Do you want the Road Tax system to change? Do you have thoughts on the potential changes to the Road Tax system? | No thanks
Re-stating my position - Martyn, Back Room moderator
IO, bogush, whatever.... this is lifted from my reply to Alwyn (in the thread \'Anothert virus\').

\"What I won\'t have, though, is this forum turned into a soapbox from which those people with an axe to grind, whether it be political, moral or whatever, attempt to browbeat the rest of us into submission by sheer volume. They\'re entitled to hold an opinion in the same way that everyone else is, but to push that opinion down our throats until we either capitulate and pretend to agree, or (more likely) we go away, is damaging to the forum as a whole, and in the long run defeats the object in that it effectively removes us as a voice which, however moderate and democratic, still has the strength of numbers.

This is not aimed at you, Alwyn. It *is* aimed at IO (Independent Observer) in this instance. If you don\'t stop shouting, IO, pretty soon there\'ll be no-one to hear you, and then nowhere to shout.\"
Re: Re-stating my position - IO
Just to clarify, martyn:

By "sheer volume" do you mean;

a) lots of people saying the same thing untill I go away?

b) one person saying lots of things until one of them finally clicks?

c) one person S-P-E-L-L-I-N-G__O-U-T what should be a well known if not self evident statement of the bleedin obvious that lots of people keep S-H-O-U-T-I-N-G down?

:-(


PS Try reading the posts before you complain about them!
Re: Re-stating my position - Gary
I'd be careful if I were you, Martyn will not take kindly to this.
Re: Re-stating my position - Martyn, Back Room moderator
Gary wrote:
>
> I'd be careful if I were you, Martyn will not take kindly to
> this.

Trouble is, Gary -- and anyone else who might be reading -- I can't ban him. All he has to do (and he's already done this more than once) is to return under a different username, and he's back ranting again. So I'm afraid the only thing to do is ignore him. Or go away (and that's the last thing I want to happen).

It's a real shame, too, because beneath all the bluster and hot air, this guy makes excellent sense. I only wish he'd be content with the small gains that can be made by attrition, rather than the one step forward two steps back of his kind of assault.
Re: Re-stating my position - Gary
Martyn,
I agree IO can make some excellent points and comments and does have vast knowledge. It appears that he does not deliver his message over at the same degree of excellence and in fact takes one hell of step back.
Re: Re-stating my position - Gary

It appears the back room is falling apart. Get a grip when heated discussions start to rear their ugly heads ensure the culprits are forced out of the backroom and onto their e-mail systems.
Since our e-mails have you noticed a slight difference to the way I conduct my postings. I hope so. Hopefully the recent culprits who have turned your back room into nothing more than a boxing ring should take note and stop.
I have never seen anything like what IO has done using a flaming keyboard with apostrophies, stars etc etc etc dashes dots and bloody commas. Now come on get a life IO and as everyone else has suggested get off your bloody soap box. STAND down and take it like a man and do not throw your teddy bear into the corner!
Re: Re-stating my position - Brill
Potentially IO could be the grit which is necessary to produce the pearl. But his posts need to be in a form which invites discussion, in both their content and presentation.
Re: Re-stating my position - Alwyn
>the grit which is necessary to produce the pearl.<

What a beautiful use of words. Well done. Is it yours?
Re: Re-stating my position - Brian
Agreed that some of the points are valid, but when I see a single posting going over two or three screens, followed by ditto, and ditto, my reaction is to skip it and go to another thread because I have not got the time to read through all the quotes, counter-arguments etc.
My principal with letters at work is to get everything onto a single side of A4 if at all possible, having found that once you go onto a second side you have lost the reader's attention.
Maybe we could club together and buy the guy a "Learn to Write" book for Xmas.
Re: Re-stating my position - Tomo
Don't let anybody be bullied. Life would be even more boring if we were all the same.
Re: Re-stating my position - io
hi guys may i be allowed to raise a point or three

i have in the past pointed out that i would stop posting were to the forum to stop advertising itself as a place to make youself heard and start billing itself as a technical forum

previously i have been attacked for bringing up a point and when it has not been accepted bringing up another to back upmy argument etc

now i am being attacked for bringing up all my arguments together you just cant win



Wouldn\'t you agree ? : - )
Re: Re-stating my position - io
Oops

But at least its shorter than A4, maybe a bit wider, but definately shorter

;-(
Re: Re-stating my position - Kev
Why are you so angry all the time? Nearly every thread is littered with exclamitaries. Chill out. Maybe you should read through what you rant before you press send. You must surely regret saying some/most of the stuff you say.

