David Bradley wrote:

Trying to deal rationally with this sort of exchanges is just going to be an
endless task and quite frankly I would much prefer to spend my time more
productively in producing pages for www.tfwl.org.uk - a site that has quickly
established itself to have exceptional credibility and well thought out
responses to the avalanche of misinformation that is circulating to make it
appear that the West London Tramway is the best thing since sliced bread.

With whom has it "quickly established itself to have exceptional
credibility and well thought out responses"? Where is the evidence to
support this assertion?

On 12 Nov 2005 18:19:07 -0800, wrote:

David Bradley wrote:

Trying to deal rationally with this sort of exchanges is just going to be an
endless task and quite frankly I would much prefer to spend my time more
productively in producing pages for www.tfwl.org.uk - a site that has quickly
established itself to have exceptional credibility and well thought out
responses to the avalanche of misinformation that is circulating to make it
appear that the West London Tramway is the best thing since sliced bread.

With whom has it "quickly established itself to have exceptional
credibility and well thought out responses"? Where is the evidence to
support this assertion?

uk.transport.london is not the entire world and its readership does not appear
to be populated with professionals from the transport industry. It is to that
group of people that I ascribe my comments. Exactly what evidence do you wish
me to produce? Do you have anything to suggest that might be an improvement
for public transport users or are you just there to whinge and moan?

David Bradley

David Bradley said:

On 12 Nov 2005 18:19:07 -0800, wrote:

David Bradley wrote:

www.tfwl.org.uk - a site that has quickly established itself to
have exceptional credibility and well thought out responses

With whom has it "quickly established itself to have exceptional
credibility and well thought out responses"? Where is the evidence
to support this assertion?

uk.transport.london is not the entire world and its readership does
not appear to be populated with professionals from the transport
industry. It is to that group of people that I ascribe my comments.
Exactly what evidence do you wish me to produce? Do you have
anything to suggest that might be an improvement for public transport
users or are you just there to whinge and moan?



You still haven't answered Kev's question: "Where is the evidence to
support this assertion?"

On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 10:09:18 -0000, wrote:

David Bradley said:

On 12 Nov 2005 18:19:07 -0800, wrote:

David Bradley wrote:

www.tfwl.org.uk - a site that has quickly established itself to
have exceptional credibility and well thought out responses

With whom has it "quickly established itself to have exceptional
credibility and well thought out responses"? Where is the evidence
to support this assertion?

uk.transport.london is not the entire world and its readership does
not appear to be populated with professionals from the transport
industry. It is to that group of people that I ascribe my comments.
Exactly what evidence do you wish me to produce? Do you have
anything to suggest that might be an improvement for public transport
users or are you just there to whinge and moan?



You still haven't answered Kev's question: "Where is the evidence to
support this assertion?"



I ask simply what kind of evidence do you want, I have enough to fill hundreds
of lines in this thread. If I give one example, or more, you will find
reasons why that is not good enough; if I respond with everything, what useful
purpose will that serve?

Fortunately I get a considerable amount of email feedback on my website that
is constructively helpful and acknowledgments that it has proved invaluable in
the work that the writer is engaged in. As a direct result of the web site I
have had invitations to speak at conferences and requests to attend forums and
committee meetings of those that are the "shakers and movers" of transport
policy.

No my Lady, it is you that is out in the cold. But then you won't be rreading
his because I have been excluded from your inbox. Nothing like not wanting to
hear the truth is there?

David Bradley

David Bradley wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 10:09:18 -0000, wrote:

Nothing like not wanting to hear the truth is there?

The follow on question that always comes to mind when someone raises that
particular issue is, "Is the speaker/writer portraying the truth, the whole
truth and nothing but the truth" or merely the portion of it that suits
their agenda?

On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 11:50:44 +0000 (UTC), "Brimstone"
wrote:

David Bradley wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 10:09:18 -0000, wrote:

Nothing like not wanting to hear the truth is there?

The follow on question that always comes to mind when someone raises that
particular issue is, "Is the speaker/writer portraying the truth, the whole
truth and nothing but the truth" or merely the portion of it that suits
their agenda?


Tell me, is this newsgroup about issues relating to transport in London or is
it a maser class in English? My comment relates to a difference of opinion on
what are the best options for the congestion problems along the Uxbridge Road
corridor. I go to considerable lengths to explain why I believe that in this
particular case [only] a tramway solution does not, and can not, meet that
objective.

It seems to me that we have a number of local government officials who wish to
leave behind a legacy prestige project of their term in office, that the vast
number of people living in the area simply don't want and worse still for some
it will be the loss of their livelihood, home and or business. At the same
time there continues to be a need for public transport provision in the area
which needs to sensibly co-exist with other demands on the limited amount of
road space available.

The current provision of public transport facilities locally hardly encourages
a modal change for those where it would be practical to do so. With no tramway
built, but perhaps a new generation of buses being introduced to meet emission
directives, then there isn't going to be any kind of step change which the
population is crying out for. Now you can continue to wax lyrically about
others that have sensibly suggestions to make, that in a small way works
towards improving things generally or you can present your own case of what
should be done.

You may not like what I have to say but any agenda I might have regarding
trolleybus *systems* does have a proven track record of making things better.
Where is the lie in that?

David Bradley


David Bradley

On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 11:09:33 +0000, David Bradley
wrote:

www.tfwl.org.uk - a site that has quickly established itself to
have exceptional credibility and well thought out responses

You still haven't answered Kev's question: "Where is the evidence to
support this assertion?"

I ask simply what kind of evidence do you want,

You must have some way of knowing that your website is considered to
"have exceptional credibility and well thought out responses". Simply
tell us how you know.

I have enough to fill hundreds of lines in this thread. If I give one
example, or more, you will find reasons why that is not good enough;

If the examples are satisfactory, then if anyone finds reasons why
they are not good enough, said reasons would be unconvincing, and
would be disregarded by readers - and of course, this being an open
group, you (and others) would have the opportunity to refute them.

As a direct result of the web site I
have had invitations to speak at conferences and requests to attend forums and
committee meetings of those that are the "shakers and movers" of transport
policy.

Care to give any examples?

You would do well to note that general statements such as these may be
considered dubious unless backed up with names and facts. For example,
on your web site, you state that "the opinion of the country's largest
group of professional transport planners is that the best option for
most places is trolleybuses". I constructively suggest that you add
the name of this group to that sentence, and possibly a direct quote
from a spokesman or report, as this would add great weight to its
credibility.