Comments (22)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:32am Sat 18 Jan 14

Stevie D says...

Because 35,000 people were either not paying any attention to the big, clear yellow-backed road signs in front of them because the only instruction they need comes from their all-knowing sat-nav, or because they didn't believe the bit about the camera and thought they could break the law with impunity.

Neither is an admirable trait.
Because 35,000 people were either not paying any attention to the big, clear yellow-backed road signs in front of them because the only instruction they need comes from their all-knowing sat-nav, or because they didn't believe the bit about the camera and thought they could break the law with impunity. Neither is an admirable trait. Stevie D
  • Score: 79

12:59pm Sat 18 Jan 14

ColdAsChristmas says...

I don't believe the inventors of this scam, Alexander, Merrett and co are capable of understanding logic.
Is it logical to have visitors vow never to return to York or add mileage and time to necessary travel for drivers? And in a city with a few bridges, necessary to cross the river, is it logical to expect all visitors, some first time, to know which one is Lendal Bridge? And if they discover it is this bridge in question at the last moment, where is their opportunity to turn around?

Is it logical to call this so called trial a scam? You bet it is!
I don't believe the inventors of this scam, Alexander, Merrett and co are capable of understanding logic. Is it logical to have visitors vow never to return to York or add mileage and time to necessary travel for drivers? And in a city with a few bridges, necessary to cross the river, is it logical to expect all visitors, some first time, to know which one is Lendal Bridge? And if they discover it is this bridge in question at the last moment, where is their opportunity to turn around? Is it logical to call this so called trial a scam? You bet it is! ColdAsChristmas
  • Score: -87

1:54pm Sat 18 Jan 14

CaroleBaines says...

Because its a little confusing. If you don't know where Lendal Bridge is etc etc. Also by the time you get to the signs you are almost upon the bridge. Plus restricted access is a vague term.
But whatever - 40,000 tells you that something is wrong. Council needs to be careful - there are other Councils which have had to return fines because of this sort of debacle - I think Shrewsbury was one.
Because its a little confusing. If you don't know where Lendal Bridge is etc etc. Also by the time you get to the signs you are almost upon the bridge. Plus restricted access is a vague term. But whatever - 40,000 tells you that something is wrong. Council needs to be careful - there are other Councils which have had to return fines because of this sort of debacle - I think Shrewsbury was one. CaroleBaines
  • Score: -75

2:23pm Sat 18 Jan 14

mjgyork says...

Why when I cycle to work at night, do motorists drive at me at the Bootham crossroads (at least once a week) completely ignoring the big red light in front of them? Why, when I set off do I have to dodge cars coming from Gillygate, often cutting the corner and likewise ignoring the stop light? Same reasons. They get in the wrong lane and knowing there are no Police about think "What the Hell!" I think that the phrase we are looking for is: "UNDUE CARE AND ATTENTION." For which they certainly do deserve a fine, tourist or not.
Why when I cycle to work at night, do motorists drive at me at the Bootham crossroads (at least once a week) completely ignoring the big red light in front of them? Why, when I set off do I have to dodge cars coming from Gillygate, often cutting the corner and likewise ignoring the stop light? Same reasons. They get in the wrong lane and knowing there are no Police about think "What the Hell!" I think that the phrase we are looking for is: "UNDUE CARE AND ATTENTION." For which they certainly do deserve a fine, tourist or not. mjgyork
  • Score: -116

2:36pm Sat 18 Jan 14

Pinza-C55 says...

CaroleBaines wrote:
Because its a little confusing. If you don't know where Lendal Bridge is etc etc. Also by the time you get to the signs you are almost upon the bridge. Plus restricted access is a vague term.
But whatever - 40,000 tells you that something is wrong. Council needs to be careful - there are other Councils which have had to return fines because of this sort of debacle - I think Shrewsbury was one.
You sound like a caring person Carole so the solution is in your hands and the hands of all other people who are upset by this. Get yourself a flask of your favourite beverage and some sandwiches and do a bit of voluntary work by standing at one end of the bridge warning people about the restrictions. Then use the reputation you amass to run for councillor - people would vote for you in droves and you could reverse this policy.
[quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: Because its a little confusing. If you don't know where Lendal Bridge is etc etc. Also by the time you get to the signs you are almost upon the bridge. Plus restricted access is a vague term. But whatever - 40,000 tells you that something is wrong. Council needs to be careful - there are other Councils which have had to return fines because of this sort of debacle - I think Shrewsbury was one.[/p][/quote]You sound like a caring person Carole so the solution is in your hands and the hands of all other people who are upset by this. Get yourself a flask of your favourite beverage and some sandwiches and do a bit of voluntary work by standing at one end of the bridge warning people about the restrictions. Then use the reputation you amass to run for councillor - people would vote for you in droves and you could reverse this policy. Pinza-C55
  • Score: -92

3:42pm Sat 18 Jan 14

strangebuttrue? says...

