On Jan 18, 12:22 pm, "Clive George" wrote:

If the latter, I reckon my guess that they've just binned them is more
likely. Hanlon's Razor.

You think that if you like.

Say 50 per day at about 33p (?) each; something like £16 or £18 face
value in the Chief Correspondence Interface Officer's (letter opener's)
litter bin. I think not.
I think you should get out more, Clive.

If they had binned them, it was still wrong. The stamps don't belong to
the council or to the contractors. They are sent in by motorists who
want a receipt within the 14 days (or whatever) because they don't want
a doubled penalty.

The receipts the motorists requested, as per the invitation on the PCN
are not sent at all (I didn't make that bit clear). The "routine
machine generated response" is sent to everyone who has paid a PCN
sometime after the 14 days.

"Aidan" wrote in message
ps.com...

If the latter, I reckon my guess that they've just binned them is more
likely. Hanlon's Razor.

You think that if you like.

Say 50 per day at about 33p (?) each; something like £16 or £18 face
value in the Chief Correspondence Interface Officer's (letter opener's)
litter bin. I think not.
I think you should get out more, Clive.

It's postage stamps, not cash. Stuck to envelopes, ie tedious to use. You
can't simply cash them in for a refund.

Do you actually know what Hanlon's Razor is?

I find life is a lot less stressful without creating gratuitous extra
worries for myself - which is what you appear to be doing.

clive

Andy Hall wrote:
On 2007-01-17 22:51:12 +0000, said:

On 17 Jan, Tony Bryer wrote:

My Tesco now has one for the use of customers: I haven't tried it
myself but you toss in load of odd coins and it gives you real
money!

We've had one in Asda for a few years. It seems popular, depite it
keeping 10% of the proceeds. Quite a high commission!

It wants what?

It's actually 7.9p in the £, so 7.9% really, although as I said in anoither
post, they aren't very accurate anway.

Do people actually use this? This rate is higher than the forex
places in the airports.

People do use them, I 'weigh in' a couple of times per year, and yes i know
it's ripping me off, but I CBA counting almost £100 in pennies, twos, fives
etc and then hauling them to a bank on a Saturday morning, while they count
them all out again in front of me....I just tip them all into a strong
carrier bag and then empty them into the machine, then stand there twiddling
appendages until it spews out a ticket and I get my cash from the nice plump
lady with too much makeup.

Do shoppers then proceed off to buy their Lottery tickets?
This shows the % taken:
http://www.coinstar.co.uk/uk/Webdocs/A1-1
and this is the homepage:
http://www.coinstar.co.uk/uk/html/a-home

"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...

Some of them are. Sited not near an accident blackspot, but in a place
designed to trap the unwary.


Do you have any evidence of one *safety* camera that does not comply with
the rules?

Police funded cameras do not have to comply with the rules but they get no
revenue from them.

"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 15:51:01 UTC, "Clive George"
wrote:

but in a place designed to trap the unwary.

Do you think driving while unwary is a good thing?

Oh, don't be silly.

Safety cameras do not catch speeders they catch people driving without due
care and attention.
The penalties are far to light and they should be increased especially the
points.

"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 16:52:20 UTC, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:

On 17 Jan 2007 15:46:49 GMT, Bob Eager wrote:

in a place designed to trap the unwary.

There is a very easy way not to get caught by a speed camera, don't break
the speed limit. There are signs and the type, location and lighting
should tell you what the speed limit is without signs. If the limit
differs from what it should be for the type, location and lighting then
there must be small repeator boards telling you the speed limit.

As I said, 'designed'. There have been cases (I know it's not legal)
where the boards are missing or obscured, and that is where the cameras
do well. A lot of the cases that are overturned are where that has
occurred. Unfortunately, for every one that is overturned, many more,
caught in the same trap (I use the word advisedly) have just paid up.

Incidentally, I have no axe to grind. I have never been caught speeding!
Nor do I condone it, but I do object to cases where cameras are clearly
treated as a cash cow.

But is it a police funded camera?
If it is it can be hidden as they do not have to obey the rules for the
local authority safety cameras.

"Dave" wrote in message
...
Dave Liquorice wrote:

There is a very easy way not to get caught by a speed camera, don't break
the speed limit. There are signs and the type, location and lighting
should tell you what the speed limit is without signs. If the limit
differs from what it should be for the type, location and lighting then
there must be small repeator boards telling you the speed limit.

I drive from Preston, Lancs. to Porsmouth Hants on a regular basis, to see
our daughter and g daughters.
If you remember, about 2 or so years ago, there were road works in the
Birmingham area, restricting the speed to 50 MPH. over the elevated
section of the M6.

It was several trips down the road before I realised that any driver
accused of speeding South bound had a very good case to have the
conviction thrown out by the court. Though the motorway had repeater signs
for 50 MPH at the correct spacing and a sign to say the the restriction
had ended, there was no starter sign, the one that has to be bigger that
the repeater signs.

I often wondered how many tickets were issued that were faulty.

I would just change the charge to one of dangerous driving then.

