More policing by social media

Use this board for general non-cycling-related chat, or to introduce yourself to the forum.
Jdsk
Posts: 24478
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: More policing by social media

Post by Jdsk »

mattheus wrote: 3 Dec 2021, 6:51pmTell someone there's been an accident on the motorway, and EVERYONE will know what you mean.
Let's explore that.

If an hour later it transpires that the immediate cause was a drunk driver who would still call it an accident?

Or if the immediate cause was a terrorist bomb?

Thanks

Jonathan
mattheus
Posts: 5030
Joined: 29 Dec 2008, 12:57pm
Location: Western Europe

Re: More policing by social media

Post by mattheus »

Jdsk wrote: 3 Dec 2021, 7:17pm
PS: I'll assume that "99.999%" is obviously rhetorical, unless you'd prefer otherwise...
Well sure - but would you care to propose another acceptable upper bound for "the vast majority"? I'm pretty sure whatever figure you come up with, the folks at BMJ will make no difference.
I'll repeat - for the hard of reading, perhaps - almost everyone uses the same meaning of accident. Some folks may put "accident" into different sentences than others, that's all; some with different intent to others. That's English for you ...
Stevek76
Posts: 2084
Joined: 28 Jul 2015, 11:23am

Re: More policing by social media

Post by Stevek76 »

Everyone will know what you mean if you use the word collision or crash too.

Re policing by social media, obviously police road policing budgets are in tatters but I think what social media is mostly doing is highlighting the huge disparity in what different police forces will follow up on when it comes to motoring offences. My impression from social media is that Derbyshire do not have a good reputation in this matter.
The contents of this post, unless otherwise stated, are opinions of the author and may actually be complete codswallop
Jdsk
Posts: 24478
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: More policing by social media

Post by Jdsk »

Stevek76 wrote: 3 Dec 2021, 7:26pm Everyone will know what you mean if you use the word collision or crash too.
And those don't carry that same implication of "by chance" or "unavoidable", and wouldn't change when the immediate cause became known in those examples.

Jonathan
mattheus
Posts: 5030
Joined: 29 Dec 2008, 12:57pm
Location: Western Europe

Re: More policing by social media

Post by mattheus »

Stevek76 wrote: 3 Dec 2021, 7:26pm Everyone will know what you mean if you use the word collision or crash too.
YES! Thrice YES !!!

I'm fine with using other - hopefully more appropriate - words.

But don't try to persuade me by claiming some spurious definition of "accident". It just doesn't wash.

(p.s. we've already fought wars over "collision", please don't bring that up again; let's go with CRASH! )
Stevek76
Posts: 2084
Joined: 28 Jul 2015, 11:23am

Re: More policing by social media

Post by Stevek76 »

eh? I must have missed the war regarding collision?

That said, it's quite clear to me that both the dictionary and colloquial definition of accident involve a significant degree of absolving the party(ies) involved of blame, else phrases like 'don't worry it's just an accident' wouldn't be so well used.

Also it is rather less clear even outside of that. 'Steve had an accident on the M5' might just mean he's had some bladder control issues for all the listener knows :)
The contents of this post, unless otherwise stated, are opinions of the author and may actually be complete codswallop
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19793
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: More policing by social media

Post by [XAP]Bob »

mattheus wrote: 3 Dec 2021, 7:34pm
Stevek76 wrote: 3 Dec 2021, 7:26pm Everyone will know what you mean if you use the word collision or crash too.
YES! Thrice YES !!!

I'm fine with using other - hopefully more appropriate - words.

But don't try to persuade me by claiming some spurious definition of "accident". It just doesn't wash.

(p.s. we've already fought wars over "collision", please don't bring that up again; let's go with CRASH! )
There are no wars over the word collision, just the decision over the subject and object.
The likelihood is that a pedestrian didn't collide with a car, but that a motorist collided with a pedestrian.
It is possible - walking across the road, car stops suddenly, you walk into the side of it... then you have collided with the car. but that's not likely to make the news.
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19793
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: More policing by social media

Post by [XAP]Bob »

thirdcrank wrote: 3 Dec 2021, 7:15pm
richardfm wrote: 3 Dec 2021, 7:09pm
[XAP]Bob wrote: 3 Dec 2021, 9:56am

No speed limit would do that though.
I agree, but @hellhound seemed to think it would.
I detect ambiguity in No speed limit would do that though.
  • Problems would be eliminated by scrapping the speed limit
  • This will not be solved by any speed limit (The solution lies elsewhere

There is no possible speed limit which would accomplish this goal.

