cleanorbust Posted October 30, 2015 Report Share Posted October 30, 2015 Evolution, innit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laird387 Posted October 30, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 30, 2015 Good point, if that happened to me I'd certainly want to chase it till it was exhausted,rip it to shreds, then smear its blood on my face. Hi Ross, I appreciate that you do not live in a hunting area whereas I used to live in the countryside regularly hunted by the Beaufort hunt, but even though I'm not by any means a hunting enthusiast, I have seen them close by my home. However, having witnessed various of the activities I can assure you that the view that you portrayed exists solely in some deranged tabloid reporter's imagination........... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
english electric Posted October 30, 2015 Report Share Posted October 30, 2015 Good point, if that happened to me I'd certainly want to chase it till it was exhausted,rip it to shreds, then smear its blood on my face. or the countless millions of deaths know doubt that have occurred to cover ones face in makeup lipstick eye shadow liner etc in ones pursuit of beauty. and may I had both the male and female cosmetics industry 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cleanorbust Posted October 30, 2015 Report Share Posted October 30, 2015 Blimey I only want to ride four laps of ten sections of a Sunday and I'm responsible for the destruction of mankind, the world and everything in it. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b40rt Posted October 30, 2015 Report Share Posted October 30, 2015 Hi Ross, I appreciate that you do not live in a hunting area whereas I used to live in the countryside regularly hunted by the Beaufort hunt, but even though I'm not by any means a hunting enthusiast, I have seen them close by my home. However, having witnessed various of the activities I can assure you that the view that you portrayed exists solely in some deranged tabloid reporter's imagination........... I bet they made the whole "Cecil the lion" story up as well, can't believe anything journalists write !!! or the countless millions of deaths know doubt that have occurred to cover ones face in makeup lipstick eye shadow liner etc in ones pursuit of beauty. and may I had both the male and female cosmetics industry Thanks for the support,appreciated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dadof2 Posted October 30, 2015 Report Share Posted October 30, 2015 Hi dadof2, it was me that requested you delete your post about The Scott, however Andy also had the good sense to delete it quickly. You gave the locations of about 9 sections that are out of bounds to spectators, is n't it about time you started to think of the implications of posting such information! Hi John, I have quoted what you wrote but this is also in reply to Nigels and Jonnyboxers posts wondering why I posted it. I did not know if your request was personal or on behalf or Richmond MC. None of the information I posted is not already well known to a large number of people. It is common practice for some well known riders to walk parts or the course and sections before the event, if you were to look back on TC and in TMX a number of riders have stated they do this. As stated previously I felt the information I posted may be of interest to some of our continental and American members, that is why I explained what some of the geographical features were, not just the references for a few sections. I also know from riding the scott that quite a few spectators have been going to these "out of bounds" sections for many years. Several of the sections I listed used to be in the programme. I did think of the implications of what I wrote before I posted it and my opinion was and still is that the post would influence a very small number, if any potential spectators. The organisers already acknowledge spectators go to some non programme sections and at one I know of they provide a parking area. I could very easily post some far more controversial information regarding conflicts over land "use" in the Scott area but judge it to be in no ones interest to do so. I will simply say there are those who believe the countryside should be opened up for various tourist / recreational activities and in some cases see business opportunities in this approach whilst at the opposite end of the spectrum are those who believe the countryside should be solely for their own chosen lifestyle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel dabster Posted October 31, 2015 Report Share Posted October 31, 2015 BS 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyboxer Posted October 31, 2015 Report Share Posted October 31, 2015 Dadof2 I don't know your agenda but you certainly know how to antagonise stuff, rightly or wrongly in your opinion When you've dug yourself a hole - turn the JCB keys off By the reaction you got, you impressed no one & angered a lot - hence the deletion & why it was done Whether an out of bounds section is near a footpath, albeit high up on the fells matters not the Club have deemed it necessary not to publish this & you should have respected that It may be because the the NPark or landowner think the area with 100+ people at one time on this footpath or fell is unsustainable, when it normally gets 5 walkers a week I don't know - but you must respect the programme advice Posting what you did, crossed the line ........of respect to the trial organisers It's a pity you still can't see it - that's the sad part 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dadof2 Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 Most of the adverse reaction I got came from the same people who would criticise me whatever I wrote. Suggestions that my post may influence 100 + people to converge on an out of bound section or that I have some sort of agenda are pretty ridiculous. When I made my post I suspected it may result in an extra two or 3 people viewing a few extra sections, which in doing so would result in less traffic at some of the overcrowded areas. You may care to note that when a potential spectator asked how to view the Scott I referred them to the programme with the suggestion some areas had traffic problems. The removed post did provide information - not advice to visit. On some of these paths and bridleways groups of walkers of up to 30 and mountain bikers up to 10 are not uncommon. To some extent those who have criticised my post have insulted the intelligence and integrity of other forum members in assuming the information I supplied may encourage them on mass visit to sections where the organisers would rather there were not spectators. There is one group of off programme sections in particular (I will not repeat their name here) where even though it is legal, I would strongly advise against taking a 4 wheel vehicle, but accessing them by MTB or on foot would cause no problems at all. Two further points: Did anyone consider the potential impact of the BBC programme? I have posted two contradictory views on that thread. The are no doubt a few areas of the course that are very "sensitive". However there will also be quite a lot of off programme areas that are nowhere near as sensitive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
proc Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 FFS 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrsunt Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 Dadof, admit when you are wrong. All you are doing is leaving a bitter taste in everyones mouth, whether it be forum members, administrators or people involved with the scott. Give it a rest. Sent a pm 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel dabster Posted November 5, 2015 Report Share Posted November 5, 2015 Sent a pm? John, I know you are in the building trade is that personal message a pair of concrete boots? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dadof2 Posted November 8, 2015 Report Share Posted November 8, 2015 (edited) At least I have kept to reasoned discussion, not had to resort to insults or exaggerated claims. "I could very easily post some far more controversial information regarding conflicts over land "use" in the Scott area but judge it to be in no ones interest to do so." I made the above statement in an earlier post. The threat to the Scott or at least to significant parts of the present course, come not from a few extra spectators where they should not be, nor (unless it becomes very much greater and is mismanaged) the volume of spectator traffic. It comes from factors I am not willing to post as it would be handing very effective ammunition to the anti off road lobby in general. Edited November 8, 2015 by dadof2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel dabster Posted November 8, 2015 Report Share Posted November 8, 2015 such power, such venom, such BS. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dadof2 Posted November 9, 2015 Report Share Posted November 9, 2015 such power, such venom, such BS. Suck a lack of knowledge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.