"John Laird" wrote in message
ups.com...
nightjar wrote:

Nothing I can see in the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions
2002 says that the sign marking the start of the speed limit has to be
larger than the repeater signs.


The law sets out minimum requirements, but there is good practice which
goes beyond this:

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/group...ds_504746.hcsp

Terminal signs are recommended to be significantly larger than
repeaters.

Those are recommendations as to the minimum size to be used, which does not
preclude the use of a larger size. It is also a code of practice and would,
therefore, not affect the legality of the speed limit if it were not
followed. The only relevance would be that, if the signs were smaller than
recommended, it might be possible to mount a defence on the basis that they
were not adequately visible.

Colin Bignell

On Jan 18, 1:32 pm, "Clive George" wrote:
It's postage stamps, not cash. Stuck to envelopes, ie tedious to use. You
can't simply cash them in for a refund.

Yes, Clive.

They have some value and therefore could be sold to anyone who doesn't
want to pay the proper price. I'm surprised you should think it doesn't
happen. They're almost certainly soaking them off during working hours
and getting paid for it.

At a previous (public sector variety) job there were some capilliary
thermostats (£30-£45? each) in a store. On getting one out, I found
the copper capilliary tubes had been cut off all of them, presumably
for their scrap value (2p-5p?). It happens. You couldn't make it up.

Do you actually know what Hanlon's Razor is?

We speak of little else in the public bar at my local.
Have you actually assumed that I don't?
Do you think anyone is actually impressed that you do?

I find life is a lot less stressful without creating gratuitous extra
worries for myself - which is what you appear to be doing.

And I like to have a realistic mental image of the environment. It
doesn't particularly worry me, I just don't particularly like some bits
of it.

I think local authorities should be providing a service in smoothing
the paths for their residents and businesses, and not spending the
council tax in trying to penalise them. It happens because councils are
directed by councillors; they live in reserves called conservation
areas. You/we don't know half of it.


Walk backwards and wear a .45.

"Aidan" wrote in message
ups.com...

It's postage stamps, not cash. Stuck to envelopes, ie tedious to use. You
can't simply cash them in for a refund.

They have some value and therefore could be sold to anyone who doesn't
want to pay the proper price. I'm surprised you should think it doesn't
happen. They're almost certainly soaking them off during working hours
and getting paid for it.

I reckon that's ********.

Do you actually know what Hanlon's Razor is?

We speak of little else in the public bar at my local.
Have you actually assumed that I don't?
Do you think anyone is actually impressed that you do?

No, I didn't assume you didn't - I thought you might, or that you would have
the nous to go and look it up. See, I don't assume people are stupid.
Since apparently you don't know and don't know how to find out, I'll tell
you : it's never ascribe to malice what can be explained by incompetence.

Can you work out why this is relevant to your stamps problem?

clive

nightjar wrote:
"John Laird" wrote in message
ups.com...

The law sets out minimum requirements, but there is good practice which
goes beyond this:

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/group...ds_504746.hcsp

Terminal signs are recommended to be significantly larger than
repeaters.

Those are recommendations as to the minimum size to be used, which does not
preclude the use of a larger size. It is also a code of practice and would,
therefore, not affect the legality of the speed limit if it were not
followed. The only relevance would be that, if the signs were smaller than
recommended, it might be possible to mount a defence on the basis that they
were not adequately visible.

I had not noticed the PP's suggestion that terminal signs had to be
larger than repeaters, which is of course incorrect. Your points are
all valid. My point was simply that the authorities publish their own
guide to good practice, and then sometimes ignore it. I think in
places this could verge on entrapment. The only excuses for using
signs smaller than those recommended, would be a physical inability to
place such a sign or if it obscured other information.

--
"Permission for lip to wobble, Sir?"

"Clive George" wrote in message
...


Say 50 per day at about 33p (?) each; something like £16 or £18 face
value in the Chief Correspondence Interface Officer's (letter opener's)
litter bin. I think not.
I think you should get out more, Clive.

It's postage stamps, not cash. Stuck to envelopes, ie tedious to use. You
can't simply cash them in for a refund.

And who needs to use all the stamps? Even I, who sends two or three letters
a day, couldn't.

Do you actually know what Hanlon's Razor is?

I find life is a lot less stressful without creating gratuitous extra
worries for myself - which is what you appear to be doing.

Well said.

Mary

clive

"Aidan" wrote in message
oups.com...


On Jan 17, 3:35 pm, "Mary Fisher" wrote:
"Aidan" wrote in
ooglegroups.com...

Many wardens are liarsEvidence?

and the wardens who are the most devious andpersistent work dodgers get
promoted to supervisory positions.

Evidence?

Mary

Circumspice.

Haven't you, or anyone you know, ever received a ticket where the
warden has misrepresented the time, location, etc.?

No. But I've parked legally in several decades of driving in UK.

Mary

George wrote:

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...

