Disqus - Latest Comments for indefensible

Re: http://indefensible.me/post/25556769845

indefensible — Thu, 21 Jun 2012 10:03:08 -0000

Maaaaaaaybe

Re: http://aimee-b-loved.tumblr.com/post/10189971823

indefensible — Tue, 13 Sep 2011 23:16:53 -0000

THIS IS AWESOME. I LIKE YELLING.

Re: http://indefensible.me/post/9228102467

indefensible — Sun, 21 Aug 2011 22:18:58 -0000

That's good advice, Denis. I needed that today. So thank you.

Re: http://indefensible.me/post/8644349614

indefensible — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 23:56:25 -0000

Yes ma'am. Staying for a few days in fact. We canned the drive for various reasons. I've emailed Ash Wells about our dates. Look forward to catching up.

Re: http://indefensible.me/post/7816317002

indefensible — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 21:55:06 -0000

Hah, did she?

Re: http://indefensible.me/post/6541599301

indefensible — Wed, 15 Jun 2011 03:20:26 -0000

Awesome. Thanks man.

Re: http://indefensible.me/post/6303575750

indefensible — Thu, 09 Jun 2011 04:00:27 -0000

You're right, Dikkii. I never even considered that, and it *is* galling.

Re: http://chipotle.tumblr.com/post/6039510444

indefensible — Mon, 06 Jun 2011 23:21:51 -0000

Rockford Files is on Netflix? BEST NEWS OF THE DAY.

Re: http://dontmakelists.com/post/6115938506

indefensible — Sun, 05 Jun 2011 23:59:31 -0000

So good. The singer is now in a band called King Biscuit Time. They are also great.

Re: http://indefensible.me/post/6032216551

indefensible — Tue, 31 May 2011 09:07:15 -0000

No way. Woe is me.

Re: http://www.thetenssf.com/post/5858800409

indefensible — Thu, 26 May 2011 19:37:52 -0000

Seriously love this photo. Any chance you might let me get a print made? Happy to pay. If you're interested, my name at gmail.

Thanks!

Re: http://indefensible.me/post/5433557219

indefensible — Wed, 18 May 2011 22:08:35 -0000

Touché

Re: http://indefensible.me/post/5433557219

indefensible — Wed, 18 May 2011 20:45:39 -0000

Huh. I wasn't suggesting there was an international dialogue. I was commenting on something you might not have seen where people were talking about placement of commas, and all the Americans were saying their way was the best. We've been doing it the other way for, as I said, hundreds of years.

Re: http://indefensible.me/post/5433557219

indefensible — Wed, 18 May 2011 20:43:47 -0000

Because they're insane and only the US, Myanmar and Liberia use them.

Re: http://indefensible.me/post/5433557219

indefensible — Mon, 16 May 2011 00:24:38 -0000

Quotation marks have been in very common usage since the mid 18th century, and in fact have been used since the 16th century.

Re: http://indefensible.me/post/4078067486

indefensible — Fri, 25 Mar 2011 02:31:05 -0000

Answering other people's questions, dummy.

Re: http://indefensible.me/post/4075551574

indefensible — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 23:15:53 -0000

Hah. Fair enough. When I'm at a low ebb, I've been known to buy Men's Health, which is the most insidious shit ever. I used to work on a magazine with the guy who started the Australian edition. Their covers always follow a singular narrative:
Do THIS exercise, then you'll look like THIS, and then you'll have THIS kind of mindblowing sex that you're currently not having.

Re: http://therealkatiewest.tumblr.com/post/3933608748

indefensible — Sun, 20 Mar 2011 21:40:27 -0000

That caption is magnificent.

Re: http://indefensible.me/post/3225048635

indefensible — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 22:26:25 -0000

Not at all. I was just saying why 'he' rides a bike. Anyway, I walk these days instead of cycling. Much more pleasant activity.

Re: http://indefensible.me/post/3225048635

indefensible — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 18:23:34 -0000

Actually, my first foray into this 'debate' was posting an article on my blog. The self-same blog you're currently venting your spleen into, actually.

Is "I'm a High School teacher" some kind of internet dick-measuring thing I'm unaware of? It's certainly got me thinking about my life. If only I'd done much worse at school and had fewer choices then perhaps I too could have taught children how to not bother with capitalisation or punctuation.

Explains why you ride a bike though.

Re: http://indefensible.me/post/3225048635

indefensible — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 17:39:09 -0000

Would you like a medal, or a chest on which you could pin one? I volunteer hundreds of hours a year to a cycling safety organisation. Can I have a hug too?

Re: http://indefensible.me/post/3225048635

indefensible — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 17:38:09 -0000

Gram: Ronan has a Google news alert set up for his name, finds my rather innocuous post, gets his panties in a wad, posts on my tumblr and then attempts to find out my personal details through my friends and I'm the one who needs a greater purpose in life?

Righty-o then.

Re: http://indefensible.me/post/3225048635

indefensible — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 01:53:09 -0000

"Transport planning 101", eh? Charm like that, and a highly sought-after degree too! You must get laid like billy-o!

Simply put, I disagree with your analysis, and think you have ascribed a value of zero to the utility of the park for people who do not wish to use it as a cycling (or indeed pedestrian) thoroughfare.

I hope your campaign is an abject failure, and I suspect that with people like you and Ronan at the vanguard I need not worry about the laws changing at any time soon.

Re: http://indefensible.me/post/3225048635

indefensible — Wed, 23 Feb 2011 17:55:42 -0000

Cyclists and Pedestrians mix safely (according to one rather new school of road safety thought) where there is a complete absence of grade separation and mode separation. In these cases, it's also been shown that cars mix safely too. In such a situation the absence of grade and speed separation generally means that everyone limits their speeds to less than 20 km/h. If you think we can limit all speeds through Carlton Gardens to this speed, and punish those who break this speed, I'm all for it. Also, please provide a remedy infrastructure for pedestrians who are injured by cyclists (who, when they ride on places other than roads are not covered by TAC, and are therefore uninsured). Then we're golden.

Re: http://indefensible.me/post/3225048635

indefensible — Wed, 23 Feb 2011 17:16:03 -0000

Ok I'll give you a serious response. A key tenet of transport safety is the separation of modes, especially modes of different speeds and agility. This is why we have seen the creation of cycle paths over the past 20 years, and also why we see the relatively new creation of cycle paths that are physically separated from cars by concrete or by parked vehicles.

It's obvious to all that pedestrians are the mode of transport most likely to be injured in any accident, so we give the utmost primacy in safety terms. We do not let them walk on the road. If they do, they may be fined. We create footpaths on which cars may not travel and grade separate them so that it is obvious where the safety lines are demarcated.

We are also finally starting to do this with cyclists, as mentioned above. This is a good thing, as cyclists need to be separated from car and motorcycle traffic for safety reasons.

Carlton Gardens, which I believe is the park you most wish to be able to ride through, is surrounded by cycle paths. Additionally there is a thoroughfare east to west through which cyclists may travel. Allowing cyclists into the pedestrian haven of Carlton Gardens would save very little time for cyclists on their commute, while making the park unsafe for the people for whom it was designed.

The utility of a park is that it's a place of tranquility and separation from danger. Adding medium and high velocity cyclists to the mix reduces this utility for very little benefit.

When I commuted by car, cyclists were an annoyance, and cycle paths and infringement of my right to travel unfettered. Then I began to cycle, and I understood the utility of cycle paths. When I cycled, I wished I could simply ride on footpaths or through the public gardens (including Carlton Gardens, so I understand why you want to do this). Now that I walk, I appreciate the separation from cyclists (I was clipped by one last week while walking on a shared bike/footpath) when it is available. I hope that this separation continues.

Perhaps you could try walking, and see what it's like.