speed and red light cameras there? Sheesh, I thought it was
only in DC where we'd sunk so low. Hopefully yours don't work on a
commission basis (don't get me started. Seriously. This has been
discussed in another newsgroup which I frequent beyond the point of
nausea to nearly shoving sharp desktop implements through my nostrils
and eardrums in an attempt to avoid inadvertantly reading another post
on the subject.

all right, you better read this with your eyes shut, then. ;-)

Kind of like watching football with your eyes shut after thanksgiving
dinner? (oh, wait, you don't have football or thanksgiving. Ummm...
you get the idea anyway, I hope.)


And yet some people still don't see the blatant
corruption...)

i must say, a lot of my compatriots agree with your view - which is that
they are for revenue-raising & not to promote safety. *i* think that since
everyone knows you're not allowed to speed & not allowed to run red lights,
that they are ok. also, there are signs posted in camera areas. it's simply
not possible not to know they're there (unlike the cops hiding behind a tree
with a radar, which one often doesn't know are there) - so in terms of
fairness i just can't see what the problem is. people get caught doing what
they are perfectly well aware they shouldn't do, therefore no problem imo.
certainly they do raise a lot of revenue, but that's not really the point.
if someone breaks the law & gets caught, they have only themselves to blame.

Ah, see, there's a difference. There's a speed camera in the 3rd street
tunnel in DC... just found out when a coworker got nabbed. No signs
anywhere. It's entirely possible that someone commuting through the
tunnel every day could rack up a ticket a day until the first one came
in the mail, which could be months! The red light cameras are another
issue - they're generally installed by subcontractors, not the
government themselves, and the subcontractors often get paid not a flat
fee for installing and maintaining the cameras but instead their pay is
based on *how many tickets* the camera generates. It's been shown that
the most profitable cameras are often installed at intersections where
the yellow light is either shorter than recommended by various
guidelines, or *has actually been shortened* to artificially increase
the number of violations. Obviously properly setting the yellow light
time would reduce violations and make the roads safer, but it doesn't
generate the same profit for the state (or District) or the
subcontractor, so until a private citizen makes a stink about it it's
ignored.

The biggest tip-off that they're really about revenue and not safety is
that unlike a ticket issued by an officer, the only consequence of
receiving a photo ticket is that you have to pay the fine. No points on
your license or anything. (I suppose if there *were* points, that would
raise some sort of Constitutional issue, but we haven't really paid much
attention to it over the past few decades anyway, especially that pesky
Bill of Rights. But now I'm getting all political on you, and I can see
your eyes starting to glaze halfway around the globe.)


my issue about it is that there's a speed limit on freeways of 110km/hour,
which i think is stupidly slow for a wide, well-made (& usually quite empty)
freeway, which is then enforced with cameras. but (like smoking) speeding's
quite the taboo around here, to the point where the lawmakers aren't
sensible about it. (e.g. you're usually allowed the state limit of 100 on a
pocked, narrow, winding country road in the dark with cows all over it & a
stream of semi-trailers coming the other way, & that's clearly too fast in
some instances, but on a fabulous freeway you can only go 10km/hour faster &
it simply defies logic.) as well as that, there's the preassumption that
everybody speeds, which i find annoying because i rarely speed.

Same problem here, speed limits of 55 MPH (89km/h) or 65 (105) on
freeways, depending on whether they're "urban" or not - some states even
allow a heady 70 MPH now. Traffic in my area regularly flows at 80 or
higher outside rush hour. I've exceeded the speed limit in just about
every car I've ever driven, including a '41 Studebaker. (yes, it
handled the heady speed of 70 MPH quite well.) The presence of an
officer usually accomplishes nothing other than to create a traffic jam
as everyone stands on their brakes simultaneously. Secondary road speed
limits are usually more reasonable though.


but we don't want to get into duelling rants here, do we. :-)
kylie

Oh, why the hell not, this *is* ADFP after all...

nate

"Nathan Nagel" wrote in message
...

Kind of like watching football with your eyes shut after thanksgiving
dinner? (oh, wait, you don't have football or thanksgiving. Ummm...
you get the idea anyway, I hope.)

we've got football & lots of it! *four* professional codes & other codes
played non-professionally. beat that, alleged football person!!!!