On 2007-01-17 10:47:21 +0000, "Robert Laws" said:

The poor sod who will have to count it all has not done you any harm;
he didn't make the rules or probably have anything to do with the
decisions. Why make his life a misery? This is little better than
punching a random stranger on the nose because you are feel cross.

Robert

He/she is a petty bureaucrat who is unable or unwilling to get a proper

job.

Actually, something like this would probably add some colour to a
rather boring existence.



Unfair comment MrHall
He/She might of had a good job before taking up traffic warden
employment,possibly he/she was forced into redundancy or closure of the firm
he/she was working at for donkeys years and when that happens they only know
that job and dont have qualifications to seek better pay and working
conditions.
which will force them into these type of jobs especially if they have mouths
to feed.
Miniumum wage I think they're paid? and lets face it you need balls to do
there job.

Lets hope your working days hold out till retirement? otherwise you might
end up doing a ****ty job.

ending note, define a better job?

I deliberately didn't snip this, because I couldn't.

The definition of a better job is much more difficult than you imagine.

I had a very technical job, but I volunteered to take a final salary
pension at the age of 53. Did I take it?
Too true I did.

After 3 years of being more busy that when I had a job, I went through a
period of life when I got bored, so I took on a shelf stackers job at my
local buy and spew.

This enabled me to lose the weight that I had put on during my
retirement and gave me some extra cash to spend on the good things in
life. The first purchase was a digital video camera for my wife to bring
back something from her visit to Australia. I forget what other things I
wasted my money after that, but the important thing was I was a lot
fitter and leaner.

I have since left that job and I would like one that puts me outside for
a couple of days. If it wasn't for my health, I would jump at the chance
to meet the public, even if it meant that I had to put on a uniform and
issue parking tickets.

A job is what you want to make it. It can be a dead end one that just
gets you out of bed in the morning, or it can take up as many hours of
the day that it can, like I did.

Not all jobs are mundane, all have benefits that are not obvious.

Dave

dennis@home wrote:

"Dave" wrote in message
...

Dave Liquorice wrote:


There is a very easy way not to get caught by a speed camera, don't break
the speed limit. There are signs and the type, location and lighting
should tell you what the speed limit is without signs. If the limit
differs from what it should be for the type, location and lighting then
there must be small repeator boards telling you the speed limit.

I drive from Preston, Lancs. to Porsmouth Hants on a regular basis, to see
our daughter and g daughters.
If you remember, about 2 or so years ago, there were road works in the
Birmingham area, restricting the speed to 50 MPH. over the elevated
section of the M6.

It was several trips down the road before I realised that any driver
accused of speeding South bound had a very good case to have the
conviction thrown out by the court. Though the motorway had repeater signs
for 50 MPH at the correct spacing and a sign to say the the restriction
had ended, there was no starter sign, the one that has to be bigger that
the repeater signs.

I often wondered how many tickets were issued that were faulty.


I would just change the charge to one of dangerous driving then.

You can't do that after the ticket has been issued. The ticket has to
reach you within the designated time limit. After that they are helpless
unless they have a witness.

Dsve

Aidan wrote:


On Jan 17, 9:01 pm, "Mary Fisher" wrote:
That's not evidence that "Many wardens are liars"

Nor that "the wardens who are the most devious andpersistent work dodgers
get promoted to supervisory positions."

People say silly things which could be libellous.

Mary- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -


It's not silly at all. It is simply one facet of the state that the
nation has been allowed to degenerate into, by allowing the pursuit of
financial 'results' unhindered by any moral considerations. If you want
evidence of this, peruse the pepipoo (sp ?) site mentioned above. I
think you must have been missing out on something. Do you live in the
UK?

One personal experience; I got a PCN for parking in a Residents' bay
whilst looking at a job. I wasn't parked in a residents' bay; I was
parked on an adjacent yellow line, but there were no notices as to the
relevant restrictions. It seems the warden had lied; they are on
commission and do that a lot. It happens all the time.

I can confirm this. A few years ago, one of my nieces worked for the
company that issued parking tickets for Manchester. The company was
urging the wardens to issue even more tickets by bending the rules.

My niece took a stand on this and was suspended. However, this back
fired on the company as the whole issue was broadcast by Granada TV. If
I remember right, the company lost the right to issue tickets in
Manchester, though I could be wrong here.

Dave

On 2007-01-18 12:31:03 +0000, Tony Bryer said:

On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 18:16:46 +0000 Andy Hall wrote :
He/she is a petty bureaucrat who is unable or unwilling to get a
proper job.

I think that this is far from fair. If you have been out of the
workforce for any one of a number of reasons, there is a lot be said
for getting a job, any job, as a lever to the next as you will at least
then have an employer's reference as to things like attendance,
punctuality, reliability etc. IOW I would sooner employ someone who had
done something, anything, during the last x months rather than just sit
at home drawing benefit.

I agree with you, but that wasn't really my point. Certainly one
should try to go for something rather than nothing for the reasons you
suggest. However, I don't think that traffic warden needs to be on
the list.

On Jan 18, 4:36 pm, "Mary Fisher" wrote:
"And who needs to use all the stamps? Even I, who sends two or three letters
a day, couldn't.

