Code: ctzreate
 |
 |
swarb.co.uk
Law discussion forum (UK)
 FAQ  Search
 Memberlist
 Usergroups
 Register
|
 Profile
 Log in to
check your private messages  Log in
|
|
|
INSIGHT!
Entire procedure,misconduct from PCN to Court 28/04
Goto page 1,
2,
3,
4,
5 Next
|
  |
swarb.co.uk Forum Index -> Road Traffic Law |
![]( "Swimmers Site")
 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Tony
Joined: 02 Jul 2006
Posts: 121
|
 Posted:
Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:36 am
Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
Bakedalasker
I reckon I'm in the majority here. I
just ignore his posts for reasons
|
Why
are you back? Just to gripe and snipe, or simply
contradict yourself while ignoring?
On the BoR thread, you will recall our exchange.
| Quote: |
| So from
that I'll let you judge what
camp I'm in. |
HERE
you say.
| Quote: |
| he also
get judgemental |
You
invite me to Judge, and then reprove me for so doing.
Fascinating.
This reminds me of council thinking. You could do well acting for
them you know.
| Quote: |
Woolfy
I have several clients like Tony. They make me want to hang myself. |
Many
people feel like that!
It's your choice
what to do about the feeling! Most solicitors take the money and
repress it.
| Quote: |
salgado
investigations
This reminds me a cross between Master Yoda |
You re-posted almost the entire thread. Are you advertising ME or YOUR
surveillance services?
It reminds me of an encyclopaedia salesman.
| Quote: |
| It's not
that I don't understand it |
Good news, we found someone who understands IT and Yoda too.
_________________
Tony |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bakedalasker
Joined: 06 Nov 2006
Posts: 1067
Location: South France
|
| Posted:
Sat Feb 02, 2008 5:23 am
Post subject: |
|
|
| Tony, it is very clear what people are
saying about your posts. Instead of trying to get one up on everyone
why dont you take in what people are saying about you and do something
about it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dls
Site Admin
Joined: 10 Apr 2005
Posts: 5822
|
| Posted:
Sat Feb 02, 2008 7:26 am
Post subject: |
|
|
Tony,
Please go back to what I said.
If what you want to do is to talk to yourself in public, then you are
succeeding.
If what you want to do is to persuade somebody of something, then, if
they are not hearing, it is never ever their fault. It must be yours.
They can pass by with undisturbed indifference. It is you who wants
something. You want other people to agree with or take in interest in
what you say.
Sadly, the way you express yourself creates a hurdle over which others
would have to jump before they could begin to see whether they agree.
Remove the hurdle, and you might have a chance.
You have some very intelligent, very well educated, very interested and
quite open minded people trying to listen. They cannot hear you.
As we move into days of HDTV, it is as if you are still insisting on
transmitting on 625-line B/W with added bad fog. You may see it as the
reverse, but transmitting HDTV to the owners of 625 line B/W TVs makes
no more sense. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ncmoody
Joined: 02 Oct 2007
Posts: 164
Location: Worcester, England
|
| Posted:
Sat Feb 02, 2008 9:22 am
Post subject: |
|
|
| dls, here, here, very well put. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony
Joined: 02 Jul 2006
Posts: 121
|
| Posted:
Sat Feb 02, 2008 5:55 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
Gentlemen, what is being discussed in the
posts that followed the
complex topic, is in fact very very simple. In subsequent posts the
material NO LONGER is
complex but merely refers to the complexities of the
first post. Thus arguments in the subsequent posts, are boringly simple.
Firstly,
while I am impressed by the
gathering of forces in agreement, I am far from convinced that the
gathering denotes strength of argument or cogency of reasoning, as
opposed to the appetite to group in
order to strengthen the arguments. For MANY years, I have
regarded a majority view as far from represententative of truth; merly
by numbers, where a specialised view is the contrary far closer to it.
I hope that is clear and simple enough. Since you desire I make it
SIMPLE.
Secondly,
I suggest you peruse my last post, and re-examine its crushing simplicity.