I see the vote riggers have already been here. The plus scores and negatives have been changed in the last 20 mins to reflect the arguments of those who have no argument but have dogma driven ideals.
I see the vote riggers have already been here. The plus scores and negatives have been changed in the last 20 mins to reflect the arguments of those who have no argument but have dogma driven ideals. strangebuttrue?
  • Score: -82

4:12pm Sat 18 Jan 14

Rocking Horse says...

strangebuttrue? wrote:
I see the vote riggers have already been here. The plus scores and negatives have been changed in the last 20 mins to reflect the arguments of those who have no argument but have dogma driven ideals.
RE: Score Hacking

If comments are massively critical of councillors, eg 'vote them out', 'muppets' etc, the council/Labour score hacker gives these >-500

If comments are by me, and I call them 'marxists' and 'subversives' scores are >-100

If comments are like those above, they are subtly adjusted from positive to low negative scores, to give the impression that they are realistic.

EVERYONE knows that the Council, Labour (in York) and their policies (like Lendal Bridge, 20mph, Kings Square, Local Plan, gagging etc) are massively unpopular, which the majority of comments are critical of. The apologists are also obvious and well known. The hacking just hacks us all off even more, and shows us how deceitful and corrupt this totalitarian, arrogant regime has become.

Come 2015, we all know who we will be voting for - ANYONE BUT LABOUR !!!
[quote][p][bold]strangebuttrue?[/bold] wrote: I see the vote riggers have already been here. The plus scores and negatives have been changed in the last 20 mins to reflect the arguments of those who have no argument but have dogma driven ideals.[/p][/quote]RE: Score Hacking If comments are massively critical of councillors, eg 'vote them out', 'muppets' etc, the council/Labour score hacker gives these >-500 If comments are by me, and I call them 'marxists' and 'subversives' scores are >-100 If comments are like those above, they are subtly adjusted from positive to low negative scores, to give the impression that they are realistic. EVERYONE knows that the Council, Labour (in York) and their policies (like Lendal Bridge, 20mph, Kings Square, Local Plan, gagging etc) are massively unpopular, which the majority of comments are critical of. The apologists are also obvious and well known. The hacking just hacks us all off even more, and shows us how deceitful and corrupt this totalitarian, arrogant regime has become. Come 2015, we all know who we will be voting for - ANYONE BUT LABOUR !!! Rocking Horse
  • Score: -73

5:04pm Sat 18 Jan 14

Jonthan says...

CaroleBaines wrote:
Because its a little confusing. If you don't know where Lendal Bridge is etc etc. Also by the time you get to the signs you are almost upon the bridge. Plus restricted access is a vague term.
But whatever - 40,000 tells you that something is wrong. Council needs to be careful - there are other Councils which have had to return fines because of this sort of debacle - I think Shrewsbury was one.
No, that is not the case.There are plenty of signs before the bridge on all routes. For example if you are driving from Heworth the first sign you will see is a large AA sign on Monkgate, opposite the Tap and Spile pub. Next one is at the botton on GillyGate at the junction with Bootham. The third is at the Theatre Royal (though there is sometimes a bus blocking the view) and the fourth and fifth are at the bridge, very large letters painted on the ground and again on a lampost at the junction with Lendal. (I think there is also one at the end og Lord Mayors walk, so that would make a total of six)
Unfortunately people ignore signs, but it is a fundemental requirement that you read them, and if you do not do so on your driving test you will fail, and rightly so.
The Council has checked and confirms that the signage has been approved as correct by the appropriate authority.
[quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: Because its a little confusing. If you don't know where Lendal Bridge is etc etc. Also by the time you get to the signs you are almost upon the bridge. Plus restricted access is a vague term. But whatever - 40,000 tells you that something is wrong. Council needs to be careful - there are other Councils which have had to return fines because of this sort of debacle - I think Shrewsbury was one.[/p][/quote]No, that is not the case.There are plenty of signs before the bridge on all routes. For example if you are driving from Heworth the first sign you will see is a large AA sign on Monkgate, opposite the Tap and Spile pub. Next one is at the botton on GillyGate at the junction with Bootham. The third is at the Theatre Royal (though there is sometimes a bus blocking the view) and the fourth and fifth are at the bridge, very large letters painted on the ground and again on a lampost at the junction with Lendal. (I think there is also one at the end og Lord Mayors walk, so that would make a total of six) Unfortunately people ignore signs, but it is a fundemental requirement that you read them, and if you do not do so on your driving test you will fail, and rightly so. The Council has checked and confirms that the signage has been approved as correct by the appropriate authority. Jonthan
  • Score: 9