Small businesses. There was a scam some years ago in which 'unused'
stamps were being sold loose and in bulk. People bought them. The
postmark had been washed out somehow but the invisible UV markings
showed up on the Royal Mail machines. I think it was this which
prompted the change to self-adhesive, shiny stamps.


I find life is a lot less stressful without creating gratuitous extra
worries for myself - which is what you appear to be doing.Well said.

You mean like ignore what's going on?
I like to be aware & beware of what is happening.

On Jan 18, 3:25 pm, "Clive George" wrote:

It's postage stamps, not cash. Stuck to envelopes, ie tedious to use. You
can't simply cash them in for a refund.
They have some value and therefore could be sold to anyone who doesn't
want to pay the proper price. I'm surprised you should think it doesn't
happen. They're almost certainly soaking them off during working hours
and getting paid for it.

I reckon that's ********.


You think that, if it pleases you. I reckon not. And the thermostats I
mentioned as a more extreme example of similar petty theft? I made
that up? No-one would do that?


Do you actually know what Hanlon's Razor is?
We speak of little else in the public bar at my local.
Have you actually assumed that I don't?
Do you think anyone is actually impressed that you do?

No, I didn't assume you didn't - I thought you might, or that you would have
the nous to go and look it up. See, I don't assume people are stupid.

How very noble of you.
Since apparently you don't know and don't know how to find out, I'll tell
you : it's never ascribe to malice what can be explained by incompetence.

Now you're gone and contradicted yourself by telling me So it seems you
thought I was stupid and couldn't possibly be better read than you. You
were busting to show that off.

Unfortunately, I did know but would never use the term in civilized
company because it's pretensious bollox. Coincidentally, the phrase was
used on Arrse (go google) some months ago.

Secondly, it's inappropriate, since I haven't ascribed anything to
unthinking incompetence (or stupidity, if you'd got the quote right).
I'd ascribed it to petty theft; Heinlein's razor would be more
appropriate, if I were given to dropping such pretentious ********.

Do you really think something of value would be left in a bin? Read
Dave's post; the ones who are unhindered by a working sets of morals
have attained management positions. The world is thus.

Can you work out why this is relevant to your stamps problem?

I sure you're a lovely chap, Clive, and you're really not half as
arrogant as your posts make you appear.

Have you worked out the relevance of walking backwards whilst wearing a
45?
It's a classical reference.

"Aidan" wrote in message
ups.com...

Do you actually know what Hanlon's Razor is?
We speak of little else in the public bar at my local.
Have you actually assumed that I don't?
Do you think anyone is actually impressed that you do?

No, I didn't assume you didn't - I thought you might, or that you would
have
the nous to go and look it up. See, I don't assume people are stupid.

How very noble of you.
Since apparently you don't know and don't know how to find out, I'll tell
you : it's never ascribe to malice what can be explained by incompetence.

Now you're gone and contradicted yourself by telling me So it seems you
thought I was stupid and couldn't possibly be better read than you. You
were busting to show that off.

Um, no. I was trying to explain something. You seemed to be saying you
didn't know what it meant, so I thought for the purposes of clarity I'd
write it down.

Unfortunately, I did know but would never use the term in civilized
company because it's pretensious bollox.

Um, no. It's an entirely sensible thing to say. It very accurately describes
what I was saying.

Coincidentally, the phrase was
used on Arrse (go google) some months ago.

And?

Secondly, it's inappropriate, since I haven't ascribed anything to
unthinking incompetence (or stupidity, if you'd got the quote right).

Exactly - that's entirely why it's appropriate, and why I've not dropped it.
You're ascribing things to malice, I'm ascribing them to incompetence. (btw,
it's not a simple quote - it's been said in many forms over the years). Ie
you've got it completely the wrong way round.

I'd ascribed it to petty theft;

See, I describe petty theft as malice.

Heinlein's razor would be more
appropriate, if I were given to dropping such pretentious ********.

Once again, it's not pretentious ********, it's a good way of conveying an
idea. Are you some kind of intellectual reverse snob, glorifying in
ignorance? "Heinlein's razor" is simply another name for the same thing -
and if you check, you'll see that "Hanlon's" is the more common name. You
apparently don't know that much about what you write.

Do you really think something of value would be left in a bin?

Yes. That's incredibly common. People chuck away many many things of far
greater value than stamps.

Read
Dave's post; the ones who are unhindered by a working sets of morals
have attained management positions. The world is thus.

Not necessarily.

Can you work out why this is relevant to your stamps problem?

I sure you're a lovely chap, Clive, and you're really not half as
arrogant as your posts make you appear.

I'm sure you're a lovely chap, and not a paranoid fool as your posts make
you appear.

Have you worked out the relevance of walking backwards whilst wearing a
45?
It's a classical reference.

Go on...

clive

On Jan 18, 7:27 pm, "Clive George" wrote:
"Aidan" wrote in
I'd ascribed it to petty theft;See, I describe petty theft as malice.