I've posted it again; at the end here, as for some who may not have the
strength to go back, or prefer to ignore, overlook and conveniently
forget; because it serves, what they said or wish to reformulate!
Invariably
I used YOUR OWN words. RE-examine my responses to the
fallacious reasoned argument forms you constantly deliver. The longest
word I used, four syllables – 'fascinating' is a simple one
too.
Unlike 'theycantdothat' whose recent contribution denote and shows
clearly he HAS learned circumspection and care how to argue cogently,
you remain grouped together holding hands for strength in numbers
rather than sound reason, that I shall highlight parts of only.
For those who wish to respond, they should READ what is said before so
doing, otherwise faults flow. For those in the know, leave it and
follow your own desires elsewhere is the suggestion.
| Quote: |
Bakedalaska
Tony, it is very clear what people are saying about your posts. Instead
of trying to get one up on everyone why dont you take in what people
are saying about you and do something about it.
|
Clearly to re-iterate, ( Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 7:59 pm)
“your sense pursues not mine” MfM. I gave you the
reference, you OUGHT TO
look it up and read what I left out. It was delivered half
baked for you to fully bake.
I suggest you are more consistent, IF
you practice what you preach. “absent thee from
felicity a while” Hamlet; to derogating projections of your
inner faults of reasoning, and examine the mirror of your forms of
arguments where what I have shown you reveals it is YOU who should
“do something about the want of correspondece in words and
deeds”
1. 'Ignoring' while
persistently returning,
2. 'Accusing of
judgements', while inviting them,
3. 'Reckoning you are in
the majority', while NOBODY YET has posted an enquiry to
any thing specifically they didn't understand. That's YOUR majority, at
present THREE or four; holding hands, among some thousands of clicks;
on all my posts, hoping for strength in numbers, while being impatient
in the thrust to make it
so, because
it was said, without visible grounds. A quick gripe and
snipe is more like what you are dong.
4. If you think I am ambitioned simply “ to get one up on
everyone”, you are regrettably so mistaken you project your
inner desires to others, suggesting a hint of self insufficiency.
5. I am solely
interested in the PURSUIT of TRUTH and sound
correspondence theory, APOLOGIES here if THESE terms are too complex
for you.
6.If as a consequence of my showing flaws in your argument forms, you
feel I got one up on YOU, then you alone felt it, others who read, and refrained
from debate were UNTOUCHED. THEY observed it as they
SHOULD, as an honest pursuit and interest in sound argument forms; using an expose as
the substrate material. NO
prejudice ever was intended, and hopefully never
delivered disgracefully. Please be fully assured you
figure far too little in my life and interests to favour you with some
personal desire to deliver such derogations, or anyone else. For
me such a notion is contrary to my very raison d'etre. (I trust the
little French is not too obscure). I am not operating on your
wavelength, solely interested in improving. All that is of interest to
me, is a sound debate well and cogently argued, I do not regard your
input constitutes what I was hoping or looking for remotely. IF you
care to
practice what YOU preach, then I suggest you do “ignore”
this post as you yourself say you do but contradict in
NOT so doing.
| Quote: |
dls
Tony,
Please go back to what I said.
If what you want to do is to talk to yourself in public, then you are
succeeding.
If what you want to do is to persuade somebody of something, then, if
they are not hearing, it is never ever their fault. It must be yours.
They can pass by with undisturbed indifference. It is you who wants
something. You want other people to agree with or take in interest in
what you say.
Sadly, the way you express yourself creates a hurdle over which others
would have to jump before they could begin to see whether they agree.
Remove the hurdle, and you might have a chance.
You have some very intelligent, very well educated, very interested and
quite open minded people trying to listen. They cannot hear you.
As we move into days of HDTV, it is as if you are still insisting on
transmitting on 625-line B/W with added bad fog. You may see it as the
reverse, but transmitting HDTV to the owners of 625 line B/W TVs makes
no more sense. |
You are kind to re-iterate what you said in the first attempt, but not
so to have failed to address the answer I gave, while repeating the
same point differently framed as if to say I MEANT etc. .