5:30pm Sat 18 Jan 14

Sillybillies says...

mjgyork wrote:
Why when I cycle to work at night, do motorists drive at me at the Bootham crossroads (at least once a week) completely ignoring the big red light in front of them? Why, when I set off do I have to dodge cars coming from Gillygate, often cutting the corner and likewise ignoring the stop light? Same reasons. They get in the wrong lane and knowing there are no Police about think "What the Hell!" I think that the phrase we are looking for is: "UNDUE CARE AND ATTENTION." For which they certainly do deserve a fine, tourist or not.
You are on unsafe grounds as a cyclist having a go at motorists -

....... Research by the Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM) shows that nearly six out of ten (57 per cent) cyclists admit to running red lights, with 14 per cent doing so regularly or sometimes. A quarter (24.9 per cent) say they do so ‘rarely’ and one in five (19.1 per cent) doing so ‘once or twice.’ Nearly three quarters(73 per cent) of cyclists admit to riding on the pavement.
A YouGov poll revealed that almost a quarter (24 per cent) of cyclists think it is acceptable to go through a red light if they can see the way ahead is clear. Nearly one in five (18 per cent) said they had jumped a traffic light in the past six months.
More than 60 per cent of people polled — including non-cyclists — said they thought it was common for cyclists to run a red light. Some 78 per cent said they should be prosecuted for such an offence......


http://www.dailymail
.co.uk/news/article-
2541739/More-11-000-
cyclists-caught-runn
ing-red-lights-ridin
g-pavements-just-one
-year.html
[quote][p][bold]mjgyork[/bold] wrote: Why when I cycle to work at night, do motorists drive at me at the Bootham crossroads (at least once a week) completely ignoring the big red light in front of them? Why, when I set off do I have to dodge cars coming from Gillygate, often cutting the corner and likewise ignoring the stop light? Same reasons. They get in the wrong lane and knowing there are no Police about think "What the Hell!" I think that the phrase we are looking for is: "UNDUE CARE AND ATTENTION." For which they certainly do deserve a fine, tourist or not.[/p][/quote]You are on unsafe grounds as a cyclist having a go at motorists - [quote]....... Research by the Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM) shows that nearly six out of ten (57 per cent) cyclists admit to running red lights, with 14 per cent doing so regularly or sometimes. A quarter (24.9 per cent) say they do so ‘rarely’ and one in five (19.1 per cent) doing so ‘once or twice.’ Nearly three quarters(73 per cent) of cyclists admit to riding on the pavement. A YouGov poll revealed that almost a quarter (24 per cent) of cyclists think it is acceptable to go through a red light if they can see the way ahead is clear. Nearly one in five (18 per cent) said they had jumped a traffic light in the past six months. More than 60 per cent of people polled — including non-cyclists — said they thought it was common for cyclists to run a red light. Some 78 per cent said they should be prosecuted for such an offence...... [/quote] http://www.dailymail .co.uk/news/article- 2541739/More-11-000- cyclists-caught-runn ing-red-lights-ridin g-pavements-just-one -year.html Sillybillies
  • Score: -78

6:52pm Sat 18 Jan 14

CaroleBaines says...