You do and in doing so you're wrong.
Malice is a desire to do injury or harm. If someone hits you because
they dislike you, that's malice, they want to hurt you. If they nick
your wallet, it's theft but not malicious. They have no particular
desire to hurt you, they just want your stuff.

Heinlein's razor would be more
appropriate, if I were given to dropping such pretentious ********.Once again, it's not pretentious ********, it's a good way of conveying an
idea. Are you some kind of intellectual reverse snob, glorifying in
ignorance? "Heinlein's razor" is simply another name for the same thing -
and if you check, you'll see that "Hanlon's" is the more common name. You
apparently don't know that much about what you write.

No; Heinlein's (a real person) version was " Do not ascribe to
villainy......."

I'm sure you're a lovely chap, and not a paranoid fool as your posts make
you appear.

I don't think 'they' are out to get me, they're out to get anyone they
can.
It's not paranoia, it's horrible reality.

"Aidan" wrote in message
ups.com...

On Jan 18, 7:27 pm, "Clive George" wrote:
"Aidan" wrote in
I'd ascribed it to petty theft;See, I describe petty theft as malice.

You do and in doing so you're wrong.
Malice is a desire to do injury or harm. If someone hits you because
they dislike you, that's malice, they want to hurt you. If they nick
your wallet, it's theft but not malicious. They have no particular
desire to hurt you, they just want your stuff.

I disagree. Stealing the stamps off SAEs is a deliberate act, intended for
financial gain. Villany is another way of saying it. Losing them isn't
deliberate, it's incompetence. This is exactly the sort of thing Hanlon's
razor is about.

Heinlein's razor would be more
appropriate, if I were given to dropping such pretentious ********.Once
again, it's not pretentious ********, it's a good way of conveying an
idea. Are you some kind of intellectual reverse snob, glorifying in
ignorance? "Heinlein's razor" is simply another name for the same thing -
and if you check, you'll see that "Hanlon's" is the more common name. You
apparently don't know that much about what you write.

No; Heinlein's (a real person) version was " Do not ascribe to
villainy......."

Yes, Heinlein was a real person. Yes, his quote was in those terms. What
you've missed is that he wasn't the only person to say such a thing - what I
wrote was expressing exactly the same sentiment. I did suggest that you
check, but you have apparently failed to do so.

I'm sure you're a lovely chap, and not a paranoid fool as your posts make
you appear.

I don't think 'they' are out to get me, they're out to get anyone they
can.
It's not paranoia, it's horrible reality.

Giggle. I don't find the need for such paranoia, but never mind.

You didn't explain your backwards thing btw...

clive

On Jan 18, 8:09 pm, "Clive George" wrote:
Yes, Heinlein was a real person. Yes, his quote was in those terms.
What
you've missed is that he wasn't the only person to say such a thing - what I
wrote was expressing exactly the same sentiment. I did suggest that you
check, but you have apparently failed to do so.

I knew of Hanlon's version which refers to stupidity; heinlein's to
villainy.
You assumed the stamps were binned through incompetence (Hanlon's), I
assumed they were stolen (villainy, so Heinlein). You'll find it
explained in Wikipedia.


I'm sure you're a lovely chap, and not a paranoid fool as your posts make
you appear.

I don't think 'they' are out to get me, they're out to get anyone they
can.
It's not paranoia, it's horrible reality.
Giggle. I don't find the need for such paranoia, but never mind.

If I were paranoid, I would think they gave ME a PCN & stole MY stamps
because they were being malicious towards ME.
I've never thought that, I think they're just low life thieves.
There's a lot of it about.

"Aidan" wrote in message
ups.com...


On Jan 18, 8:09 pm, "Clive George" wrote:
Yes, Heinlein was a real person. Yes, his quote was in those terms.
What
you've missed is that he wasn't the only person to say such a thing -
what I
wrote was expressing exactly the same sentiment. I did suggest that you
check, but you have apparently failed to do so.

I knew of Hanlon's version which refers to stupidity; heinlein's to
villainy.
You assumed the stamps were binned through incompetence (Hanlon's), I
assumed they were stolen (villainy, so Heinlein). You'll find it
explained in Wikipedia.

You mean http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_razor

which explains that Hanlon's and Heinlein's razor are the same thing?

Hanlon : "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained
by stupidity"
Heinlein : "You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result
from stupidity"

I'm saying exactly what Heinlein says : that you're attributing something to
villany which simply results from stupidity (aka incompetence).

Can you explain why you think Heinlein said exactly the opposite of what he
did say?

clive

Dave wrote:

Aidan wrote:

One personal experience; I got a PCN for parking in a Residents' bay
whilst looking at a job. I wasn't parked in a residents' bay; I was
parked on an adjacent yellow line, but there were no notices as to the
relevant restrictions. It seems the warden had lied; they are on
commission and do that a lot. It happens all the time.

I can confirm this. A few years ago, one of my nieces worked for the
company that issued parking tickets for Manchester. The company was
urging the wardens to issue even more tickets by bending the rules.