Of course not having a limit might actually help a little, since they wouldn't be overtaking with both limited by a speed limiter which is within a percent or two of the true speed. The overtakes could certainly be made in less distance, although it's not hard to suggest that it would be significantly less safe.
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
mattheus
Posts: 5030
Joined: 29 Dec 2008, 12:57pm
Location: Western Europe

Re: More policing by social media

Post by mattheus »

[XAP]Bob wrote: 3 Dec 2021, 10:17pm
mattheus wrote: 3 Dec 2021, 7:34pm
Stevek76 wrote: 3 Dec 2021, 7:26pm Everyone will know what you mean if you use the word collision or crash too.
YES! Thrice YES !!!

I'm fine with using other - hopefully more appropriate - words.

But don't try to persuade me by claiming some spurious definition of "accident". It just doesn't wash.

(p.s. we've already fought wars over "collision", please don't bring that up again; let's go with CRASH! )
There are no wars over the word collision, just the decision over the subject and object.
The likelihood is that a pedestrian didn't collide with a car, but that a motorist collided with a pedestrian.
It is possible - walking across the road, car stops suddenly, you walk into the side of it... then you have collided with the car. but that's not likely to make the news.
Oh no, it's started again. I did warn you ...
mattheus
Posts: 5030
Joined: 29 Dec 2008, 12:57pm
Location: Western Europe

Re: More policing by social media

Post by mattheus »

Stevek76 wrote: 3 Dec 2021, 7:43pm
That said, it's quite clear to me that both the dictionary and colloquial definition of accident involve a significant degree of absolving the party(ies) involved of blame, else phrases like 'don't worry it's just an accident' wouldn't be so well used.
Nay!
That just shows that context matters - which hopefully you, bob and jd all know,

Equally the phrase " person X caused an accident" is well used, and equally easily understood.

(I don't recall any stats listing "just an accident", or any "Just an Accident and Emergency" departments at Hospitals.
Can anyone find a headline using "just an accident"? Unlikely, but I expect we could keep jd busy for a few minutes looking for one ... )
thirdcrank
Posts: 36764
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: More policing by social media

Post by thirdcrank »

Not a headline and no "just", but this seems to be apposite
Hellhound wrote: 2 Dec 2021, 12:34pm It was an accident.
No need to prosecute anyone.
The 'prosecute this and prosecute' that mentality of the UK,especially where motorists are concerned,is a joke :roll:
mattheus
Posts: 5030
Joined: 29 Dec 2008, 12:57pm
Location: Western Europe

Re: More policing by social media

Post by mattheus »

thirdcrank wrote: 4 Dec 2021, 2:03pm Not a headline and no "just",
Keep trying then.
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19793
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: More policing by social media

Post by [XAP]Bob »

Are you suggesting that the use of a word is defined by headlines?
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
mattheus
Posts: 5030
Joined: 29 Dec 2008, 12:57pm
Location: Western Europe

Re: More policing by social media

Post by mattheus »

[XAP]Bob wrote: 5 Dec 2021, 12:45pm Are you suggesting that the use of a word is defined by headlines?
Are you suggesting balloons are made of penguins?
cycle tramp
Posts: 3479
Joined: 5 Aug 2009, 7:22pm

Re: More policing by social media

Post by cycle tramp »

mattheus wrote: 5 Dec 2021, 6:43pm
[XAP]Bob wrote: 5 Dec 2021, 12:45pm Are you suggesting that the use of a word is defined by headlines?
Are you suggesting balloons are made of penguins?
Oh my Lord!?!!..... Are they?... That's terrible!
..
It's time to go :-)
Post Reply