Jonthan wrote:
CaroleBaines wrote:
Because its a little confusing. If you don't know where Lendal Bridge is etc etc. Also by the time you get to the signs you are almost upon the bridge. Plus restricted access is a vague term.
But whatever - 40,000 tells you that something is wrong. Council needs to be careful - there are other Councils which have had to return fines because of this sort of debacle - I think Shrewsbury was one.
No, that is not the case.There are plenty of signs before the bridge on all routes. For example if you are driving from Heworth the first sign you will see is a large AA sign on Monkgate, opposite the Tap and Spile pub. Next one is at the botton on GillyGate at the junction with Bootham. The third is at the Theatre Royal (though there is sometimes a bus blocking the view) and the fourth and fifth are at the bridge, very large letters painted on the ground and again on a lampost at the junction with Lendal. (I think there is also one at the end og Lord Mayors walk, so that would make a total of six)
Unfortunately people ignore signs, but it is a fundemental requirement that you read them, and if you do not do so on your driving test you will fail, and rightly so.
The Council has checked and confirms that the signage has been approved as correct by the appropriate authority.
40,000 would say you were mistaken. That is a lot of 'errors'.
[quote][p][bold]Jonthan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: Because its a little confusing. If you don't know where Lendal Bridge is etc etc. Also by the time you get to the signs you are almost upon the bridge. Plus restricted access is a vague term. But whatever - 40,000 tells you that something is wrong. Council needs to be careful - there are other Councils which have had to return fines because of this sort of debacle - I think Shrewsbury was one.[/p][/quote]No, that is not the case.There are plenty of signs before the bridge on all routes. For example if you are driving from Heworth the first sign you will see is a large AA sign on Monkgate, opposite the Tap and Spile pub. Next one is at the botton on GillyGate at the junction with Bootham. The third is at the Theatre Royal (though there is sometimes a bus blocking the view) and the fourth and fifth are at the bridge, very large letters painted on the ground and again on a lampost at the junction with Lendal. (I think there is also one at the end og Lord Mayors walk, so that would make a total of six) Unfortunately people ignore signs, but it is a fundemental requirement that you read them, and if you do not do so on your driving test you will fail, and rightly so. The Council has checked and confirms that the signage has been approved as correct by the appropriate authority.[/p][/quote]40,000 would say you were mistaken. That is a lot of 'errors'. CaroleBaines
  • Score: -83

8:07pm Sat 18 Jan 14

ColdAsChristmas says...

Rocking Horse, don't forget anything that questions the Green agenda will also be voted down big style, by those who have been brainwashed with too much time on their hands!
Rocking Horse, don't forget anything that questions the Green agenda will also be voted down big style, by those who have been brainwashed with too much time on their hands! ColdAsChristmas
  • Score: -79

8:15pm Sat 18 Jan 14

Pinza-C55 says...

CaroleBaines wrote:
Jonthan wrote:
CaroleBaines wrote:
Because its a little confusing. If you don't know where Lendal Bridge is etc etc. Also by the time you get to the signs you are almost upon the bridge. Plus restricted access is a vague term.
But whatever - 40,000 tells you that something is wrong. Council needs to be careful - there are other Councils which have had to return fines because of this sort of debacle - I think Shrewsbury was one.
No, that is not the case.There are plenty of signs before the bridge on all routes. For example if you are driving from Heworth the first sign you will see is a large AA sign on Monkgate, opposite the Tap and Spile pub. Next one is at the botton on GillyGate at the junction with Bootham. The third is at the Theatre Royal (though there is sometimes a bus blocking the view) and the fourth and fifth are at the bridge, very large letters painted on the ground and again on a lampost at the junction with Lendal. (I think there is also one at the end og Lord Mayors walk, so that would make a total of six)
Unfortunately people ignore signs, but it is a fundemental requirement that you read them, and if you do not do so on your driving test you will fail, and rightly so.
The Council has checked and confirms that the signage has been approved as correct by the appropriate authority.
40,000 would say you were mistaken. That is a lot of 'errors'.
That is known as "Argumentum Ad Populum" ie "So many people do or think this it must be right".
[quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jonthan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: Because its a little confusing. If you don't know where Lendal Bridge is etc etc. Also by the time you get to the signs you are almost upon the bridge. Plus restricted access is a vague term. But whatever - 40,000 tells you that something is wrong. Council needs to be careful - there are other Councils which have had to return fines because of this sort of debacle - I think Shrewsbury was one.[/p][/quote]No, that is not the case.There are plenty of signs before the bridge on all routes. For example if you are driving from Heworth the first sign you will see is a large AA sign on Monkgate, opposite the Tap and Spile pub. Next one is at the botton on GillyGate at the junction with Bootham. The third is at the Theatre Royal (though there is sometimes a bus blocking the view) and the fourth and fifth are at the bridge, very large letters painted on the ground and again on a lampost at the junction with Lendal. (I think there is also one at the end og Lord Mayors walk, so that would make a total of six) Unfortunately people ignore signs, but it is a fundemental requirement that you read them, and if you do not do so on your driving test you will fail, and rightly so. The Council has checked and confirms that the signage has been approved as correct by the appropriate authority.[/p][/quote]40,000 would say you were mistaken. That is a lot of 'errors'.[/p][/quote]That is known as "Argumentum Ad Populum" ie "So many people do or think this it must be right". Pinza-C55
  • Score: 7

10:53pm Sat 18 Jan 14

Igiveinthen says...