My niece took a stand on this and was suspended. However, this back
fired on the company as the whole issue was broadcast by Granada TV. If
I remember right, the company lost the right to issue tickets in
Manchester, though I could be wrong here.

No, I think you're right, but I forget the firm involved. This lot
took the biscuit, though:

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...._evidence.html

--
"Press any key to continue. Press any other key to quit."

On Jan 18, 8:48 pm, "Clive George" wrote:
You meanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_razor

which explains that Hanlon's and Heinlein's razor are the same thing?

Yes. But it says they're similar. The difference is the words malice &
villainy respectively.

Hanlon : "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained
by stupidity"
Heinlein : "You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result
from stupidity"


I'm saying exactly what Heinlein says : that you're attributing something to
villany which simply results from stupidity (aka incompetence).

You are now.
You started off saying Hanlon, so you've learnt something.

Can you explain why you think Heinlein said exactly the opposite of what he
did say?

I didn't/don't.
You need to re-read what I did write.

"Aidan" wrote in message
ups.com...


On Jan 18, 8:48 pm, "Clive George" wrote:
You meanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_razor

which explains that Hanlon's and Heinlein's razor are the same thing?

Yes. But it says they're similar. The difference is the words malice &
villainy respectively.

Which is no difference in this context.

Hanlon : "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately
explained
by stupidity"
Heinlein : "You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result
from stupidity"

I'm saying exactly what Heinlein says : that you're attributing something
to
villany which simply results from stupidity (aka incompetence).

You are now.
You started off saying Hanlon, so you've learnt something.

I merely said Heinlein to placate you - I'll carry on using Hanlon
everywhere.

Can you explain why you think Heinlein said exactly the opposite of what
he
did say?

I didn't/don't.
You need to re-read what I did write.

You wrote:

"You assumed the stamps were binned through incompetence (Hanlon's), I
assumed they were stolen (villainy, so Heinlein). "

So, why are you ascribing to villany (stealing the stamps) what can be
explained by stupidity (binning them)?

(why are you ascribing to malice what can be explained by incompetence?)

clive

"Aidan" wrote in message
oups.com...


On Jan 18, 4:36 pm, "Mary Fisher" wrote:
"And who needs to use all the stamps? Even I, who sends two or three
letters
a day, couldn't.

Small businesses. There was a scam some years ago in which 'unused'
stamps were being sold loose and in bulk. People bought them. The
postmark had been washed out somehow but the invisible UV markings
showed up on the Royal Mail machines. I think it was this which
prompted the change to self-adhesive, shiny stamps.

You only think? And here I was, assuming from your posts that you knew
everything.


I find life is a lot less stressful without creating gratuitous extra
worries for myself - which is what you appear to be doing.Well said.

You mean like ignore what's going on?
I like to be aware & beware of what is happening.

I don't feel the ned to look over my shoulder. That way lies paranoia.

On 2007-01-18 20:57:13 +0000, "John Laird" said:

Dave wrote:

Aidan wrote:

One personal experience; I got a PCN for parking in a Residents' bay
whilst looking at a job. I wasn't parked in a residents' bay; I was
parked on an adjacent yellow line, but there were no notices as to the
relevant restrictions. It seems the warden had lied; they are on
commission and do that a lot. It happens all the time.

I can confirm this. A few years ago, one of my nieces worked for the
company that issued parking tickets for Manchester. The company was
urging the wardens to issue even more tickets by bending the rules.

My niece took a stand on this and was suspended. However, this back
fired on the company as the whole issue was broadcast by Granada TV. If
I remember right, the company lost the right to issue tickets in
Manchester, though I could be wrong here.

No, I think you're right, but I forget the firm involved. This lot
took the biscuit, though:

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...._evidence.html

On

this very note, here is a useful link


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...4069_1,00.html

It appears that Mr McGuire won his appeal. Sadly it doesn't say what
happened to the firm
and individuals involved.

On 2007-01-18 19:08:03 +0000, Owain said:

Andy Hall wrote:
However, I don't think that traffic warden needs to be on
the list.

Although annoying, the long-term implications for society are less
worrying if people so inclined aim for a career in traffic wardening
rather than, say, Reichschancellor.

Owain

Well, yes, there is that, although it could be said that the former may
well aspire to the attributes of the latter as a job perk. That and
bus inspectors, although at least they are protecting legitimate
revenue for their employer.

wrote:
funny how some assume all laws must be reasonable and right. While most
mostly are, there is always going to be the odd rogue one, and some can
be right out there on occasion. Why? People with inadequate basic sense
or subject knowledge can sometimes be involved in implementing them.

not to mention those proposing and legislating

--
djc

On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 22:51:12 GMT, wrote:

On 17 Jan,
Tony Bryer wrote:

My Tesco now has one for the use of customers: I haven't tried it
myself but you toss in load of odd coins and it gives you real
money!

We've had one in Asda for a few years. It seems popular, depite it keeping
10% of the proceeds. Quite a high commission!