Please go back to what I
said. HERE IS the relevant part.
| Quote: |
| If you
post for your own pleasure, fine. If you want to persuade other people
of something, you have to make your posts legible to them. They are not. |
I
gave you TWO answers, A YES AND, A NO, plus Oscar Wilde.
They were I should have thought SIMPLE enough, no complexities in YES
and NO surely?
I repeated them, at the
end here, nothing changed just because you wanted to change or embellish
on your original, to an ANSWER I GAVE to that original and
NOT the new formulation, with analogies to HDTV.
Additionally
To Quote
| Quote: |
| If what
you want to do is to persuade somebody of something, then, if they are
not hearing,
it is never ever their fault. |
I perceive this is NOT a site for hearing
but READING, and as such NOBODY reads BEYOND a word, or
sentence or paragraph UNLESS
they wish to.
If listening, it's difficult to avoid the material without leaving or
covering the ears. THUS reading; unlike listening, IS consensual IF
they went that far, then they were imbibing, willingly, as distinct
from listening to, the thoughts there contained. Where they didn't like
them, they either departed, or said so before departing, often in a
manner that appealed to some fallacy of reasoning or emotion, rather
than simply state, That's NOT for me, AND try to; as alaska says GET ONE OVER on ME.
and therefore blame me; for that want in themselves.
I
will not continue the disambiguation of your reply post, because [b]I did ANSWER the
earlier one[/b], you simply ignored what I said, in your second, by
re-presenting two IF statements differently formulated, wher that
conjecture, was already addressed substantially, and required no
further embellishment. DO
check it out, You
had the answers already.
| Quote: |
ncmoody
dls, here, here, very well put. |
Yes it was well put, nicely argued and presented, the problem was it overlooked my answer. And
continued and expanded on an unnecessary for into a fallacious form in
listening where only reading is being carried out here at all!
This continuity of sequences blurs the original form is pursuit of a
misdirect.
I have observed many type of responses of a particular feature
widespread in legal activities, where one asks twenty questions and
receives a misdirect answering one or something one never asked. As in
a student giving puff relies to an exam, he can't actually properly
answer, OR wishes to hide in a smokescreen response that hides a fault
that he doesn't understand the question or else it was NOT what he was
hoping for, and gives the answer to the question he was hoping for in
modified form hoping it goes unnoticed.
That's just a BTW comment.
A
final point IF anyone took the time to bother and examine
the ONE letter the council wrote with so many contradictions it
wouldn't hold a bucket of water in full free fall.
I am writing a book; whose index is THERE also, and certainly not for this forum,
and has not been concealed for a moment, currently at 400 pages, on argument forms,
and the material I found on a number of sites; being sights for sore
eyes, are of exemplary interest.
That is why I use the refrain 'such fun with words on occasion'.
I hope that clarifies things a little more, that was presented to those
who LOOKED.
I regret I do not agree with the points made, I reserve that right
please, we are not YET in a despotic or tyrannical society, though it's
fast moving that way with NLP, PR, common purpose, and
“independent” bodies whose names alone are the only honest
things about them. 'Cucullus non facit monachum'. Forget it or Google it.
Apologies for typo's and any infelicities or errors in syntax or
grammar.
NO prejudice intended, Solely interested in sound reasonig forms I hope
that is clear.n
The previous answers in the original form a clear YES and NO. NOW IN RED...
| Quote: |
Tony,
If you post for your own pleasure, fine. If you want to persuade other
people of something, you have to make your posts legible to them. They
are not. |
| Quote: |
| If you
post for your own pleasure, fine. |
Yes I do AND also
I post to show people what is happening around and to them,
by presenting FACTS written by an elected council, called AUTHORITY,
and showing how those we elect treat us.
