Vic How would you rate Daniel Andrews' performance as Victorian Premier? - Part 7

[Evolved1]

I see you are totally out of material. Fine. Let’s leave it here and I mentally shake your hand for what began as an interesting debate

I've had more interesting debates with my cat. He usually wins too.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Camera or pulled over by police? Cos a camera will fine you for doing 41 in a 40 zone!

Pulled over. Must be a trouble spot and the school likely complained that motorists weren’t slowing down enough.

 

[Evolved1]

Tell me about it.

Few years ago, I was coaching a game of cricket at Albert Park, and you could only pay for 4 hours at a time. Was out in the middle all game umpiring, walked off, and there sitting on my car was a lovely, fresh parking fine for $125 dollars.

Now, I get that if they don't charge for parking in Albert park, shitloads of people will take advantage, but that not only seems exorbitant to me but designed deliberately to catch as many people as they can. Ticket zones specifically near cricket grounds, set so that you cannot pay before the game's over.

I don't have much of a problem with speed limits, because the government has to take into account each and every car that is on the roads at any given time. Your car might be able to handle doing 130 on a country road, but can a truck built in the seventies? My first car was an '86 mazda 323 sport, with no ABS or traction control; I've no doubt I used to piss people off when I slowed down good and early entering roundabouts, because I learned my lesson one winter's day when my car lost traction doing barely 35 into a roundabout on a wet road.

The counter being, "my car can do it, why do I have to suffer for everyone else?" But then we come back to the other side of it; an element of driving around other people is you assume they'll make the same decisions as you will, so they're predictable. If you behave differently, you will cause accidents and accidents will happen to you, simply because you are unpredictable AND because you cannot or won't be able to predict other behaviours.

When everyone's driving a weapon, you kind of need to play by the rules at least some of the time.

If you have a CFC sticker on the back, I might give your car a gentle nudge.

 

[Crankyhawk]

Police should pull over the halfwit campaigners in the right lane doing ******* 70 KLM's in an 80 K zone, 80 in a 100k zone,' drag the campaigners off the road, shoot them gut them and then pout petrol on them and set them on fire.

While it has been years since I sat driver’s test I only remember keep left being a courtesy not something which has an actual law behind it (those signs just remind of courtesy same as signs saying drowsy drivers die). Of course those advocates for police pulling over slow campaigners on the right lane will no doubt highlight the relevant law?

Edit found a specific example, it only applies where speed limit is 80 kph or more

It's our most basic road rule - but did you know you could be fined over this?

A Melbourne motorist was slapped with a $161 fine and lost two demerit points for breaking one of the first rules drivers learn.

au.news.yahoo.com

So more often than essendon winning a final

 

[eddiesmith]

Tell me about it.

Few years ago, I was coaching a game of cricket at Albert Park, and you could only pay for 4 hours at a time. Was out in the middle all game umpiring, walked off, and there sitting on my car was a lovely, fresh parking fine for $125 dollars.

Now, I get that if they don't charge for parking in Albert park, shitloads of people will take advantage, but that not only seems exorbitant to me but designed deliberately to catch as many people as they can. Ticket zones specifically near cricket grounds, set so that you cannot pay before the game's over.

I don't have much of a problem with speed limits, because the government has to take into account each and every car that is on the roads at any given time. Your car might be able to handle doing 130 on a country road, but can a truck built in the seventies? My first car was an '86 mazda 323 sport, with no ABS or traction control; I've no doubt I used to piss people off when I slowed down good and early entering roundabouts, because I learned my lesson one winter's day when my car lost traction doing barely 35 into a roundabout on a wet road.

The counter being, "my car can do it, why do I have to suffer for everyone else?" But then we come back to the other side of it; an element of driving around other people is you assume they'll make the same decisions as you will, so they're predictable. If you behave differently, you will cause accidents and accidents will happen to you, simply because you are unpredictable AND because you cannot or won't be able to predict other behaviours.

When everyone's driving a weapon, you kind of need to play by the rules at least some of the time.

Don’t get me started on the bloody parking inspectors at Albert Park!!! Been done a couple of times at Shield games, think it was only 2 hour limit during the week? Got held up talking to someone and got done.

Same thing happened this year at the G, forgot the Australian open was on but we were training at the G for 2 hours so parked in 2 hour spot. Came back to car with inspector writing out the ticket. But of course it was Mens final day so of course they were out in force.

 

[Proper Gander]

I've had more interesting debates with my cat. He usually wins too.

Yet you’ve hung in for a good while now??? and have suddenly lost interest when you inevitably fail to produce any meaningful argument to support your own position, which is admittedly challenging now you have dropped the straw man stuff and admitted that your behaviour is entirely based on your wanting to do something and not getting caught?

Not surprised in the slightest at your cat winning anything much against you. He probably doesn’t set out on a pathway to prove he has the largest penis of the two, and probably doesn’t mind too much about any boasts in that direction

 

[Evolved1]

Yet you’ve hung in for a good while now??? and have suddenly lost interest when you inevitably fail to produce any meaningful argument to support your own position, which is admittedly challenging now you have dropped the straw man stuff and admitted that your behaviour is entirely based on your wanting to do something and not getting caught?