Sillybillies wrote:
mjgyork wrote:
Why when I cycle to work at night, do motorists drive at me at the Bootham crossroads (at least once a week) completely ignoring the big red light in front of them? Why, when I set off do I have to dodge cars coming from Gillygate, often cutting the corner and likewise ignoring the stop light? Same reasons. They get in the wrong lane and knowing there are no Police about think "What the Hell!" I think that the phrase we are looking for is: "UNDUE CARE AND ATTENTION." For which they certainly do deserve a fine, tourist or not.
You are on unsafe grounds as a cyclist having a go at motorists -

....... Research by the Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM) shows that nearly six out of ten (57 per cent) cyclists admit to running red lights, with 14 per cent doing so regularly or sometimes. A quarter (24.9 per cent) say they do so ‘rarely’ and one in five (19.1 per cent) doing so ‘once or twice.’ Nearly three quarters(73 per cent) of cyclists admit to riding on the pavement.
A YouGov poll revealed that almost a quarter (24 per cent) of cyclists think it is acceptable to go through a red light if they can see the way ahead is clear. Nearly one in five (18 per cent) said they had jumped a traffic light in the past six months.
More than 60 per cent of people polled — including non-cyclists — said they thought it was common for cyclists to run a red light. Some 78 per cent said they should be prosecuted for such an offence......


http://www.dailymail

.co.uk/news/article-

2541739/More-11-000-

cyclists-caught-runn

ing-red-lights-ridin

g-pavements-just-one

-year.html
Oops! mjgyork, is that what they 'putting ones foot init' or 'scoring an own goal' or 'people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones' the euphemisms are endless, nice one Sillybillies.
[quote][p][bold]Sillybillies[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mjgyork[/bold] wrote: Why when I cycle to work at night, do motorists drive at me at the Bootham crossroads (at least once a week) completely ignoring the big red light in front of them? Why, when I set off do I have to dodge cars coming from Gillygate, often cutting the corner and likewise ignoring the stop light? Same reasons. They get in the wrong lane and knowing there are no Police about think "What the Hell!" I think that the phrase we are looking for is: "UNDUE CARE AND ATTENTION." For which they certainly do deserve a fine, tourist or not.[/p][/quote]You are on unsafe grounds as a cyclist having a go at motorists - [quote]....... Research by the Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM) shows that nearly six out of ten (57 per cent) cyclists admit to running red lights, with 14 per cent doing so regularly or sometimes. A quarter (24.9 per cent) say they do so ‘rarely’ and one in five (19.1 per cent) doing so ‘once or twice.’ Nearly three quarters(73 per cent) of cyclists admit to riding on the pavement. A YouGov poll revealed that almost a quarter (24 per cent) of cyclists think it is acceptable to go through a red light if they can see the way ahead is clear. Nearly one in five (18 per cent) said they had jumped a traffic light in the past six months. More than 60 per cent of people polled — including non-cyclists — said they thought it was common for cyclists to run a red light. Some 78 per cent said they should be prosecuted for such an offence...... [/quote] http://www.dailymail .co.uk/news/article- 2541739/More-11-000- cyclists-caught-runn ing-red-lights-ridin g-pavements-just-one -year.html[/p][/quote]Oops! mjgyork, is that what they 'putting ones foot init' or 'scoring an own goal' or 'people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones' the euphemisms are endless, nice one Sillybillies. Igiveinthen
  • Score: 81

11:30pm Sat 18 Jan 14

PKH says...

