On 26.08.15 13:51, Hils wrote:
On 26/08/15 09:20, y wrote:
It seems the intellectual powerhouse masquarading as a naive wet 70s throwback
has suggested women only carraiges would be a good idea.

Wrong again, what JC actually wrote was this: "Some women have raised
with me that a solution to the rise in assault and harassment on public
transport could be to introduce women only carriages. My intention would
be to make public transport safer for everyone from the train platform,
to the bus stop to on the mode of transport itself. However, I would
consult with women and open it up to hear their views on whether
women-only carriages would be welcome."

People who try to throw **** find that they end up a good deal dirtier
than their targets.

A more useful idea would be sober only carriages, perhaps some boffins
can invent a breathalyser activated door.

Current legislation will never let it fly.

Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 26/08/2015 15:44, Glazebrook East wrote:

From the article to which you referred:

"Last year, Claire Perry, a Conservative junior transport minister
said the idea of women only carriages was interesting"

As in "That's an interesting idea"? I suspect politicians of all kinds
say that to people with Good Ideas on a regular basis.

I'm sure Michael Bell hears it very often, which is why he keeps telling us
about the massive political support for his ideas. Of course, he then tells
us how disappointed he is that they never take any further action.

On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 17:35:03 +0100, Arthur Figgis put finger to keyboard
and typed:

On 26/08/2015 15:44, Glazebrook East wrote:

From the article to which you referred:

"Last year, Claire Perry, a Conservative junior transport minister
said the idea of women only carriages was interesting"

As in "That's an interesting idea"? I suspect politicians of all kinds
say that to people with Good Ideas on a regular basis.

Oh, absolutely. "Interesting" is what you call something when you don't
agree with it but don't want to publicly disagree with it (or offend the
person suggesting it). Or, alternatively, what you say when you haven't
thought about it enough yet to know whether you agree with it or not. Every
politician knows that :-)

Mark
--
Please take a short survey on security and privacy on the Internet: http://meyu.eu/ao
My blog: http://www.markgoodge.uk

Hils wrote:
On 26/08/15 09:20, y wrote:
It seems the intellectual powerhouse masquarading as a naive wet 70s throwback
has suggested women only carraiges would be a good idea.

Wrong again, what JC actually wrote was this: "Some women have raised
with me that a solution to the rise in assault and harassment on public
transport could be to introduce women only carriages. My intention would
be to make public transport safer for everyone from the train platform,
to the bus stop to on the mode of transport itself. However, I would
consult with women and open it up to hear their views on whether
women-only carriages would be welcome."

People who try to throw **** find that they end up a good deal dirtier
than their targets.

A more useful idea would be sober only carriages, perhaps some boffins
can invent a breathalyser activated door.

Matt's take on it:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/

wrote:
On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 18:30:24 +0100
eastender wrote:
I wouldn't put much faith in someone who can't spell carriages.

I wouldn't put much faith in someone like this:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...=spelling+nazi

You and Mister T should form a little losers club for your miniscule talents.
Maybe one day the pair of you could progress to being grammar nazis if you
practice hard enough?

It's amusing that both your post, and the urban dictionary link, include
further spelling mistakes.

On Thu, 27 Aug 2015 08:51:23 +0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 18:30:24 +0100
eastender wrote:
I wouldn't put much faith in someone who can't spell carriages.

I wouldn't put much faith in someone like this:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...=spelling+nazi

You and Mister T should form a little losers club for your miniscule talents.
Maybe one day the pair of you could progress to being grammar nazis if you
practice hard enough?

It's amusing that both your post, and the urban dictionary link, include
further spelling mistakes.

Well whatever keeps you amused eh?

You guys are giving me a good laugh today, keep it up

--
Spud

wrote:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2015 08:51:23 +0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 18:30:24 +0100
eastender wrote:
I wouldn't put much faith in someone who can't spell carriages.

I wouldn't put much faith in someone like this:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...=spelling+nazi

You and Mister T should form a little losers club for your miniscule talents.
Maybe one day the pair of you could progress to being grammar nazis if you
practice hard enough?

It's amusing that both your post, and the urban dictionary link, include
further spelling mistakes.

Well whatever keeps you amused eh?

You guys are giving me a good laugh today, keep it up

I'm really disappointed in you: that latest post fails to include even a
single misspelled word. What went wrong?

On Thu, 27 Aug 2015 10:09:46 +0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2015 08:51:23 +0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 18:30:24 +0100
eastender wrote:
I wouldn't put much faith in someone who can't spell carriages.

I wouldn't put much faith in someone like this:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...=spelling+nazi

You and Mister T should form a little losers club for your miniscule
talents.
Maybe one day the pair of you could progress to being grammar nazis if you
practice hard enough?

It's amusing that both your post, and the urban dictionary link, include
further spelling mistakes.

Well whatever keeps you amused eh?

You guys are giving me a good laugh today, keep it up

I'm really disappointed in you: that latest post fails to include even a
single misspelled word. What went wrong?

Neid to ceep u on ur tows.

--
Spud

In article e.net,
(Mark Goodge) wrote:

On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 17:35:03 +0100, Arthur Figgis put finger to keyboard
and typed:

On 26/08/2015 15:44, Glazebrook East wrote:

From the article to which you referred:

"Last year, Claire Perry, a Conservative junior transport minister
said the idea of women only carriages was interesting"

As in "That's an interesting idea"? I suspect politicians of all kinds
say that to people with Good Ideas on a regular basis.

Oh, absolutely. "Interesting" is what you call something when you don't
agree with it but don't want to publicly disagree with it (or offend the
person suggesting it). Or, alternatively, what you say when you haven't
thought about it enough yet to know whether you agree with it or not.
Every politician knows that :-)

Who remembers Roman and Martin's Laugh-In? "Vairy Interesting... but
stoopid""

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In uk.transport.london message , Wed, 26
Aug 2015 08:20:11, y posted:

It seems the intellectual powerhouse masquarading as a naive wet 70s throwback
has suggested women only carraiges would be a good idea.

Equality legislation would presumably require an equal proportion of
men-only accommodation.

That would be beneficial, since in it there would be considerably less
high-pitched yackety-yak and fewer squalling children.

--
(c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. Mail via homepage. Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - FAQqish topics, acronyms and links;
Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.