Pro compulsion

[ufkacbln]

You stated that :

You do not like people wearing helmets do you? come on admit it, its easier than constantly trying to pick holes and then denying you have issues. If you dont mind as you have claimed why do you question people so much?

Then when this was queried and it was pointed out that only you seemed to be of the opinoon that people disliked helmets or helmet wearers you asked:

can you point out were i claimed someone had stated (not satated) this?

So I simply made it clear for you.... to help with your understanding of the posts

oOh dear, using large red letters suggests you are angry. (Grammar)

Once again you are misleading at best, notice the question mark? hence a question based on my observations, therefore different than a statement.

Not at all, just making it clear in case you wanted to make any unfounded accusations...... that you will then refuse to substantiate.


Let's make this clear - are you now denying that you are of the opinion that by questioning the total perfection and absolute efficacy of helmets the other poster hates helmets and helmet wearers.

 

[twobiker]

Nothing wrong with those at all IMHO.

No its funny but I bought the silver one recently and although it is 6/7 yrs younger it weighs more and is no more comfortable.

 

[david k]

Let's make this clear - are you now denying that you are of the opinion that by questioning the total perfection and absolute efficacy of helmets the other poster hates helmets and helmet wearers.

Good morning everyone, sorry in advance if this leads to numerous other pages of posts!
To answer your question, not all posters but on this thread I’dsay there are quite a few yes, you included. To point out, you said I stated,not that I was of the opinion, your correct in your assumption though. I am happy to go either way but you use my posts to assume what I am saying,you don't like it when people do this to you, which way would youprefer it? We assume from posting style or we do not? Please make your mind upas your changes in what is right and wrong simply stems the flow and makes you look foolish. Demanding this and that and using red enlarged letters makes you appear childish, this feedback will help you with future posts, I hope you takeheed.

On many threads me and others have said why we believe helmets are of benefit, you say this is always to do with compulsion and fight our beliefs vigorously. You protest too much! If your approachwas less obnoxious I am sure the conversation would flow better, but continually jumping on any post that may merely suggest a helmet of benefit isa little strange and makes you look desperate.

It appears to be an obsession with you and not ahealthy one, if you allow us to have our beliefs without being so aggressive inyour replies things would be fine. Without that courtesy then yes you are antihelmet and hostile towards those who are pro helmet.

I've answered question after question and your posting style is very troll like and you knowit. Am I to see a reply with the same troll approach or would you like to discuss things without being difficult? I am happy with either style you chose,but that will dictate the way these conversations go.

There was a reply from a poster admitting theydisagreed with people wearing helmets as everyone who does takes us closer to compulsion, that’s fine, its ok to admit it if that’s your agenda. You hide behind saying you don't mind if someone wears a helmets you areonly against compulsion, then say anyone discussing helmet benefits must be questioned because of compulsion and any other suggestion is trying to hide it,therefore you do have issues with people wearing helmets.

The arguments are going in circles, I’m happy to accept you are anti helmet are you happy to accept I am pro helmet?

Heres hoping you can play with a straight bat, we live in hope

 

[david k]

It wouldn't go in circles if you were to answer honestly rather than ducking questions answering different questions from those put etc. Then all the issues could be dealt with in an orderly manner.

Adrian this is not the case. Some questions put to me have the answers already planned out, if i agree with neither what am i to do? to answer one or the other would allow you to focus on this as my view which would be incorrect

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Adrian this is not the case. Some questions put to me have the answers already planned out, if i agree with neither what am i to do? to answer one or the other would allow you to focus on this as my view which would be incorrect

If you can not construct a counter argument for the "pre answered questions" then your case is lost.

 

[david k]

If you can not construct a counter argument for the "pre answered questions" then your case is lost.

i did explain why i was against answering the pre answered questions, and i did give my view. If im forced into answering one of the options even though thats not my opinion it would be misleading to all

 

[david k]

Life does tend to be a question of least wrong options, none of which are our perfect choice. Live with it.

i dont see it that way. i think looking for the 'least wrong' is a negative way to view life. I wont be living with it, however you seem resigned to it

 

[Angelfishsolo]

i did explain why i was against answering the pre answered questions, and i did give my view. If im forced into answering one of the options even though thats not my opinion it would be misleading to all

That is your choice. If an argument is strong enough you should be able to answer any question fired at it.

 

[david k]

That is your choice. If an argument is strong enough you should be able to answer any question fired at it.

maybe my argument isnt strong as i think, i dont pretend to be any kind of expert on this but dont feel i need to be just to wear a helmet. i can see the replies now! your ill informed, your ignoring the facts etc etc. i cannot research every decision i ever make, sometimes youve got to rely on your own judgement and mines done me well so far lol!

if the argument against wearing helmets is as strong as suggested by some on here why have they not been banned? makes me think its a lot of noise from the few, but im happy to be proved wrong. but when i go for a ride today we all know many cyclists will wear helmets and walkers wont, so for now my view is the most common and those who propose it have not been able to convince the majority of their case

 

[Angelfishsolo]

maybe my argument isnt strong as i think, i dont pretend to be any kind of expert on this but dont feel i need to be just to wear a helmet. i can see the replies now! your ill informed, your ignoring the facts etc etc. i cannot research every decision i ever make, sometimes youve got to rely on your own judgement and mines done me well so far lol!

if the argument against wearing helmets is as strong as suggested by some on here why have they not been banned? makes me think its a lot of noise from the few, but im happy to be proved wrong. but when i go for a ride today we all know many cyclists will wear helmets and walkers wont, so for now my view is the most common and those who propose it have not been able to convince the majority of their case

The bottom line is simple. Do what you want to do. Just don't try and make others do the same.

 

[david k]

Nothing misleading at all. You prevarication and circumlocution are eloquent enough.

As i gave you my view this is obviously not the case. Nothing is ever sorted by asking or answering hypothetical questions with the only answers you can offer are those pre written for you, this would achieve nothing other than a circular argument which you say you are against

 

[david k]

The bottom line is simple. Do what you want to do. Just don't try and make others do the same.

Angelfisholo, I think many are happy with that view, but as helmet wearers are questioned for wearing one, and compulsion is being linked to every helmet post or thread then its difficult to give positive views for wearing a helmet without the underlying accusation that you are pro compulsion. A couple of us did try to separate the issues to allow the debate to flow but was told this is not possible as it was 'avoiding compulsion agenda'.

So there you have it, no discussion can take place around helmets without compulsion being the issue it seems. So to take the view do what you want but dont force others to do the same cannot take place as one is the other. Needless to say i dont agree that they are one and the same, i think they can be separate but this is proving difficult if not impossible on here.

so im not accused of avoiding, i am pro helmet

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Angelfisholo, I think many are happy with that view, but as helmet wearers are questioned for wearing one, and compulsion is being linked to every helmet post or thread then its difficult to give positive views for wearing a helmet without the underlying accusation that you are pro compulsion. A couple of us did try to separate the issues to allow the debate to flow but was told this is not possible as it was 'avoiding compulsion agenda'.

So there you have it, no discussion can take place around helmets without compulsion being the issue it seems. So to take the view do what you want but dont force others to do the same cannot take place as one is the other. Needless to say i dont agree that they are one and the same, i think they can be separate but this is proving difficult if not impossible on here.

so im not accused of avoiding, i am pro helmet

MTFU and rise above it. This thread has proven that opinions are set in stone. The only thing continued discussion will achieve is frustration and potential animosity.

 

[david k]

Exactly so fuck off with the compulsion, the campaigning to get a potentially very flawed product forced on people in the name of safety, and the anything must be better than nothing bollocks. OK?

I've haven't been pushing compulsion, in fact i tried to avoid that when discussing helmets and therefore started a separate thread. Only to be told that on other threads when discussing helmet points that i am avoiding the compulsion agenda and they cannot sit separately.

So if this is the case (I dont believe it is) anyone who mentions they believe helmets to be of benefit is automatically a pro compulsionist and must be swore at aggressively. Do you only take this view and subsequent aggressive approach with somebody on a forum or do you swear at everyone in a helmet? Just wondered if your intimidating approach works for your anti compulsion agenda?

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Just wondered if your intimidating approach works for your anti compulsion agenda?

Possibly substitute intimidating with frustrated.