Jonthan wrote:
CaroleBaines wrote:
Because its a little confusing. If you don't know where Lendal Bridge is etc etc. Also by the time you get to the signs you are almost upon the bridge. Plus restricted access is a vague term.
But whatever - 40,000 tells you that something is wrong. Council needs to be careful - there are other Councils which have had to return fines because of this sort of debacle - I think Shrewsbury was one.
No, that is not the case.There are plenty of signs before the bridge on all routes. For example if you are driving from Heworth the first sign you will see is a large AA sign on Monkgate, opposite the Tap and Spile pub. Next one is at the botton on GillyGate at the junction with Bootham. The third is at the Theatre Royal (though there is sometimes a bus blocking the view) and the fourth and fifth are at the bridge, very large letters painted on the ground and again on a lampost at the junction with Lendal. (I think there is also one at the end og Lord Mayors walk, so that would make a total of six)
Unfortunately people ignore signs, but it is a fundemental requirement that you read them, and if you do not do so on your driving test you will fail, and rightly so.
The Council has checked and confirms that the signage has been approved as correct by the appropriate authority.
Drive up Heworth Green/Monkgate the Inner Ring Road signs directs drivers towards Lendal Bridge, also the councils visitor maps show Lendal Bridge as part of the Inner Ring Road and do not show any restrictions. Visitors do not know which bridge is Lendal Bridge so do not understand any early signs. Coming from the Gillygate direction they will only become aware which bridge Lendal Bridge is once they are pretty close and as there is no obvious point to turn round feel they no option but to proceed across the bridge. The signs you refer to mean absolutely nothing if you do not know the names of the bridges in York which most visitors won't.
[quote][p][bold]Jonthan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: Because its a little confusing. If you don't know where Lendal Bridge is etc etc. Also by the time you get to the signs you are almost upon the bridge. Plus restricted access is a vague term. But whatever - 40,000 tells you that something is wrong. Council needs to be careful - there are other Councils which have had to return fines because of this sort of debacle - I think Shrewsbury was one.[/p][/quote]No, that is not the case.There are plenty of signs before the bridge on all routes. For example if you are driving from Heworth the first sign you will see is a large AA sign on Monkgate, opposite the Tap and Spile pub. Next one is at the botton on GillyGate at the junction with Bootham. The third is at the Theatre Royal (though there is sometimes a bus blocking the view) and the fourth and fifth are at the bridge, very large letters painted on the ground and again on a lampost at the junction with Lendal. (I think there is also one at the end og Lord Mayors walk, so that would make a total of six) Unfortunately people ignore signs, but it is a fundemental requirement that you read them, and if you do not do so on your driving test you will fail, and rightly so. The Council has checked and confirms that the signage has been approved as correct by the appropriate authority.[/p][/quote]Drive up Heworth Green/Monkgate the Inner Ring Road signs directs drivers towards Lendal Bridge, also the councils visitor maps show Lendal Bridge as part of the Inner Ring Road and do not show any restrictions. Visitors do not know which bridge is Lendal Bridge so do not understand any early signs. Coming from the Gillygate direction they will only become aware which bridge Lendal Bridge is once they are pretty close and as there is no obvious point to turn round feel they no option but to proceed across the bridge. The signs you refer to mean absolutely nothing if you do not know the names of the bridges in York which most visitors won't. PKH
  • Score: 87

2:48am Sun 19 Jan 14

Magicman! says...

Rocking Horse wrote:
strangebuttrue? wrote:
I see the vote riggers have already been here. The plus scores and negatives have been changed in the last 20 mins to reflect the arguments of those who have no argument but have dogma driven ideals.
RE: Score Hacking

If comments are massively critical of councillors, eg 'vote them out', 'muppets' etc, the council/Labour score hacker gives these >-500

If comments are by me, and I call them 'marxists' and 'subversives' scores are >-100

If comments are like those above, they are subtly adjusted from positive to low negative scores, to give the impression that they are realistic.

EVERYONE knows that the Council, Labour (in York) and their policies (like Lendal Bridge, 20mph, Kings Square, Local Plan, gagging etc) are massively unpopular, which the majority of comments are critical of. The apologists are also obvious and well known. The hacking just hacks us all off even more, and shows us how deceitful and corrupt this totalitarian, arrogant regime has become.

Come 2015, we all know who we will be voting for - ANYONE BUT LABOUR !!!
The only reason Lendal Bridge closure is unpopular is because it affectes car drivers, a large (and if you go by the comments on here, selfish) and very vocal group. When Deangate was closed to cyclists to build the ridiculous Minster Plazza, we got 2 letters about it despite the fact it was a route of equal importance as Lendal Bridge - but because it didn't affect car drivers, it got brushed under the carpet, cyclists told to "get off and walk, and put up with it".