I agree with most of the things you say, I just dont agree with how you say it.

Why cant you just state you opinion [please note, thats all it is] without disecting everyline somebody says?
Dont you see that its how you are saying it, not what you are saying which is putting people off?
O, and massive replies, as soon as I see a small scroll bar, I move on. Unless you cant, please keep it in the box.

And your supposed reason the 'catchphrase' of the backroom. Im all for you saying how much you dont like the government, thats fine. Just dont shout, scream and rant it, please.

Kev
Re: Re-stating my position - pugugly
I Agree with Kev, I love the lucid and articulate arguments as written, for eaxample, by the Lacey siblings and Mark from Brazil, and find some of my views and values challenged at times, but when IO types off screen and S-H-O-U-T-S, I simply stop reading. I back Martyn on this.
Re: Re-stating my position - Vin
Oh dear, I think I may have started this. My point in an earlier thread was that IO/Bogush/whatever is becoming unreadable.

Now, IO, I happen to agree with what you say, but the manner and style is aggressive at the least. Your dissection of every line of text in a response is irritating and means that I just skip over anything and everything you write. The only reason I even read your "beeb" thread was that it was short and readable. After that, once the dissections started, I did what I always do and passed over it.

So, *and please take this in the spirit in which it's meant*, consider whether making your points a little more concisely and a little less like a boxer at a pre-fight press conference you are more likely to be read.

Regardless of further dissections and rants on this subject, I have had my final say. You are welcome to the last word.

V
Re: Re-stating my position - Guy Lacey
Re: Re-stating my position - Alex. L. Dick
Come to think of it, good IO, there have been attempts made to drive other people off this site before now.

The rule seems to be that as long as they love the nice anti-motoring police, don't object to the hideous persecution of real motorists, are prepared to put up with absolutely anything as long as it hurts us more than them, indulge their right to make us creep around at 70 in the best of conditions, etc. etc, they can say what they like, how they like, however much it may annoy us.

If we dare to put an elementary proposition, such as that it should be OK to put the pedal to the metal if a road is obviously clear and safe, for instance, that amounts to abuse and intimidation and goodness knows what.

Can we have a decision? Is this a motorists' site or a mimsers' site (and they know very well what "mimser" means, so don't let's have any rubbish about that).

Meanwhile, IO, some of us are with you! Keep 'em coming.
Re: Re-stating my position - roland
I don't think there has been any policy to "drive" people off the site. I speak as a "lurker"; one who is happy to read, but whose contributions are sparse. Surely the tone of the site sets itself by the time one has read 3 threads. We all have our opinions, and they are all without doubt, well thought opinions. I, for one, am happy to have someone voice an opinion at odds to my own, but I don't want to be told that I'm wrong, or don't have a clue. Surely there are much more agressive fora where one can vent one's spleen. Perhaps This is one too much G&T talking
Roland
Re: Re-stating my position - io
OK, I'll try again, and I would request that everyone shows me how they would have written this:

So a lone voice pointing out government transport lab figures is:

"this forum turned into a soapbox from which those people with an axe to grind, whether it be political, moral or whatever, attempt to browbeat the rest of us into submission by sheer volume ..... to push that opinion down our throats until we either capitulate and pretend to agree"

Whilst the masses repeatedly insisting that I accept that I should "Kill My Speed" to an artificially low, and according to the governments transport lab figures, dangerous level, and accept the even pithier "Speed Kills" mantra as Gospel is a non-political, non-moral, no axe-to-grind, definately not trying to push that opinion down my throat until I either capitulate and pretend to agree or (hopefully) I go away:

"lucid and articulate argument"

Perhaps along the lines of:



So that would be a w.h.i.s.p.e.r then ? ; - (
Re: Re-stating my position - Tomo
"......much more agressive fora where one can vent one's spleen."

If that implies there is a forum where one can express a pro-motoring opinion without getting shouted at, I think Alex. L. Dick (who had a nasty experience on this one, Roland) would like to be directed to it. Or were we just speaking hypothetically?

(Come to think of it, so would I!)

Cheers and beers,

Tomo
Re: Re-stating my position - Alwyn
Lone voice? Can't you hear me saying the same things?

