On 26/08/2019 13:32, T i m wrote:
On Mon, 26 Aug 2019 13:16:42 +0100, ARW
wrote:

On 26/08/2019 12:35, Richard wrote:

I have not read past your *Except* sentence.

A pity you have not read it. Basically he was saying that he will abide
by the rules only when it suits him.

Nope. I said I will (typically, unless circumstances dictate it's
sensible to do otherwise, like going up on the pavement to allow an
emergency vehicle past) abide to the formal rules, but won't apply
informal 'rules' unilaterally.

Perhaps you need to apply to become one of the moronic hypocritical
jobsworth ****wits illustrated in Adam's two posts as you appear to be
well qualified.

BTW I have never attacked a park warden or parked on double yellow lines
in Watford.

;-)

The park warden threw the first punch.

Then he was very much in the wrong (even if provoked).

He was happy to start a fight and
even happier to call the police after he had been given a bloody nose
and claim that he had been assaulted.

I guess how potentially rational people react in those circumstances
can be a function of if / how they were provoked.

The police had none of it after
collecting about 10 witness statements - although I was warned about my
language.

;-)

In Watford I was just pointing out that traffic wardens are

snip

I'd say some can be more unreasonable than others but in many cases
they are just doing their job [1]

They are just doing their job. But it's a ****'s job and only a ****
would do that job. Hence why it has been suggested that you apply for
the job.

--
Adam