I let them judge if the bulk of my comments are incontrovertible;
as I say they are, NOBODY
has done so. It would be nice if someone said TONY I found
NO contrarieties or contradictions and explained to me how they arrived
at their conclusions. WHEN they examine the evidence and quote the
phrases.
| Quote: |
| If you
want to persuade all other people of something, you have to make your
posts legible to them. |
NO I rarely if ever try to
persuade.
Please don't misunderstand this, It involves responsibilities one
should be careful of. Governments persuade and that's more than enough
highly questionable responsibility (having in mind WMD and NONE found
with lives lost) for all of us to swallow.
I refer you to Oscar Wilde Picture of Dorian Gray, Chap 2, "There is no
such thing as a good influence, Mr. Gray. All influence is immoral--immoral
from the scientific point of view." I think this has
value.
| Quote: |
| make you
posts legible. They are not. |
Presumably you speak here for 'other
people'.
This is easily verified. Etc
etc etc. Sorry for the LATIN!
I don't see much in that reply that failed to address your point, but
do see in your emebellished responss you skipped my answer.
I have refrained from providing the reply with the proper formal
constructions of the propositions presented, and disambiguated; as
clearly no person here is likely to understand it or wish to.
I expect one word, or several lines in sound bites.
_________________
Tony
Last edited by Tony on Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:36 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
smg
Joined: 27 Aug 2006
Posts: 384
|
| Posted:
Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:24 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
Oh baby baby, oh baby baby
Oh baby baby, how was I supposed to know
That something wasnt right here
Oh baby baby, I shouldnt have let you go
And now youre out of sight, yeah
Show me how you want it to be
Tell me baby cuz I need to know now, oh because
Chorus
My loneliness is killin me (and I)
I must confess I still believe (still believe)
When Im not with you I lose my mind
Give me a sign, hit me baby one more time!
Oh baby baby, the reason I breathe is you
Boy youve got me blinded
Oh pretty baby, theres nothin that I wouldnt do
Thats not the way I planned it
Show me how you want it to be
Tell me baby cuz I need to know now, oh because
Chorus
Oh baby baby, how was I supposed to know
Oh pretty baby, I shouldnt have let you go
I must confess that my loneliness
Is killin me now
Dont you know I still believe
That you will be here
And give me a sign, hit me baby one more time
Chorus
I must confess (my loneliness) that my loneliness
(is killing me) is killing me now
(I must confess) dont you (I still believe) know I still believe
That you will be here (I lose my mind)
And give me a sign...
Hit me baby one more time!
______
See, it makes just as much sense! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony
Joined: 02 Jul 2006
Posts: 121
|
| Posted:
Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:37 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
YES and NO, Yes it makes sense, and NO
becasue it's irrelevent.
Perhaps your next reply is
INDEED!
From your own vocabulary.
_________________
Tony |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
smg
Joined: 27 Aug 2006
Posts: 384
|
| Posted:
Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:43 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
| Indeed, but it prompted your shortest reply
yet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ncmoody
Joined: 02 Oct 2007
Posts: 164
Location: Worcester, England
|
| Posted:
Sat Feb 02, 2008 7:26 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
Tony:
My mum used to have a saying about people like you.
"Everybody
is out of step but our johnny" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony
Joined: 02 Jul 2006
Posts: 121
|
| Posted:
Sat Feb 02, 2008 7:55 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
I
thought you were predictable enough to bite the bait.
| Quote: |
smg
Indeed,
but it prompted your shortest reply yet. |
The
REASON is more disastrous.
Because you
presented NO argument worth the investigation or reply!
Two
Indeeds on the DVLA post, prompted by me here, and the fourth by you,
was
what I wanted to confirm in your extensive
vocabulary.
Three
indeeds sounds like a broken record. If it takes more than
ONE second forget it just spit against the wind, for the same.
Good
night.
| Quote: |
ncmoody
My mum used to have a saying about people like you.
"Everybody is out of step
but our johnny" |
Fallacy !......Appeal to authority!
Problem,
your
mum is to you a
figure of authority ALAS
not to me.
Probably Johhny was the savviest of you all from what you have to say.