I also see Sillybillies has been on with his usual selective tripe. Whilst the main offenses for cyclists are running red lights and riding on pavements, this palls to insignificance compared to the countless Drunk Driving and Speeding offences alone by car drivers; nevermind occupation of bus stops, bus lanes, yellow boxes, incorrect use of roundabouts, poor lane discipline, failure to Tax/Insure/MOT the vehicle, anti-social driving... the list goes on. Plus there's also the fact of numbers: on a given road in York, the likely proportion ratio is 10 cyclists to every 100 motor vehicles (or more) - so if 20% of each category do something illegal, that is 2 cyclists compared to 20 cars... or let's up the anti, let's say that 60% of cyclists break the law compared to 20% of car drivers - it still is only 6 cyclists compared to 20 cars doing something illegal.
And finally, I noted sillybillies quoted from the Daily Wail, the completely unbiased source of everything unquestionaly factual with no hidden agenda whatsoever.... Oh wait, that doesn't sound right. If you're going to quote numbers and 'fats', get them from a reliable source of information:- The Sun, the Daily Star, and the Daily Mail are not reliable sources.
[quote][p][bold]Rocking Horse[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]strangebuttrue?[/bold] wrote: I see the vote riggers have already been here. The plus scores and negatives have been changed in the last 20 mins to reflect the arguments of those who have no argument but have dogma driven ideals.[/p][/quote]RE: Score Hacking If comments are massively critical of councillors, eg 'vote them out', 'muppets' etc, the council/Labour score hacker gives these >-500 If comments are by me, and I call them 'marxists' and 'subversives' scores are >-100 If comments are like those above, they are subtly adjusted from positive to low negative scores, to give the impression that they are realistic. EVERYONE knows that the Council, Labour (in York) and their policies (like Lendal Bridge, 20mph, Kings Square, Local Plan, gagging etc) are massively unpopular, which the majority of comments are critical of. The apologists are also obvious and well known. The hacking just hacks us all off even more, and shows us how deceitful and corrupt this totalitarian, arrogant regime has become. Come 2015, we all know who we will be voting for - ANYONE BUT LABOUR !!![/p][/quote]The only reason Lendal Bridge closure is unpopular is because it affectes car drivers, a large (and if you go by the comments on here, selfish) and very vocal group. When Deangate was closed to cyclists to build the ridiculous Minster Plazza, we got 2 letters about it despite the fact it was a route of equal importance as Lendal Bridge - but because it didn't affect car drivers, it got brushed under the carpet, cyclists told to "get off and walk, and put up with it". I also see Sillybillies has been on with his usual selective tripe. Whilst the main offenses for cyclists are running red lights and riding on pavements, this palls to insignificance compared to the countless Drunk Driving and Speeding offences alone by car drivers; nevermind occupation of bus stops, bus lanes, yellow boxes, incorrect use of roundabouts, poor lane discipline, failure to Tax/Insure/MOT the vehicle, anti-social driving... the list goes on. Plus there's also the fact of numbers: on a given road in York, the likely proportion ratio is 10 cyclists to every 100 motor vehicles (or more) - so if 20% of each category do something illegal, that is 2 cyclists compared to 20 cars... or let's up the anti, let's say that 60% of cyclists break the law compared to 20% of car drivers - it still is only 6 cyclists compared to 20 cars doing something illegal. And finally, I noted sillybillies quoted from the Daily Wail, the completely unbiased source of everything unquestionaly factual with no hidden agenda whatsoever.... Oh wait, that doesn't sound right. If you're going to quote numbers and 'fats', get them from a reliable source of information:- The Sun, the Daily Star, and the Daily Mail are not reliable sources. Magicman!
  • Score: -100

2:49am Sun 19 Jan 14

Magicman! says...

'* facts'
'* facts' Magicman!
  • Score: -105

10:31am Sun 19 Jan 14

CaroleBaines says...

Pinza-C55 wrote:
CaroleBaines wrote:
Because its a little confusing. If you don't know where Lendal Bridge is etc etc. Also by the time you get to the signs you are almost upon the bridge. Plus restricted access is a vague term.
But whatever - 40,000 tells you that something is wrong. Council needs to be careful - there are other Councils which have had to return fines because of this sort of debacle - I think Shrewsbury was one.
You sound like a caring person Carole so the solution is in your hands and the hands of all other people who are upset by this. Get yourself a flask of your favourite beverage and some sandwiches and do a bit of voluntary work by standing at one end of the bridge warning people about the restrictions. Then use the reputation you amass to run for councillor - people would vote for you in droves and you could reverse this policy.
I am way too intelligent to be a councillor. But thanks for your support.
[quote][p][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: Because its a little confusing. If you don't know where Lendal Bridge is etc etc. Also by the time you get to the signs you are almost upon the bridge. Plus restricted access is a vague term. But whatever - 40,000 tells you that something is wrong. Council needs to be careful - there are other Councils which have had to return fines because of this sort of debacle - I think Shrewsbury was one.[/p][/quote]You sound like a caring person Carole so the solution is in your hands and the hands of all other people who are upset by this. Get yourself a flask of your favourite beverage and some sandwiches and do a bit of voluntary work by standing at one end of the bridge warning people about the restrictions. Then use the reputation you amass to run for councillor - people would vote for you in droves and you could reverse this policy.[/p][/quote]I am way too intelligent to be a councillor. But thanks for your support. CaroleBaines
  • Score: 12

9:55am Mon 20 Jan 14

York Fox says...