Ah, see, there's a difference. There's a speed camera in the 3rd street
tunnel in DC... just found out when a coworker got nabbed. No signs
anywhere. It's entirely possible that someone commuting through the
tunnel every day could rack up a ticket a day until the first one came
in the mail, which could be months!

oh my, that's revenue raising in a big way. oh dear.

The red light cameras are another
issue - they're generally installed by subcontractors, not the
government themselves, and the subcontractors often get paid not a flat
fee for installing and maintaining the cameras but instead their pay is
based on *how many tickets* the camera generates. It's been shown that
the most profitable cameras are often installed at intersections where
the yellow light is either shorter than recommended by various
guidelines, or *has actually been shortened* to artificially increase
the number of violations. Obviously properly setting the yellow light
time would reduce violations and make the roads safer, but it doesn't
generate the same profit for the state (or District) or the
subcontractor, so until a private citizen makes a stink about it it's
ignored.

how wrong is that?! that's wrong, nate. not only is it wrong, but i hope tom
enright read that & is presently eating his words about socialistic
governments!!!!!! READ IT, TOM! but i won't get into it, because we can
easily agree how warped it is to have private subcontrators policing the
roads.

The biggest tip-off that they're really about revenue and not safety is
that unlike a ticket issued by an officer, the only consequence of
receiving a photo ticket is that you have to pay the fine. No points on
your license or anything. (I suppose if there *were* points, that would
raise some sort of Constitutional issue, but we haven't really paid much
attention to it over the past few decades anyway, especially that pesky
Bill of Rights. But now I'm getting all political on you, and I can see
your eyes starting to glaze halfway around the globe.)

no, i'm all fired up with the wrongness of it all ;-) i have sparky things
coming out. i'm not sure (not having read your bill of rights, naturally)
that there would be a constitutional issue: my husband would tell you in
scintillating detail about the one (1) time i was caught by a speeding
camera in our car, which is registered in his name, thus causing him 2
demerit points on his licence for the aforementioned offence. but as stated
elsewhere, he could have signed a stat dec claiming that *i* was driving &
have the points on my licence instead. but he had the full component of
points & couldn't be bothered pursuing it. i doubt it would come to a matter
of the consititution - if so, how?
of course, the assumption as above is that the revenue raising aspect is the
sole motivator (in d.c.) so therefore it may well be unamended because
they'd need to bring in private subcontrators to rewrite the law at the
cheapest possible price ;-)

Same problem here, speed limits of 55 MPH (89km/h) or 65 (105) on
freeways, depending on whether they're "urban" or not - some states even
allow a heady 70 MPH now. Traffic in my area regularly flows at 80 or
higher outside rush hour. I've exceeded the speed limit in just about
every car I've ever driven, including a '41 Studebaker. (yes, it
handled the heady speed of 70 MPH quite well.) The presence of an
officer usually accomplishes nothing other than to create a traffic jam
as everyone stands on their brakes simultaneously. Secondary road speed
limits are usually more reasonable though.

not sure what you mean by secondary road speed limits...? (for secondary
roads?)

tell me what you think - we have 60km/h standard speed in town (or any built
up area), many places have 50km/h in suburban streets, & all have 40km/h
school zones which operate (iirc) from 8-10am & again 2.30-4pm. this means
someone could come off a freeway (110km/h) & slow down to 60 for the main
thoroughfare, drop to 50 when s/he enters a suburban street, has to check
the time & slow down to 40 because there's a school zone (or not slow down
outside those hours), increase to 50 at the end of the school zone, turn a
corner into a main thoroughfare (60), join an arterial road (70 to 90, it
all depends) & in the meantime not go completely insane. i think it's sheer
unadulterated madness, but nobody else seems to share my view. i have a
school child & still can't be guaranteed to know exactly when i should be
slowing for a school zone, because they're wider than school hours & the
middle of the school day doesn't count! argh!!