When I attend meetings with police and councillors, I get sick and tired of those - usually councillors - who keep banging on about speed causing accidents and if drivers slowed down there would be fewer accidents.

It is totally obvious they have not looked at any real research or statistics on accident causation, otherwise they could not possibly have such opinions.

I can't wait for next Tuesday's meeting when I will ask them the following question.

"Would those who believe that speed cameras and traffic calming save lives please explain why, with a crackdown on speeding and rigid enforcement of speed limits in their areas, Lincolnshire has seen a 16% rise in fatalities, Essex has a 29% rise and Suffolk has seen an 82% increase in deaths? And the year is not yet ended.

Two of these areas, Essex and Lincs. were part of the so-called succesful trial of speed cameras last year.

What really cheeses me off is that some of these idiot councillors are so bright they are virtually unemployable and yet are making daft decisions affecting all our safety.
Re: Re-stating my position - Mark (Brazil)

> OK, I'll try again, and I would request that everyone shows me how they would have written this:

I`ll take you at your word.

> So a lone voice pointing out government transport lab figures
> is:
>
> "this forum turned into a soapbox from which those people
> with an axe to grind, whether it be political, moral or
> whatever, attempt to browbeat the rest of us into submission
> by sheer volume ..... to push that opinion down our throats
> until we either capitulate and pretend to agree"

I wouldn`t have copied that whole chunk in. I wouldn`t have deliberately made a link between "lone voice" and Martyn`s paragraph since even though it is easy to infer, it is clearly not a link that Martyn intended.

I would have emphasised that you *are* sometimes a lone voice, and that you do frequently point out things, and occasionally explain things, that it is important that people know.

For example the thread where you pointed out a survey and where you pointed out you were not being acknowledged by that survey. Without sarcasm, I apologise that I didn`t read it carefully, but from the look I did have it seemed important.

I would have allowed the enthusiasm and sincerity, both of which I believe you have, to show through, rather than the ability to drown other voices - surely useful in some forums such as council meetings, but usually not in a forum of this type and personality.

I would also try to respect the way this forum wishes to be, in the same way that I would like it to respect what I wish to be in the same way that I am able to drink and socialise with some of my friends who have massively opposing political or religious views to me.

> Whilst the masses repeatedly insisting that I accept that I should "Kill My Speed" to an artificially low, and according
> to the governments transport lab figures, dangerous level, and accept the even pithier "Speed Kills" mantra as Gospel is
> a non-political, non-moral, no axe-to-grind, definately not trying to push that opinion down my throat until I either
> capitulate and pretend to agree or (hopefully) I go away:

I don`t think that`s me. Most of the time I agree with your opinion, although you tend to have more fervently held beliefs in this than me.

Take my point from yesterday. I was trying to explain, that whilst I agree with your point about daft speed levels, it is an awful PR exercise with "the masses" since unless one views the subject with intelligence and interest, it is difficult to argue *at a perception level* with the oft voiced opinion that slower is safer.

Now given that we, I think, have similar beliefs in some of these matters, why couldn`t we have had a sensible discussion about different ways to represent the subject to a normally non-caring public hopefully ending up with even more ways of pushing forward ? Instead we started with one of your disections.

Either I voiced my point inadequately, or you read it, or understood it, inappropriately.

However, one of us missed the point. I would normally think it was me, and explain again, except that as you have proved so many times, you`re very difficult to talk [sic] to and frequently deliberately misunderstand or attribute definitions and subtleties not intended.

> "lucid and articulate argument"

"Articulate" you most certainly are, "lucid" not so much (bearing in mind that lucidity can ony be judged by the listener). As for "argument", I wouldn't understand you at all were it not for the fact that many years ago, in the world of VAXNotes, I did encounter a persona very much like yours which I did eventually work out. This doesn`t mean I understand your approach, but I at least have a clue. However, if you felt able to tell me honestly that you have never used the name "edp" I would sleep better.

As a final point, I have to think that you realise that the majority of people in this forum are far from anti-motoring and tend at least towards "enthusiastic" driving. I know I do.

Given that, one would think that this group was most likely to be in agreement, or at least have sympathy for your views, certainly insofar as driving laws are concerned and the behvaiour of other road users.

Why, then, do the majority of people who comment, seem to have a problem with you and what you write? I can`t see that it is your views, so I fail to see what else it can be other than the way that you present those views.

Frankly I have two quite opposing views.

1) I think it would be a sad day if this forum lost your point of view, your enthusiasm and your sincerity, which it would if you regrettably went away.

2) I think your presentation and behaviour is harmful to this forum and spoils my enjoyment so I wish you would go away.

Those two opinions both begin "I think", you may disagree, but you can't stop it being what I think.

My issue is that those two opinions conflict, which is a pity.

One thing I am sure of is that you will win in the end, within the confines of this forum. Since at some point, so many people will have left, not out of disgust, but rather boredom, that nobody will argue with you. Then, I suspect, you will go and do the same elsewhere, as you have probably done before you came to this forum.

The whole thing is rather sad.

My e-mail address is above. I am happy to discuss this or any other point in e-mail. If you reply in a way which I find acceptable, I am happy to discuss it here, although we have to accept that Martyn might not be quite so happy. On the other hand, if you reply in your normal fashion, allow me to say up front "I agree, you win".

Mark.
Re: Re-stating my position - markymarkn
everyone please tell me if your different, but i come and read/post on the forum for some light-hearted discussion about motoring in general, with a good helping of brilliant technical advice from those who dont mind sharing their knowledge and experience to help others.

I dont see the need to try and brainwash everyone, and when people do disagree with you, to get a bag on and have to try and brainwash everyone. I dont think anyone, including, IO wants to come here to get wound up and annoyed.

I find it insulting and annoying to have what i say torn apart and scruitinised, since written words can be mis-interpreted and give different people different meanings. If you want to give you 2-pence worth, you are more than welcome to do that, but everyone here has an equal, and everyones opinion is correct.

I hope this matter can be sorted sooner rather than later. Hopefully chrimbo will cheer everyone up a bit.

MERRY CHRISTMAS EVERONE!!

mark.

p.s. << > (ha- you cant rip this to bits now any of you)
Re: Re-stating my position - markymarkn
it should read

p.s. < >

ruined my moment...
Re: Re-stating my position - markymarkn
raaaaa! why wont it write it????

p.s. {{ Anti Disection Mode Enabled }}
Re: Re-stating my position - steve paterson
Be interesting (and impossible) to know what the fatality figures would have been without the existing laws being enforced. Probably be higher. Would be interesting to know how many fatal accidents involved a driver not being able to control his vehicle for some reason. Every single one I should think.
Now - I'm racking my brain trying to think of a single factor that might be part of every fatal accident, apart from a corpse.
Re: Re-stating my position - Alwyn
Steve,

If you send me your e-mail address I can let you have a copy of TRL 323 which shows all the accident causation codes used by police. No, don't all ask. If HJ wants a copy, he can them put on the site. Subject to copyright laws of course
Re: Re-stating my position - Stuart B
Alwyn,

I still think TRL 323 is flawed in that it was about developing a measuring system rather than an actual representative study.

www.honestjohn.co.uk/phorum/read.php?f=1&i=8839&t=...t

Fundamentally I don't disagree at all with what you are saying around the various places I just feel our message would be better accepted if we had access to and used the latest information.
Re: Re-stating my position - Bob
i've been away a while but, from what i can see, old bogbrush, aka independent gobserver, is still around with the same old rhetoric. He still holds the record for writing the most words and yet saying so little. Must be a sad little man. I bet his dinner parties are scintillating. Sadly, he is unlikely to get an invite from me.

I have said this before, I know, but, get a life bogwash.
Re: Re-stating my position - Piers Green
{{ Anti Disection Mode Defence Over-ride Enabled }}

{{ Anti Disection Mode Disabled }}

> I dont see the need to try and brainwash everyone

But this is what winds me up and annoys me: there are people out there with an anti-motoring agenda who are trying to brainwash the great unwashed. And when I try to expose the spin and the fact that the emperor has no clothes the middle class liberals leap to the emperor's defence and try to cover up on his behalf.

And they claim to be "motorists".

They are, in fact, what Lenin called his: "useful idiots".

Having said that: they have the right to be whatever they want to be.

Even blind to the ;-) I am wont to slip in now and again because "written words can be mis-interpreted"

As for:

> I find it insulting and annoying to have what i say torn apart and scruitinised [the "i" should have been capitalised! ;-) ]

Why is it insulting to have someone have enough respect for what you are saying, albeit without agreeing, to dissect and respond to to the bulk of it?

People here complain about having to scroll off the bottom of the screen to read my posts, full of cutting and pastingandquotingandpunctuation.

Would they rather, guess at what I am responding to, and wait days for me to complete my response in individual sound bites?

Perhaps, having decided that they are, at best, blind to the assault on non-public transport, at worst, part of that self-same attack, I have no right to be surprised to find them unable to comprehend that I have, in fact, neatly pre-packaged my argument in tidy little, easily (well, perhaps not so easily, I'm the first to admit my paragraph long sentences are a bit OTT) digested chunks complete with references to the points being debated, leaving them with the (perhaps deceptively too) simple task of scrolling and scanning ;-)

{{ Anti Disection Mode Re-enabled }}

{{ Anti Disection Mode Defence Over-ride Disarmed }}

{{Control Returned to Moderator }}


PS Alwyn: I know that I'm not alone, but I decided that "lone voice" put over my point better than the original unrevised rough draft "me and all the other guys who think the same way but are beating our heads against the brick wall of the generality of motorists indifference to the politico-economic assault on our liberty, mobility, and economic viability" ; - )


PPS Perhaps where I went wrong is not appreciating that some people have monitors larger than 14". Perhaps those one para "lucid and articulate arguments" fit nicely on a "comfortable" 19 inch.

Or perhaps the " "'s and the "Boring!"'s fit nicely on one of those trendy micro wap screens?:-(


PPPS Anyone catch the programme on R4 this morning, where they decided that repressed Britons resort to lucid and articulate arguments when they want to punch somebody in the face. I just hope that bliar and his crones are picking that up from the posters here, and that the focus group facilitators are feeding back the correct interpretation to the spin doctors.
Re: Re-stating my position - Mark (Brazil)
io wrote:

>So a lone voice pointing out government transport lab figures is:
>
>"this forum turned into a soapbox from


Piers Green wrote:

> PS Alwyn: I know that I'm not alone, but I decided that "lone
> voice" put over my point better than the original unrevised



Did I miss something here ?
Re: Re-stating my position - Bob
ohhhh..sooooo...boringggggg.
Re: Re-stating my position - A. Piers Green
> I bet his dinner parties are scintillating. Sadly, he is unlikely to get an invite from me.

You'll be pleased to know that I'm well out of the Islington New Dinner Party circuit ; - )
Re: Re-stating my position - Bob
well out of your league you mean....
Re: ohhhh..sooooo...boringggggg. - A. Piers Green
Which is a pity, as I'm sure that I would find your dinner parties scintillating.
Re: Re-stating my position - Brian
The other point not to lose sight of is that even if we convince ourselves on here that motoring is, on the whole, an asset to society, no purpose will be serves unless we make our views known, in large numbers, to the powers that be and the media.

The Government seems to be, at the moment, in the pocket of certain pressure groups. Some of their arguments may have a certain amount of validity, but most of the views which they hold are, at the best, incapable of direct scientific evaluation and, at the worst, are based on biased selection of incompatable data.

One of the problems with modern society is inertia. The general public moan to each other when things go wrong, but will not hold those in civic office to account directly. This attitude may spring from the sidelining of Parliamentary democracy and from the view that all politicians are the same so there is no point in even bothering to vote.

Pressure groups only succeed when they get the ear of government. A lot of the ones being heard now are small in numbers but well organised and generally intolerant of those who do not conform to their views.

In the cause of democracy and freedom, not only to travel, but to express our views and make them count on behalf of the silent masses, we must be a vociferous in putting our point across to those who run our lives as those minorities.

Anything else leaves us in an elected dictatorship.

Re: ohhhh..sooooo...boringggggg. - Bob
no, you wouldn't be able to cope with reasoned and polite debate. Anyone resorting to verbal diahorrea is tied and gaged and left out for the dustman. You would be outside in no time.
Re: Brian's Soapbox - IO
If that was (only the second, and first public) response to:

"I would request that everyone shows me how they would have written this"

Thank you for the response.

Thanks also for a brilliant piece!

Perhaps I rant and rage so much in frustration because I know that I will never be able to put across what I have to say so eloquently.

PS

Thanks also to Mark (Brazil) for his earlier email.
Re: Brian's Soapbox - ChrisR
OK, this dinner party thing has finished me off. I'm sure the people you are campaigning against are truly scared of your PR abilities. If I want to listen to this kind of drivel I'll get a job as a primary school playground attendant.

Bye all.

Chris
Re: Brian's Soapbox - Mark (Brazil)
IO wrote:
>
> If that was (only the second, and first public) response to:
>
> "I would request that everyone shows me how they would have
> written this"

Do you mean my response ?

> Thanks also to Mark (Brazil) for his earlier email.

Now I am really confused. I don't even know your e-mail address.

Help ?
Re: Email - IO
Oops, sorry, trying, and failing to multi task.

Thanks to Mark (I've responded by email) and Brian for their public responses.

None received by email.

BTW Mark, we did have a VAX cleaner/carpet shampooer once, but I'm not edp.

So just how boring are you, subscribing to a vacuum newsletter ? ; - )

Insight is a wonderful thing, and self insight rare. Feel free to email me your "understanding" of my "persona" (I really am willing to learn - but that doesn't mean that I'm any good at it ; - ).


PS Re yesterday on the other thread:

"Yup ; - )"

"Did you collar the pilot and insist that he throttled back to 10 knots on your flight back?!"

Was an attempt to graphically demonstrate the fact that slowing down can be (very) dangerous - think about it.

The fact that I am responding to a point doesn't mean that I disagree with it, or you.

And it certainly doesn't mean that I am having a go at you.

Evan if you do think that for entertainment value I rank well below reading a legal contract ! ; - (
Re: Email - Mark (Brazil)
IO,

You know what really &#%* me off about you ? Its the fact that I just start enjoying your humour and the sensible things you have to say, and then you do something, in my opinion, which is dumb.

However, trusting that this is not one of those times....

> BTW Mark, we did have a VAX cleaner/carpet shampooer once,
> but I'm not edp.

Oh, like that never gave me a problem. At the time I was doing a contract for Digital Equipment. Now, despite the fact that most of the UK thought we made watches, we actually made some seriously impressive machines, of which one of the leaders was the VAX.

And then the vacuum cleaner company starts a campaign which was something like - "nothing sucks like an electrolux" which immediately started a huge amount of derivations, normally around"unless its a VAX"

And if I can find out where Eric (edp) is these days, I'll put you in touch. It will probably be the end of the civilised world as we know it.

> So just how boring are you, subscribing to a vacuum newsletter ? ; - )

So boring that I've witnessed my dogs throw themselves into the swimming pool to escape one of my more ernest conversations. Which is, of course, my wife's fault, since if she listened to me I wouldn't have to talk to the dogs.

> Insight is a wonderful thing, and self insight rare. Feel
> free to email me your "understanding" of my "persona" (I
> really am willing to learn - but that doesn't mean that I'm
> any good at it ; - ).

If you've responded to me by e-mail, I guess I now have your e-mail address. It is, however, my office e-mail so forgive me if it has to wait until Monday. Even for you, I am not going into the office today !

> PS Re yesterday on the other thread:
>
> "Yup ; - )"
>
> "Did you collar the pilot and insist that he throttled back
> to 10 knots on your flight back?!"
>
> Was an attempt to graphically demonstrate the fact that
> slowing down can be (very) dangerous - think about it.

I worked it out actually, but its not a very good analogy. A car doesn't fall to the ground if it stops, most planes do.

> The fact that I am responding to a point doesn't mean that I
> disagree with it, or you.

It isn't whether you agree with me or not, even though I am a shy and sensitive person easily upset and distressed by argument and dispute. Its only that this forum is recreation for me and recreation needs to be fun. Frequently your replies are not fun. (I use "fun" in a wide sense).

In fact I enjoy a good argument if [especially?] the other person knows something or thinks something I do not. Mind you, if you want to have one of thsoe we ought to wander somewhere else; Martyn wouldn't like it and more than that, I like this website, for all its real or perceived failings, and I really don't want to do anything to detract from it.

> Evan if you do think that for entertainment value I rank well
> below reading a legal contract ! ; - (

I'm iin Brazil. Trust me, contracts and their interpretation are *really* good for a laugh. Anyway, nobody pays me a ridiculous amount of money to listen to you, although in my opinion they should.

Mark
Re: Email - IO
@?!
Re: Email - Mark (Brazil)
*&)(** (*& #$$^% @#%, (*^#(#.
Re: Re-stating my position - A. Piers Green
Nope

In fact you seem to be the first one to have spotted it ! ; - )
 

Ask Honest John Right column

Value my car