I suppose it appeals to a certain type of person, sounding as it does
as if it's a fruit machine paying out a "jackpot".

You could make quite a fortune at that rate by simply standing in the
street and asking passers-by for 1uk pound, for which you'd give them
90-odd pence in return.

In fact, aren't fruit machines supposed (in theory) to pay out at
about 90%?

--
Frank Erskine

On 17 Jan 2007 15:46:49 GMT, "Bob Eager" wrote:

On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 14:08:48 UTC, "dennis@home"
wrote:


"The Medway Handyman" wrote in message
.uk...
paul wrote:
"The Medway Handyman" wrote in
message .uk...
Hi All

Recently had a PCN issued by the local parking dept.

Good, it might teach you a lesson. Parking rules are there for a
reason and apply to everyone. Why should you be any different.

Parking rules where I live are there to raise revenue, thats the reason.
Since you have no idea of the circumstances you can't really comment can
you - ****wit.

I suppose you think speed cameras are there to raise revenue too.

Some of them are. Sited not near an accident blackspot, but in a place
designed to trap the unwary.

Surely they are placed to *avoid* an accident blackspot. Why wait
until the horse has bolted before you close the stable door?

--
Frank Erskine

On 2007-01-18 23:23:56 +0000, Frank Erskine
said:

On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 22:51:12 GMT, wrote:

On 17 Jan, Tony Bryer wrote:

My Tesco now has one for the use of customers: I haven't tried it
myself but you toss in load of odd coins and it gives you real money!

We've had one in Asda for a few years. It seems popular, depite it keeping
10% of the proceeds. Quite a high commission!

I suppose it appeals to a certain type of person, sounding as it does
as if it's a fruit machine paying out a "jackpot".

There are some odd folk about.


You could make quite a fortune at that rate by simply standing in the
street and asking passers-by for 1uk pound, for which you'd give them
90-odd pence in return.

HMRC is well practised at this.


In fact, aren't fruit machines supposed (in theory) to pay out at
about 90%?


Ah but is it gambling?

I'm reminded of the Python merchant banker sketch

City Gent: Ah, Mr Ford isn't it?

Mr Ford: That's right.

City Gent: How do you do. I'm a merchant banker.

Mr Ford: How do you do Mr...

City Gent: Er... I forget my name for the moment but I am a merchant banker.

Mr Ford: Oh. I wondered whether you'd like to contribute to the
orphan's home. (he rattles the tin)

City Gent: Well 1 don't want to show my hand too early, but actually
here at Slater Nazi we are quite keen to get into orphans, you know,
developing market and all that... what son of sum did you have in mind?

Mr Ford: Well... er... you're a rich man.

City Gent: Yes, 1 am. Yes. Yes, very, very rich. Quite phenomenally
wealthy. Yes, I do own the most startling quantifies of cash. Yes,
quite right... you're rather a smart young lad aren't you. We could do
with somebody like you to feed the pantomime horse. Very smart.

Mr Ford: Thank you, sir.

City Gent: Now, you were saying. I'm very, very, very, very, very,
very, very, very, very, very, very rich.

Mr Ford: So er, how about a pound?

City Gent: A pound. Yes, I see. Now this loan would be secured by the...

Mr Ford: It's not a loan, sir.

City Gent: What?

Mr Ford: It's not a loan.

City Gent: Ah.

Mr Ford: You get one of these, sir. (he gives him a flag)

City Gent: It's a bit small for a share certificate isn't it? Look, I
think I'd better run this over to our legal department. If you could
possibly pop back on Friday.

Mr Ford: Well do you have to do that, couldn't you just give me the pound?

City Gent: Yes, but you see I don't know what it's for.

Mr Ford: It's for the orphans.

City Gent: Yes?

Mr Ford: It's a gift.

City Gent: A what?

Mr Ford: A gift?

City Gent: Oh a gift!

Mr Ford: Yes.

City Gent: A tax dodge.

Mr Ford: No, no, no, no.

City Gent: No? Well, I'm awfully sorry I don't understand. Can you just
explain exactly what you want.

Mr Ford: Well, I want you to give me a pound, and then I go away and
give it to the orphans.

City Gent: Yes?

Mr Ford: Well, that's it.

City Gent: No, no, no, I don't follow this at all, I mean, I don't want
to seem stupid but it looks to me as though I'm a pound down on the
whole deal.

Mr Ford: Well, yes you are.

City Gent: I am! Well, what is my incentive to give you the pound?

Mr Ford: Well the incentive is - to make the orphans happy.

City Gent: (genuinely puzzled) Happy?... You quite sure you've got this fight?

Mr Ford: Yes, lots of people give me money.

City Gent: What, just like that?

Mr Ford: Yes.

City Gent: Must be sick. I don't suppose you could give me a list of
their names and addresses could you?

Mr Ford: No, I just go up to them in the street and ask.

City Gent: Good lord! That's the most exciting new idea I've heard in
years! It's so simple it's brilliant! Well, if that idea of yours isn't
worth a pound I'd like to know what is. (he takes the tin from Ford)

Mr Ford: Oh, thank you, sir.