i completely sympathise with the thinking behind it (some people DO drive
too fast in suburban streets, & SHOULD be stopped) but your ordinary person
has so much to deal with in terms of signage already (varying speed limits,
trying to ascertain clearway hours, notices for not turning left or right,
merging signs, humps, watching for pedestrians & god knows what) whilst
trying to drive that it's simply impossible to follow the law exactly in
conditions like this. if all extraneous advertising, good-looking male
pedestrians, attractive buildings, other vehicles & pedestrians etc were all
removed, one could possibly concentrate solely on the actual road signage &
driving the actual car.

man, sorry about that but alt.peeves must be good for something ;-)
kylie

0tterbot wrote:

"Nathan Nagel" wrote in message
...

oh nathan, i wasn't talking about *you*.
in fact, i was making it up completely!!!!!!!!!!!!! --- whoops, there
goes
a week of lunches
so stop stomping all over my joke.


I'll buy ya dinner next time you're in DC-land then.

at this rate you'll owe me 27 courses.

Well, that'll be a long dinner then!


So how's archy, anyway?

who?


Now we're even apparently.

http://www.donmarquis.com/archy/index.html

Somehow it's less funny with an explanation (I *knew* I should have gone
with an e.e.cummings reference.)

hahaha, yes you SHOULD.

I'm just practicing to be a curmudgeon someday.

i would like to be a fractious old biddy with a polyester dress, a drinking
habit, & a hairy chin. i shall elbow young & muscular people out of the way
in my furious attempts to claim the best seat on the bus. once i get it,
i'll sit there having a spit-flyingly animated conversation with myself in
order to keep the seat next to me free as well.
kylie

I can sympathise completely, except for the hairy chin part. The only
reason *I* have one is I'm too lazy to be arsed to shave. I find it
singularly unattractive on females, although I suppose if you're trying
to get people to leave you alone, it doesn't really matter...

nate

0tterbot wrote:

"Nathan Nagel" wrote in message
...

I do not think that word means what you think it means. In other words,
what we call "football" here is somewhat akin to rugby, although
different enough that a rugby fan would still be confused by it.
Sometimes called "american football" outside the YooEss. What you call
"football" is probably what we call "soccer."

not at all. robert summed it up pretty nicely (although he's writing from
his own local p.o.v. i note - what he calls association is known here as the
rugby union, aka rugby). soccer is the least professional & lowest profile
of the 4 professional codes here. shame, that, but there you are.

might i add my utter affrontment at any parallel between american "football"
& the grand game of rugby!!!!! rugby is a wonderful game, fast-moving,
thrilling & exceptionally violent.


Don't take the comparison too far... I'd probably categorize american
football as "rugby lite" if pressed.

snip

it does sound sensible off the top of people's heads. it's not a question of
"how" fast, it's more a question of speed limits going up & down like a
yoyo. it sounds wonderful until you're trying to do it in a busy &
unfamiliar area. its only saving grace is that the cops in town are
apparently unfamiliar with the fact they're responsible for monitoring
traffic speed when they're out & about.


heh... good thing eh? actually they're all out on the interstate
writing people for 73 in a 65.

(I still think in miles and feet, although I do have more
familiarity with the metric system than most 'murricans thanks to an
engineering degree) The same sort of thing happens here - trying to
guess what a speed limit shoud be is near pointless, you have to
constantly watch for the signs. Unfortunately, it's always about 20 MPH
lower than I feel safe driving, except in residential areas...

Speed limits etc. are generally pretty clear (clearly posted, that is)
here, but for some reason the "speed kills" crowd has taken over the
machinery of deciding speed limits here

yes, same here, exactly.

(snip) I was under the impression that Australia was much more
rational and in some provinces

states ;-)


Sorry, thinking of Canada and ASSuming that all the ex-British colonies
used similar terminology. (yeah, I know, technically we are one too, at
least the East Coast, but that was a LONG time ago.)

actually had German-style unlimited speed
freeways - is my info out of date?

yes, sort of. in the northern territory afaik all roads except within towns
are a free-for-all. everywhere else (again afaik) has a limit.

Sigh. Guess that limits the vacation options then...


man, sorry about that but alt.peeves must be good for something ;-)
kylie

I find it very cathartic at times. You should stop by sometime,

i shall!

