UK Karting

Notice Board (Chat)




Re: -John: still avoid the simple question itpro/t
Posted by 'JohnClucas' on 01 Apr 2009 @ 19:35


| View Message Thread | Reply to this message |
JohnClucas
Joined: August 2001
Total Posts: 1
[ View User Profile ]
All the DFT are saying is that in 13% of cases someone was speeding. That does NOT imply (nor do they imply) that speeding was the CAUSE of the accident. Indeed they have a separate category of "excess speed" - whether above OR below the limit. You clearly do not understand the concept of a causal link. If 13% or drivers were in red cars you wouldn't say having a red car was the cause of the accident - indeed if 20% of the cars were red you would say that being in a red car was safer! Conversely if only 10% of the cars were red you might reasonably think there was a causal link. And if 13% or more of the population are speeding at any one time (quite possible) you would (if you were rational) say that there was NO direct link between the two.


But if we accept that the DFT figures are right, why are you and itpro spending 100% of their effort on speeding rather than other issues?

Now for a bombshell which blows your simplistic views of my motives out of the water - I've just suggested "speed humps" as a way forward in our village. Not because we have a REAL issue of speed, but we have a REAL issue of SAFETY with a dangerously placed pinch point. It's a way of placating those who ARE fixated by speed, but which will solve a real SAFETY problem.

That is the real problem with your and itpro's approach - it is so simplistic as to be dangerous.

Message Thread:

Re: Continued from SAFE SPEED thread.  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (01 Apr 2009 @ 9:04)
Re: Continued from SAFE SPEED thread.  by 'davidmc'   (01 Apr 2009 @ 10:14)
David  by 'itpro'   (01 Apr 2009 @ 11:37)
Re: David  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (01 Apr 2009 @ 12:56)
Re: Continued from SAFE SPEED thread.  by 'itpro'   (01 Apr 2009 @ 11:32)
Re: Continued from SAFE SPEED thread.  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (01 Apr 2009 @ 13:06)
This stuff is NOT complex!  by 'itpro'   (01 Apr 2009 @ 15:54)
Re: Still avoiding the simple question itpro/tangl  by 'JohnClucas'   (01 Apr 2009 @ 17:11)
Re: Still avoiding the simple question itpro/tangl  by 'PaulMRotax'   (01 Apr 2009 @ 17:31)
Paul  by 'itpro'   (01 Apr 2009 @ 19:52)
Re: Paul  by 'PaulMRotax'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 8:19)
Re: Paul  by 'itpro'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 10:15)
Re: Paul  by 'PaulMRotax'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 10:22)
Re: Paul  by 'itpro'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 11:23)
Re: Paul  by 'PaulMRotax'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 12:33)
Re: Still avoiding the simple question itpro/tangl  by 'JohnClucas'   (01 Apr 2009 @ 17:41)
-John: still avoid the simple question itpro/tangl  by 'TanglerTKM'   (01 Apr 2009 @ 17:47)
Re: -John: still avoid the simple question itpro/t  by 'JohnClucas'  << You are here!
Re: -John: still avoid the simple question itpro/t  by 'itpro'   (01 Apr 2009 @ 19:54)
Re: -John: still avoid the simple question itpro/t  by 'JohnClucas'   (01 Apr 2009 @ 19:59)
Re: -John: still avoid the simple question itpro/t  by 'TanglerTKM'   (01 Apr 2009 @ 22:45)
Re: That just sums it up Tangler!!!!  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 7:56)
Re: That just sums it up Tangler!!!!  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 8:24)
Dan.......  by 'itpro'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 11:17)
Re: Dan.......  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 11:36)
Re: Dan.......  by 'itpro'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 15:07)
Try thinking about it Dan  by 'TanglerTKM'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 18:58)
Re: ARE YOU thinking about it Tangler?  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:24)
Re: ARE YOU thinking about it Tangler?  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:26)
Re: ARE YOU thinking about it Tangler?  by 'itpro'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:39)
Re: ARE YOU thinking about it Tangler?  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:51)
Re: ARE YOU thinking about it Tangler?  by 'itpro'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 20:07)
*sigh*  by 'TanglerTKM'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 20:08)
Re: Excuse me Tangler  by 'JohnClucas'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:26)
Re: Excuse me Tangler  by 'itpro'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 20:16)
Re: Typical ipro - no interest in facts or context  by 'JohnClucas'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 22:29)
Re: Dan.......  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:38)
Re: Dan.......  by 'PaulMRotax'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 12:38)
Re: Dan.......  by 'itpro'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 15:09)
Re: Dan.......  by 'PaulMRotax'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:53)
Re: Dan.......  by 'itpro'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 20:09)
Re: Dan.......  by 'PaulMRotax'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 23:35)
I'll answer YOUR question the first time YOU....  by 'itpro'   (01 Apr 2009 @ 19:50)
Re: I'll answer YOUR question the first time YOU..  by 'JohnClucas'   (01 Apr 2009 @ 20:06)
Re: I'll answer YOUR question the first time YOU..  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (01 Apr 2009 @ 20:35)
where are we with this?  by 'TanglerTKM'   (01 Apr 2009 @ 23:08)
Re: where are we with this?  by 'Booney'   (01 Apr 2009 @ 23:29)
Re: where are we with this?  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 7:40)
Ok...getting somewhere! Booney & Dan  by 'TanglerTKM'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:17)
Re: Now that is real progress Tangler!!!!  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:47)
Re: Now that is real progress Tangler!!!!  by 'TanglerTKM'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 20:13)
Re: Now that is real progress Tangler!!!!  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 20:36)
Re: Now that is real progress Tangler!!!!  by 'TanglerTKM'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 20:57)
Re: Tangler  by 'JohnClucas'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 8:15)
Re: Tangler  by 'itpro'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 11:26)
John  by 'TanglerTKM'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 18:44)
Re: Tangler - well actually YES someone did die  by 'JohnClucas'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:41)
Re: Tangler - well actually YES someone did die  by 'TanglerTKM'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 20:21)
For goodness sake Tangler  by 'JohnClucas'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 22:33)
John  by 'TanglerTKM'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 23:38)
Re: I'll answer YOUR question the first time YOU..  by 'itpro'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 11:10)
Re: I'll answer YOUR question the first time YOU..  by 'JohnClucas'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 11:50)
Re: I'll answer YOUR question the first time YOU..  by 'itpro'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 15:08)
Re: I'll answer YOUR question the first time YOU..  by 'JohnClucas'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:12)
Re: I'll answer YOUR question the first time YOU..  by 'itpro'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 20:30)
Re: Sorry I should have said..  by 'JohnClucas'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:15)
Re: Sorry I should have said..  by 'itpro'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:53)
Re: So answer the question  by 'JohnClucas'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:59)
Re: So answer the question  by 'itpro'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 20:13)
Gentlemen....I suggest you look here......  by 'QuickOldTimer'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 21:08)
Re: Gentlemen....I suggest you look here......  by 'TanglerTKM'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 21:37)
Re: Do be scientific  by 'JohnClucas'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 21:59)
Re: Do be scientific...get it right...  by 'QuickOldTimer'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 22:04)
Re: Do be scientific...get it right...  by 'JohnClucas'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 22:15)
john.....ahem  by 'TanglerTKM'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 23:47)
Re: er Tangler no  by 'JohnClucas'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 12:08)
John....you're arguing against yourself now!  by 'TanglerTKM'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 12:27)
Re: no I'm not!!!  by 'JohnClucas'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 12:51)
Re: no I'm not!!!  by 'TanglerTKM'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 16:00)
Re: Try logic tangler  by 'JohnClucas'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 17:32)
and i thought it was blue.....  by 'Avago'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 12:43)
Re: This stuff is NOT complex!  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (01 Apr 2009 @ 20:49)
Re: This stuff is NOT complex!  by 'itpro'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 11:00)
Re: This stuff is NOT complex!  by 'PaulMRotax'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 12:39)
I really can't understand.....  by 'vic'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 13:01)
Re: Unfortunately vic  by 'JohnClucas'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 17:01)
John will do his BEST to avoid this BUT.....  by 'itpro'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:28)
Re: No he won't, put up or shut up  by 'JohnClucas'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:47)
Re: No he won't, put up or shut up  by 'itpro'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 20:10)
One for the mix  by 'Booney'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 23:24)
Re: One for the mix  by 'TanglerTKM'   (02 Apr 2009 @ 23:55)
Re: One for the mix  by 'PaulMRotax'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 7:59)
Re: One for the mix  by 'TanglerTKM'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 8:59)
Re: One for the mix  by 'PaulMRotax'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 11:17)
Re: One for the mix  by 'TanglerTKM'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 16:10)
Re: One for the mix  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 20:00)
Accidents are NOT accidents because....  by 'Avago'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 12:56)
Re: Accidents are NOT accidents because....  by 'Booney'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 17:33)
Re: Accidents are NOT accidents because....  by 'PaulMRotax'   (04 Apr 2009 @ 14:02)
Re: Unfortunately vic....  by 'vic'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 12:51)
Re: Unfortunately vic....  by 'JohnClucas'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 14:36)
Re: Unfortunately vic....  by 'vic'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 19:37)
Re: Unfortunately vic....  by 'JohnClucas'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 20:12)
Re: Telepathy or what!  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 20:26)
Re: Unfortunately vic....  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 20:21)
Dan & John  by 'TanglerTKM'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 20:56)
Re: And the conclusion...  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 21:29)
The reason speed is made an issue  by 'TanglerTKM'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 21:58)
Re: The reason speed is made an issue  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 22:10)
Re: The reason speed is made an issue  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 22:20)
Re: The reason speed is made an issue  by 'TanglerTKM'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 22:26)
Re: The reason speed is made an issue  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 22:44)
Re: The reason speed is made an issue  by 'TanglerTKM'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 22:22)
Re: The reason speed is made an issue  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 22:47)
Re: The reason speed is made an issue  by 'JohnClucas'   (04 Apr 2009 @ 19:38)
Re: Tangler  by 'JohnClucas'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 21:37)
Re: Tangler  by 'TanglerTKM'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 22:05)
Re: Tangler  by 'JohnClucas'   (04 Apr 2009 @ 12:42)
Re:Enforce the things that matter  by 'QuickOldTimer'   (04 Apr 2009 @ 14:19)
Re:Enforce the things that matter  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (05 Apr 2009 @ 0:01)
Re:Enforce the things that matter  by 'TanglerTKM'   (05 Apr 2009 @ 8:57)
Re:Enforce the things that matter  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (05 Apr 2009 @ 13:21)
Re:Enforce the things that matter  by 'QuickOldTimer'   (05 Apr 2009 @ 17:47)
Re:Enforce the things that matter  by 'TanglerTKM'   (05 Apr 2009 @ 18:38)
Re:Enforce the things that matter  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (05 Apr 2009 @ 20:05)
Re:Enforce the things that matter  by 'JohnClucas'   (05 Apr 2009 @ 21:28)
Re:Enforce the things that matter  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (06 Apr 2009 @ 7:24)
Re: and what about consistency in punishment  by 'JohnClucas'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 20:47)
Re: This stuff is NOT complex!  by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 20:37)
Re: This stuff is NOT complex!  by 'DevonHawker'   (03 Apr 2009 @ 20:48)

Post a Reply:
You may post a direct reply to this message which will appear in this thread.
To post a new or unrelated message use This Form.
Reply To "Re: -John: still avoid the simple question itpro/t"
Email Address :   Not Registered? Click Here to register...
Password :   Passwords are Case Sensitive!   [ Password Lookup ]
Message Title / Subject :
Message :
Options : Subscribe to this thread?   [ More Information ]

Top of Page
Notice Board Index

[ UK Karting Main Index ]


News Karts and Karting Notice Board Market Place Companies Directory Tracks Directory Events Calendar Race Results Photo Gallery Links
News Karts &
Karting
Notice
Board
Market
Place
Companies
Directory
Tracks
Directory
Events
Calendar
Race
Results
Photo
Gallery
Links

UK Karting

Copyright © 1996-2018 UK Karting
Comments, Suggestions etc. mail@karting.co.uk