City Gent: The only trouble is, you gave me the idea before I'd given
you the pound. And that's not good business.

Mr Ford: Isn't it?

City Gent: No, I'm afraid it isn't. So, um, off you go. (he pulls a
lever opening a trap door under Ford's feet and Ford falls through with
a yelp) Nice to do business with you.

"Frank Erskine" wrote in message
...

Some of them are. Sited not near an accident blackspot, but in a place
designed to trap the unwary.

Surely they are placed to *avoid* an accident blackspot. Why wait
until the horse has bolted before you close the stable door?

There are rules for "safety" cameras.
Like they have to be close to somewhere that has had a fatal accident or
several injuries.
The local authority can then keep the "revenue" to reinvest in safety
schemes.

The police can put a camera anywhere but the "revenue" goes in the general
tax fund and not to the police.
The police tend to be choosy as it costs them money to run the camera.

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 23:53:26 +0000, Andy Hall
wrote:

On 2007-01-18 23:23:56 +0000, Frank Erskine
said:

On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 22:51:12 GMT, wrote:

On 17 Jan, Tony Bryer wrote:

My Tesco now has one for the use of customers: I haven't tried it
myself but you toss in load of odd coins and it gives you real money!

We've had one in Asda for a few years. It seems popular, depite it keeping
10% of the proceeds. Quite a high commission!

I suppose it appeals to a certain type of person, sounding as it does
as if it's a fruit machine paying out a "jackpot".

There are some odd folk about.


You could make quite a fortune at that rate by simply standing in the
street and asking passers-by for 1uk pound, for which you'd give them
90-odd pence in return.

HMRC is well practised at this.

What - they give that much back?

--
Frank Erskine

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 23:54:42 -0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:


"Frank Erskine" wrote in message
.. .

Some of them are. Sited not near an accident blackspot, but in a place
designed to trap the unwary.

Surely they are placed to *avoid* an accident blackspot. Why wait
until the horse has bolted before you close the stable door?

There are rules for "safety" cameras.
Like they have to be close to somewhere that has had a fatal accident or
several injuries.

That's precisely what I mean.

So there have to have been accidents/injuries/fatalities already?

Surely a "safety" scheme is to prevent accidents etc in the first
place.

--
Frank Erskine

Dave wrote:

I have since left that job and I would like one that puts me outside
for a couple of days. If it wasn't for my health, I would jump at the
chance to meet the public, even if it meant that I had to put on a
uniform and issue parking tickets.

This always reminds me of the concentration camp guards who claimed 'I was
just obeying orders'.

The point is that local authorities use parking fines as a revenue raising
exercice - my local authority recently admitted this in a local paper
article - and also said they simply would not cancel tickets on appeal 'no
matter what the circumstances'. They also stated in a recent council
meeting that 'they had increased the target for parking revenue to £4
million for the next year'.

IMO if you work for such a corrupt, money grabbing, unjust organisation you
deserve all the abuse you get & more. If people simply had the morals to
say 'no' 'that isn't right' we would all be better off.

As a matter of interest McDonalds pay more than the council pays parking
attendants. I have much more respect for them.


--
Dave
The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
01634 717930
07850 597257

dennis@home wrote:

Safety cameras do not catch speeders they catch people driving
without due care and attention.
The penalties are far to light and they should be increased
especially the points.

What a load of Rollocks.

Simple question. Why have RTA's and road deaths INCREASED since speed
cameras where introduced?

That is a fact. Only one other explanation for their use. I'll give you a
clue. Starts with Gordon. Ends with Brown.


--
Dave
The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
01634 717930
07850 597257

dennis@home wrote:

I often wondered how many tickets were issued that were faulty.


I would just change the charge to one of dangerous driving then.

Faulty tickets can be, and are issued in their tens of thousands...

Notable recent cases include over 60,000 issued in London due to
incorrect alignment of the SPECS system on the embankment. Eventually a
driver pointed out to them that the signs indicating the reduction in
speed to 20mph were placed directly below the SPECS cameras which were
looking down distance down the road. Hence the cameras were sampling
vehicle speed between two fixed points, but half the length monitored
was actually a 30mph road.

Another case involved a motorist being "caught" by a fixed temporary
camera on a dual carriageway. He had to go to court to point out that
although the temporary speed reduction was signed on the main road, it
was not indicated on the slip road that he joined via. Hence the last
sign he went through advised NSL on entry to the road.

Another was a motorcyclist accused of doing 40 in a 30 zone. The rider
challenged the prosecution and demanded to see the evidence. After many
many months of refusals, eventually the police produced the photos taken
by the camera. They indicated the maximum speed was only 26mph based on
the distance travelled over the marked section of road. It transpires
that they had simply issued tickets based the the readings taken by the
Doppler sensor in the camera - and not actually checked the photos in
more detail than required to acquire the registration number of the
vehicle. (this case also illustrated beyond any doubt that the cameras
do make mistakes)


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/