Just don't tell 'em I invited you. I haven't been taught the secret
handshake myself yet.


but
should you ever post here regularly I must warn you that use of
emoticons is almost universally 'd upon. Summat about writing snobs,

like me old mate pockets?

although I have to admit, it does make one think about what one is
writing more carefully and tends to make one's words more exact as
well. (also forces one to develop a dry sense of humor, if one doesn't
already posess same, unless one wishes to be completely serious all the
time.)

:-O
heh.
those emoticons fly out of my fingers cos in the rest of usenet doesn't
understand & previous expressions of my dryness (not to mention local
vernacular) have led to misunderstandings. i'm sure you understand where
pockets would not.
kylie

Aside from not knowing pockets, I think I do...

nate

On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 13:09:55 +1000, "0tterbot" wrote:


tell me what you think - we have 60km/h standard speed in town (or any built
up area), many places have 50km/h in suburban streets, & all have 40km/h
school zones which operate (iirc) from 8-10am & again 2.30-4pm. this means
someone could come off a freeway (110km/h) & slow down to 60 for the main
thoroughfare, drop to 50 when s/he enters a suburban street, has to check
the time & slow down to 40 because there's a school zone (or not slow down
outside those hours), increase to 50 at the end of the school zone, turn a
corner into a main thoroughfare (60), join an arterial road (70 to 90, it
all depends) & in the meantime not go completely insane. i think it's sheer
unadulterated madness, but nobody else seems to share my view. i have a
school child & still can't be guaranteed to know exactly when i should be
slowing for a school zone, because they're wider than school hours & the
middle of the school day doesn't count! argh!!

Move to Qld. My father-in-law made the exact same argument when he
came to visit last year. He hated driving down the Pacific Hwy
because he had NO idea of what speed he was supposed to be doing at
any given time. From what he said there are only 3 speed limits in
Qld - 60km, 80km and 100km (except for two roads which have 110km
but he doesn't count them because they are still "trial" speed
limits, 4 years at least since they started).

There is a new push in North Sydney to have all suburban streets
dropped to 40km permanently, does that help your blood pressure?


--
Cheryl

DS#1 (Mar 99), DS#2 (Oct 00)
DD born 30 Jul 02

In article , Dan Evans mailer.da
writes

"Robert Sneddon" wrote in message
...

There are two distinct Rugby football games, League and Association.

UNION. Association Football is "Soccer" football.

I know that. Now. I woke up this morning thinking some smart *******
will have pointed this out by now. Set theory strikes again.

You'll be calling the British Flag the "Union Jack" next, which is a MAJOR
peeve of mine.

Well, it's the Union Flag. If it's on the jackstaff of a ship or a boat
it's the Union Jack. The real British Flag would probably be the Royal
Standard.

--

Robert Sneddon nojay (at) nojay (dot) fsnet (dot) co (dot) uk

"Robert Sneddon" wrote in message
...
In article , Dan Evans mailer.da
writes

You'll be calling the British Flag the "Union Jack" next, which is a
MAJOR
peeve of mine.

Well, it's the Union Flag. If it's on the jackstaff of a ship or a boat
it's the Union Jack.

Thank gh0d for that, at least one other person knows that. It always ****s
me off big time when it gets called the Union Jack.

The real British Flag would probably be the Royal
Standard.

Nah, that's the Royal Standard. The British flag, ie the Flag of the Union
between the 4 nations in corporating all 4 flags, is the Union Flag.

Bad luck about your tranny - I've had several over the years and found you
either got a gem or a turd. Seems like you got a turd.

Dan

"Cheryl" wrote in message
news
There is a new push in North Sydney to have all suburban streets
dropped to 40km permanently, does that help your blood pressure?

that sounds marvellous, thank you. although, like all sensible girls, i
avoid north sydney like the plague. oh well!
kylie

"0tterbot" wrote in message
...
"Nathan Nagel" wrote in message
...
Don't take the comparison too far... I'd probably categorize american
football as "rugby lite" if pressed.

*cough!* rugby league is "rugby lite" if you want to go there. (you
don't!!)

League is "lite" my arse. I used to live near Featherstone Rovers and
Castelford - those are ****ing big guys who train ****ing hard.

Your thinking of Union being the "lite" version

Dan