Not surprised in the slightest at your cat winning anything much against you. He probably doesn’t set out on a pathway to prove he has the largest penis of the two, and probably doesn’t mind too much about any boasts in that direction

I honestly didn't realise there was any sort of formal debate, or I would have enjoyed the theatrics while treating you with every ounce of respect you clearly deserve.

I do what I want, when I want, and there's no amount of whinging on your part that can change that. That's my opening statement.

Do you have an opening statement or retort other than a sook? If so, I'm truly fascinated to read it.

 

[Proper Gander]

I honestly didn't realise there was any sort of formal debate, or I would have enjoyed the theatrics while treating you with every ounce of respect you clearly deserve.

I do what I want, when I want, and there's no amount of whinging on your part that can change that. That's my opening statement.

Do you have an opening statement or retort other than a sook? If so, I'm truly fascinated to read it.

Only that I think people who do what they want without any reference to what is best and safest for others are making poor and selfish decisions. Especially poor when the only justification they can come up with is that they want to do it. But I’ve said that throughout, and I’m not sure why you are asking me to repeat it?

And I was a princess before and now I’m a sook. All because I suggested you were selfish about wanting to do whatever you want without reference to anything about anyone else. I get you are struggling because I wasn’t impressed enough by your claim to speed an a habitual basis. I mean, people should really be impressed with you, yeah?

 

[Evolved1]

Only that I think people who do what they want without any reference to what is best and safest for others are making poor and selfish decisions. Especially poor when the only justification they can come up with is that they want to do it. But I’ve said that throughout, and I’m not sure why you are asking me to repeat it?

And I was a princess before and now I’m a sook. All because I suggested you were selfish about wanting to do whatever you want without reference to anything about anyone else. I get you are struggling because I wasn’t impressed enough by your claim to speed an a habitual basis. I mean, people should really be impressed with you, yeah?

Did I ask anything of you? I merely responded to one ignorant rant on your part and you've taken that as an invite to formal debate.

Nobody here is trying to impress you.

Are you usually this creepy? Do women deny your advances and avoid you?

 

[Proper Gander]

Did I ask anything of you? I merely responded to one ignorant rant on your part and you've taken that as an invite to formal debate.

Nobody here is trying to impress you.

Are you usually this creepy? Do women deny your advances and avoid you?

I can absolutely promise you that women don’t deny my advances and don’t avoid me.

I don’t really understand where you are coming from with either formal debate or ignorant rant. I’ve claimed no formal debate. You are on a forum where people may disagree with your opinion and express it. That doesn’t usually qualify as a formal debate and if encountering any opposing views worries you, then maybe stop making claims about yourself on the internet? Also puzzled about how my position about speeding is ignorant? There are multitudes of studies that have concluded that driving faster places everyone at risk. I suspect it would be tricky to source any meaningful research that says the opposite. The ranting I heard was your weird straw man about people in the right lane that seem to get on your nerves, and apparently provide a justification for your habitual speeding. I don’t recall raising that issue, or ranting about it. The only rant I heard is when you tried to have a go at another poster for apparently arguing the issue as a ‘straw man’ when you were the one who raised the issue.

But this is beside the point right? You do what you do because you feel like it, and you haven’t been stopped. Great philosophy!

 

[Evolved1]

I can absolutely promise you that women don’t deny my advances and don’t avoid me.

I don’t really understand where you are coming from with either formal debate or ignorant rant. I’ve claimed no formal debate. You are on a forum where people may disagree with your opinion and express it. That doesn’t usually qualify as a formal debate and if encountering any opposing views worries you, then maybe stop making claims about yourself on the internet? Also puzzled about how my position about speeding is ignorant? There are multitudes of studies that have concluded that driving faster places everyone at risk. I suspect it would be tricky to source any meaningful research that says the opposite. The ranting I heard was your weird straw man about people in the right lane that seem to get on your nerves, and apparently provide a justification for your habitual speeding. I don’t recall raising that issue, or ranting about it. The only rant I heard is when you tried to have a go at another poster for apparently arguing the issue as a ‘straw man’ when you were the one who raised the issue.

But this is beside the point right? You do what you do because you feel like it, and you haven’t been stopped. Great philosophy!

You made the claim that we were having a debate, did you not?

Do you know anything about logic? If not, you'd be well advised to shelve your nonsense about strawman arguments because you don't seem to understand when it's relevant to discussion.

You seem all round just a weird guy. I don't believe your absolute promise btw. I think we're done here.

 

[Proper Gander]

You made the claim that we were having a debate, did you not?

Do you know anything about logic? If not, you'd be well advised to shelve your nonsense about strawman arguments because you don't seem to understand when it's relevant to discussion.

You seem all round just a weird guy. I don't believe your absolute promise btw. I think we're done here.

We were done before you started. Nobody believes your claim that you break laws habitually. If they even did for a single second, the moment you brought in your great car specs that out perform everyone clinched it. Have a great night

 

[Evolved1]

We were done before you started. Nobody believes your claim that you break laws habitually. If they even did for a single second, the moment you brought in your great car specs that out perform everyone clinched it. Have a great night

Plenty of people speed habitually. Plenty of people drive cars with good brakes.