Good Night!
Such
fun, enjoyed chattering! Such poor adversarial material!
There's far more, even on the weakest Springer program than is found
here today. Suggestion for the night.....
You go there while I have watch of something better.
You can leave your one/two liners for the bin liner Monday.
_________________
Tony |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Woolfy
Joined: 16 May 2006
Posts: 357
|
| Posted:
Sat Feb 02, 2008 8:06 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
| Tony, you talk utter crap. You use words
out of context. Is English your first language? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
smg
Joined: 27 Aug 2006
Posts: 384
|
| Posted:
Sat Feb 02, 2008 8:08 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
I don't want to take up all of DLS'
bandwith, but if it serves a good cause:
Me no bubbletious
Me smoke heavy tar
Me be groovin' slowly where you are
Notify your next of kin
'Cause you're never coming back
I've been dropping beats since Back in Black
And we'll paint by numbers
'Til something sticks
Don't mind doing it for the kids
(So come on) jump on board
Take a ride (yeah)
(You'll be doin' it all right)
Jump on board feel the high
'Cause the kids are alright
You've got a reputation
Well I guess that can be explored
You're dancing with the chairman of the board
Take a ride on my twelve cylinder symphony
But if you got other plans
The purpose of a woman is to love her man
And we'll paint by numbers
'Til something sticks
Don't mind doing it for the kids
(So come on) jump on board
Take a ride (yeah)
(Doin' it all right)
Jump on board feel the high
'Cause the kids are alright
I'm gonna give it all of my loving
It's gonna take up all of my love
I'm gonna give it all of my loving
It's gonna take up all of my love
I'm gonna give it all of my loving
It's gonna take up all of my love
I'm gonna give it all of my loving
It's gonna take up all of my love
Come down from the ceiling
I didn't mean to get so high
I couldn't do what I wanted to do
When my lips were dry
You can't just up and leave me
I'm a singer in a band
Well I like drummers baby
You're not my bag
Jump on board
Take a ride, yeah
(You'll be doin' it all right)
Jump on board feel the high, yeah
Jump on board
Take a ride, yeah
(You'll be doin' it all right)
Jump on board feel the high, yeah
I'm an honorary Sean Connery, born '74
There's only one of me
Single-handedly raising the economy
Ain't no chance of the record company dropping me
Press be asking do I care for sodomy
I don't know, yeah, probably
I've been looking for serial monogamy
Not some bird that looks like Billy Connolly
But for now I'm down for ornithology
Grab your binoculars, come follow me |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PeterM24
Joined: 12 Jan 2006
Posts: 1606
|
| Posted:
Sat Feb 02, 2008 8:43 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
***** DELETED
Last edited by PeterM24 on Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:47 pm; edited 1 time in
total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stu1985
Joined: 24 Mar 2007
Posts: 465
Location: Aberdeen
|
| Posted:
Sat Feb 02, 2008 11:40 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
smg, are u trying to soothe tony with some
britney and robbie and kylie?! it seemed to work!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bakedalasker
Joined: 06 Nov 2006
Posts: 1067
Location: South France
|
| Posted:
Sat Feb 02, 2008 11:54 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
| Woolfy
wrote: |
| Tony, you
talk utter crap. You use words out of context. Is English your first
language? |
Oh no Woolfy, you have now given Tony more opportunity to take up alot
more bandwidth than the average user on this site. Get ready for an
avalanche of the OED and what qualifications he has.
Tony, what I ignore is the purpose of this post. What I wont ignore is
your efforts to belittle users who slightly oppose your views or the
way you communicate. I agree with Woolfy in the fact you use words out
of context and also I believe you manipulate sentences of others to try
and prove a point.
Tony, do us all a favour. Dont make it Good Night, make it Good Bye. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| |
swarb.co.uk Forum Index -> Road Traffic Law |
All times
are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page
Previous 1, 2, 3, 4,
5 Next |
| Page 2 of 5 |
|
You cannot
post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Powered
by phpBB ©
2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
