Brunstrom is a twat

Which, roughly translated, means "You haven't".

 

Okay then, I'm asking you what you consider "appropriately" to mean in
this context. Everyone will have their own idea of what is
appropriate to any given situation.

 

And he's off on his famous denial game...

Oy Brim, better if you just shut the **** up then you wouldn't have to
run around denying everything you've ever said.

 

Made it up, like you do? You're quite an accomplished liar.

 

Exactly, whatever is appropriate to the conditions one is meeting en route.

 

Aww bless, you're such a sore loser.

 

And the roundabout continues...

 

Quite. There will never be agreement on what is "appropriate" because
everyone's method of doing thigs and their levels of ability are different.

 

... Brimstone wishes at all costs to be in a situation where he can be
judged to have made a falsifiable statement.

 

Any chance you could bin the redundant "!" from your sig? You remind me of
a 1960's Ty-Phoo tea advert.

 

Do you actually *know* this? I only ask because none of the reports I have
read refer to the exact conditions (if any) the journalists were required to
sign up to. You either know someone involved, or you're making it up.

Yesterday, it was just "speeding". Today, it's "reckless speeding".
Closer.

Get rid of that "!", there's a good chap.

 

I can just hear Lady Bracknell deliver that line.

 

Well, no. The first two quotations refer to the same idea. Yours is
neither relevant nor is it by Confucius.

 

Oooh! Toss! Toss! Foul Language! Stop him, someone. I'm going to
cunting bastard well faint.

 

So it's rather pointless to state that people should behave
appropriately, as they probably believe that they are doing so, unless
you mean "appropriately" by your standards, in which case you should
make that clear.

 

Wasn't the driver of the Astra seriously injured? And even if he wasn't,
having the headless torso of a biker hanging in through your windscreen
while you wait for the ambulance can hardly have been fun. You can't say
the accident had no consequences for anyone other than the rider.

 

Just because everyone's definition is different doesn't mean the result will
be. Those who drive approporiately will get where they're going in one piece
and they won't have inconvenienced anyone else unduly. (Unduly means causing
a collision or near collision).

 

No, "unduly" means without due cause, unnecessarily. With the power
available from a reasonably modern motorcycle, a skilled rider can
comfortably exceed arbitrary speed limits over a considerable distance
without ever being likely to cause a collision or near collision or
otherwise inconveniencing any other road user.

I'm not saying that's me, by the way. I know my limits.

 

That's the dictionary definition, I was defining it in the context of my
usage with which you don't appear to disagree.

The machine is irrelevant. It's the user's attitude which is important. But
I agree with your general argument.

Quite. We all screw it up from time to time. The dangerous people are those
who fail to accept that they make mistakes.

 

Rich B () gurgled happily,
sounding much like they were saying :

Couldn't find anything saying he was, so I may have leapt to a conclusion.
If so, my apologies.