Your claim that women flock around you is the extraordinary claim, and obvious bullshit. I can't imagine there being many woman desperate enough.

 

[Proper Gander]

Plenty of people speed habitually. Plenty of people drive cars with good brakes.

Your claim that women flock around you is the extraordinary claim, and obvious bullshit. I can't imagine there being many woman desperate enough.

I’d love you to point to where I claimed that women flock around me.

Your sphere of reference is embarrassingly narrow. But then I guessed that so it’s not a surprise

 

[Crankyhawk]

Plenty of people speed habitually. Plenty of people drive cars with good brakes.

Your claim that women flock around you is the extraordinary claim, and obvious bullshit. I can't imagine there being many woman desperate enough.

The exact words were “I don’t have a problem with women denying my advances or avoid me” which can also be true if the poster makes no advances on women…

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Plenty of people speed habitually. Plenty of people drive cars with good brakes.

Your claim that women flock around you is the extraordinary claim, and obvious bullshit. I can't imagine there being many woman desperate enough.

You put a specific question about women to him, as some weird grubby personal attack.

Did I ask anything of you? I merely responded to one ignorant rant on your part and you've taken that as an invite to formal debate.

Nobody here is trying to impress you.

Are you usually this creepy? Do women deny your advances and avoid you?

Anyways, you have become very disruptive to the thread. You can start an evolved1 is weird, creepy, obsessive and disobeys road rules thread if you wish to continue this conversation publicly.

 

[adogsfan5]

 

[Senor M]

Anyways, you have become very disruptive to the thread. You can start an evolved1 is weird, creepy, obsessive and disobeys road rules thread if you wish to continue this conversation publicly.

That sounds like a "Legendary" thread idea GP.

 

[randyzany]

Great post other then speeding laws being specifically targeted to making roads safer and not for revenue raising purposes.

Men-made laws is the most peculiar phrase I’ve heard in a while outside of pre-lingual focussed television programs

Meaning that these state sanctioned rules are not infallible, they're not gospel truth like some seem to think they are and therefore can't be questioned or debated giving them reverence as if they were delivered by a deity, hence the emphasis on men-made.

If it there was shed of truth to the claim that going over 5kh in a 50kh zone leads to serious crashes then there would be hundreds of road fatalities every day because I see a fair share of drivers every day doing that with no issues whatsoever.

Excessive speeding on the other hand, for example driving at 80kh in a 50kh zone, yep that has the potential to cause a serious accident no arguments about that. But you have to be very gullible to believe the patronising spiel that that a few khs over the speed limit is incredibly risk and that a fine of a few hundred dollars is all that is needed to save lives.

The government rakes in millions of dollars from fines every year and if they were serious about that claim they would re-possess the offender's car and ban them from driving for at least a year, or increase the fine to $10,000 to completely discourage it. But not they leave it as is because it's a blatant lie that a few ks over the speed limit kills people and it's a nice little revenue earner for them every year so the status quo remains.

 

[Donakebab]

Meaning that these state sanctioned rules are not infallible, they're not gospel truth like some seem to think they are and therefore can't be questioned or debated giving them reverence as if they were delivered by a deity, hence the emphasis on men-made.

If it there was shed of truth to the claim that going over 5kh in a 50kh zone leads to serious crashes then there would be hundreds of road fatalities every day because I see a fair share of drivers every day doing that with no issues whatsoever.

Excessive speeding on the other hand, for example driving at 80kh in a 50kh zone, yep that has the potential to cause a serious accident no arguments about that. But you have to be very gullible to believe the patronising spiel that that a few khs over the speed limit is incredibly risk and that a fine of a few hundred dollars is all that is needed to save lives.

The government rakes in millions of dollars from fines every year and if they were serious about that claim they would re-possess the offender's car and ban them from driving for at least a year, or increase the fine to $10,000 to completely discourage it. But not they leave it as is because it's a blatant lie that a few ks over the speed limit kills people and it's a nice little revenue earner for them every year so the status quo remains.

Unsurprisingly you are flat out wrong, the physics behind speed and stopping distance has been around for a long time, we were taught it in high school.

Some very easy to digest visuals out there too.

 

[Messenger]

The 3AW types are very cross.

 

[adogsfan5]

The 3AW types are very cross.

Not really sure how it’ll impact businesses so I can’t really comment

 

[Opine]

The 3AW types are very cross.

I can see this leading to increase in contract worker arrangements as distinct from casual employees.

 

[Opine]

He seems intent on creating a Cain-like legacy of his own. But his timing is all up the creek.

 

[Messenger]

I can see this leading to increase in contract worker arrangements as distinct from casual employees.

The hospitality modern award is pretty grim reading. A “Level 5” food and beverage supervisor working without casual loading makes $31.45 ph on a Saturday (a 25% surcharge on mid week rates). They get a modest surcharge on their base rate for working evenings. This is the supervisor mind you.

if they are working with a causal loading their best rate is nearly $40 ph on a Saturday night.