CaroleBaines wrote:
Pinza-C55 wrote:
CaroleBaines wrote:
Because its a little confusing. If you don't know where Lendal Bridge is etc etc. Also by the time you get to the signs you are almost upon the bridge. Plus restricted access is a vague term.
But whatever - 40,000 tells you that something is wrong. Council needs to be careful - there are other Councils which have had to return fines because of this sort of debacle - I think Shrewsbury was one.
You sound like a caring person Carole so the solution is in your hands and the hands of all other people who are upset by this. Get yourself a flask of your favourite beverage and some sandwiches and do a bit of voluntary work by standing at one end of the bridge warning people about the restrictions. Then use the reputation you amass to run for councillor - people would vote for you in droves and you could reverse this policy.
I am way too intelligent to be a councillor. But thanks for your support.
This is simply not the way to restrict access. I am trying to wrack my brains for another major tourist city with limited road access that arbitrarily closes one of its arteries to some people for some of the time without clarifying a clearly marked and specifically created alternative route.

When you close a route like this the new route should be so clear as to the only logical and practical route. It should be second nature to follow a ring road, not a challenge of reading signs, understanding what the hell Lendal Bridge even is and then trying to work out if it means you, is in effect now, and where the hell you can turn around, all whilst there is traffic behind you.
[quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: Because its a little confusing. If you don't know where Lendal Bridge is etc etc. Also by the time you get to the signs you are almost upon the bridge. Plus restricted access is a vague term. But whatever - 40,000 tells you that something is wrong. Council needs to be careful - there are other Councils which have had to return fines because of this sort of debacle - I think Shrewsbury was one.[/p][/quote]You sound like a caring person Carole so the solution is in your hands and the hands of all other people who are upset by this. Get yourself a flask of your favourite beverage and some sandwiches and do a bit of voluntary work by standing at one end of the bridge warning people about the restrictions. Then use the reputation you amass to run for councillor - people would vote for you in droves and you could reverse this policy.[/p][/quote]I am way too intelligent to be a councillor. But thanks for your support.[/p][/quote]This is simply not the way to restrict access. I am trying to wrack my brains for another major tourist city with limited road access that arbitrarily closes one of its arteries to some people for some of the time without clarifying a clearly marked and specifically created alternative route. When you close a route like this the new route should be so clear as to the only logical and practical route. It should be second nature to follow a ring road, not a challenge of reading signs, understanding what the hell Lendal Bridge even is and then trying to work out if it means you, is in effect now, and where the hell you can turn around, all whilst there is traffic behind you. York Fox
  • Score: 1

10:40am Mon 20 Jan 14

mjgyork says...

Yes, there are cyclists who ignore traffic signals. And no they should not. I also happen to think that cyclists should have some form of insurance. And if the council really wanted to generate income, fining all those who I see riding on the wrong side of the road and without lights would be one way! I would have thought however that the difference between cyclists and motorists is fairly obvious. They are not contained in a 4X4 tank and thus cannot go around with the attitude "Get out of my way, I will do as I please and to hell with you!"
Yes, there are cyclists who ignore traffic signals. And no they should not. I also happen to think that cyclists should have some form of insurance. And if the council really wanted to generate income, fining all those who I see riding on the wrong side of the road and without lights would be one way! I would have thought however that the difference between cyclists and motorists is fairly obvious. They are not contained in a 4X4 tank and thus cannot go around with the attitude "Get out of my way, I will do as I please and to hell with you!" mjgyork
  • Score: 3

9:54pm Mon 20 Jan 14

wolds way says...

Where did all the huge numbers of voters come from all of a sudden in the earlier comments or am I missing something? And all in favour of what generally seems to have been the minority in the past?
Where did all the huge numbers of voters come from all of a sudden in the earlier comments or am I missing something? And all in favour of what generally seems to have been the minority in the past? wolds way
  • Score: -5

11:39pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Pinza-C55 says...

wolds way wrote:
Where did all the huge numbers of voters come from all of a sudden in the earlier comments or am I missing something? And all in favour of what generally seems to have been the minority in the past?
Some idiot who visits this site has a "votebot" or some similar software. Its a cry for attention.
[quote][p][bold]wolds way[/bold] wrote: Where did all the huge numbers of voters come from all of a sudden in the earlier comments or am I missing something? And all in favour of what generally seems to have been the minority in the past?[/p][/quote]Some idiot who visits this site has a "votebot" or some similar software. Its a cry for attention. Pinza-C55
  • Score: -4

9:52pm Tue 21 Jan 14

wolds way says...

And renders useless any statistics that might have been useful in this whole debacle....
And renders useless any statistics that might have been useful in this whole debacle.... wolds way
  • Score: -4

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree