Discussion in 'Motoring' started by SanPedro, Apr 13, 2005.
But they are all getting too much.
What does anybody else think?
That's a great idea, Chris!
When the politicians introduce unpopular, dishonest or controversial policies, we should make it easier for them by banning any discussions about it.
You could always just not read the threads if you're not interested.
Shouldn't be banned and they obviously provoke responses from a number of people. Have to admit that I don't bother reading them anymore though.
Yes. I say ban them. Fed up with listening to people who don't understand the law.
Like suggesting we ban threads about speeding
It's more a rail against going over the same old tired ground every few days. Don't get me wrong I love reading a good thread, but when the same basic arguments are reiterated by the same people each time it doesn't make for any more enlightenment on the subject.
People like Rahl (and others with strongly held views) are great for the forums as he sends all the Guardian readers into apoplexy every time he hits the submit button.
I dont think the threads themselves should be banned.. but how about another voting option?
"No, but Ban taking threads off-topic to begin a speeding/driving debate"
That I would vote for, I have to admit I am starting to just scan over speeding/driving rants that show up in threads that started off having nothing to do with it.
Nothing wrong with the Guardian: it's generally well-written.
It's my paper of choice, but I'll be voting Tory, and I don't use smelly public transport or knit lentils.
Wouldn't we be better off with just the one speeding thread ? We have a weekly football thread, so there's no reason why we can't have one for speeding and cameras as well.
How about a seperate speeding forum?
Ban them if I could , funnily 2 out of the last 4 were started by moderators or ex-moderators.
Subforum or sticky perhaps.
Subforum could be speeding, immigration and chavs.
or more like this...
..and all threads started by Ethics or Rahl.
I quite agree. I never said there was anything wrong with the Guardian, merely pointing out that it is unlikely to be a paper that has much in common with many of Rahl's points of view (and by association neither would many of its readers).
Conversly I take the Sunday Times and would be more inclined to vote Labour again this time around. Funny old world.
However, as a mate of mine said years ago, although the Guardian is morally/socially Liberal, politically it's Tory and at every Election for years its urged people to vote for them. So maybe Rhoamishs comments aren't so out of sorts for a Guardian reader?
Now thats what I call succinct!
Well unless a thread goes off topic don't you have a choice to read it or not?
You don't count and 1 will be taken into consideration seeing you started one of the speeding threads.
Should we ban threads about speeding
I don't think we should ban them, just 3 points towards your forums suspension and a 60 quid fine
I know, I know.
But, after all, i was only doing a small amount over the limit, in a perfectly safe situation, with clear roads, clear weather and a car that was only a couple of years old. None of this was taken into consideration, no common sense was applied to the issuing of the ticket and the circumstances surrounding it, there was no comeback possible on the possibility of the equipment used being faulty or even slightly inaccurate. I have no recourse.
The use of speed cameras to boost the funding of the local..............
oops, i'm off again
I'm over it, honest.
well, i will be in a few years when my license gets back to it's proper state
I reckon we should ban threads with people trying to ban things in.
Best start a new thread on that one Games Guru.
totally, agree ....Banning IS WRONG !!
Separate names with a comma.