Anyone know this idiot motorcyclist?

[slowmotion]

I'm interested in the question of vigilantism which has popped up a few times here. I have been quite amazed at how easily it has been to work out Alex Mitchell's details. I certainly don't advocate "going round" , but as a cyclist ( and white van man ) I understand peoples' outrage at his internet attitude, both after his video masterpiece and before it. Looking at it, I think it's pretty unlikely that the police will do anything at all. He can just claim that he made a mistake. I suspect that most of the people here know that he's going to get away with this, and hence their frustration. In the circumstances, I don't think that Alex Philip Harvey Mitchell's current discomfort is entirely unwarranted.

 

[martint235]

I'm interested in the question of vigilantism which has popped up a few times here. I have been quite amazed at how easily it has been to work out Alex Mitchell's details. I certainly don't advocate "going round" , but as a cyclist ( and white van man ) I understand peoples' outrage at his internet attitude, both after his video masterpiece and before it. Looking at it, I think it's pretty unlikely that the police will do anything at all. He can just claim that he made a mistake. I suspect that most of the people here know that he's going to get away with this, and hence their frustration. In the circumstances, I don't think that Alex Philip Harvey Mitchell's current discomfort is entirely unwarranted.

My view is fwiw he brought this to the internet. Yes "us geeks" know how to find him but it's an internet thing.

Bear in mind that unless you come to CC through TOR Alex Mitchell may know how to find you. That is all.

 

[slowmotion]

My view is fwiw he brought this to the internet. Yes "us geeks" know how to find him but it's an internet thing.

Bear in mind that unless you come to CC through TOR Alex Mitchell may know how to find you. That is all.

I may be a bit of a grassy knollster but I'm not exactly working my fingers to the bone deleting posts.

 

[martint235]

I may be a bit of a grassy knollster but I'm not exactly working my fingers to the bone deleting posts.

Nope neither am I. I'm actually trying to engage with his last known twitter account.

However there are people, and no blame/fault implied that do not realise that everything is visible. In fact proved upthread where people have managed to copy posts/videos.

If anyone is concerned about privacy, google TOR

 

[slowmotion]

However there are people, and no blame/fault implied that do not realise that everything is visible. In fact proved upthread where people have managed to copy posts/videos.

If you become an incontinent internet broadcaster of the minute details of your life, together with your own darker thoughts and prejudices, you take the consequences. Why do it? Utterly bonkers.

 

[martint235]

If you become an incontinent internet broadcaster of the minute details of your life, together with your own darker thoughts and prejudices, you take the consequences. Why do it? Utterly bonkers.

Yebbut I'm not talking about our motorcycling friend more about people on here with concerns about whether they can be traced. Yes is the answer. First rule don't say anything illegal. Second, to me, don't say something you wouldn't say in person

 

[slowmotion]

Yebbut I'm not talking about our motorcycling friend more about people on here with concerns about whether they can be traced. Yes is the answer. First rule don't say anything illegal. Second, to me, don't say something you wouldn't say in person

Yep, sound advice.

 

[Nigeyy]

Yes, I also think that's very sound advice. I try not to say anything -or say anything in a way -that I wouldn't have a problem saying to someone face to face.

Yebbut I'm not talking about our motorcycling friend more about people on here with concerns about whether they can be traced. Yes is the answer. First rule don't say anything illegal. Second, to me, don't say something you wouldn't say in person

 

[slowmotion]

I'm a pretty meek and mild person but I do believe that if Alexander Philip Harvey Mitchell pulled up alongside me at a set of red lights on his penis-extension Ducati, I might have words. No, I wouldn't push him off his bike on to the tarmac.

 

[.stu]

if Alexander Philip Harvey Mitchell pulled up alongside me at a set of red lights on his penis-extension Ducati, I might have words.

Is that before or after you spontaneously fall off your bike? Unlucky!

 

[jonny jeez]

[QUOTE 3095635, member: 45"]Your attitude is in how you respond to people, and that's wanting.

As to what you meant to say, that's 5 who have indicated on here that they can see it possible to be interpreted either way. It's ok, nobody's perfect.[/QUOTE]
6

 

[Markymark]

7

 

[Spinney]

Surely the skill of a good writer/editor is producing text that cannot be misinterpreted, not in producing text that is only understood in the way it was meant if people read it 'properly'.

I, too, spend all my working day (and some of my hobby time!) working with text. I'm happy to take the advice of the development editors, series editors and copyeditors that work on what I produce, if what I have written can be misinterpreted.

 

[perplexed]

8. I read it as the motorcyclist too...

 

[Mugshot]

[QUOTE 3095475, member: 9609"]@Mugshot & @User13710 I'm sure the two of you are correct and my initial interpretation was wrong, but why is my interpretation wrong, the post goes
"I adjusted my right handle bar mirror with the left elbow of a cyclist. Lol"

I sort of see this as 'I adjusted my watch with the pips on the radio' or 'I adjusted my visor with the sun' But others see this as he has hit a cyclist, and his mirror has moved, presumably out-of-adjustment, in which case he would have said I have needed to re-adjust my mirror after hitting a cyclist. Unless of course he asked a cyclist to help adjust his mirror in the same way I might get someone to help me adjust the near side mirror in a bigger vehicle.

So I'm sure the two of you are right, but where am I wrong?[/QUOTE]
That would be a rather strange way of speaking, I may say "I adjusted my watch with the pips on the radio", although it feels rather clumsy, but that doesn't suggest that I have adjusted my watch in order to affect the radio pips it suggests that I have used the radio pips to adjust my watch. I can't ever imagine saying "I adjusted my visor with the sun", I may adjust my visor because of the sun but certainly not with it as that suggests to me that I would be using the sun to adjust my visor as opposed to adjusting my visor because of the sun.
Our friendly motorcyclist is possibly trying to suggest in his statement that his mirror needed adjusting and he used a cyclists elbow to do it, this is of course all part of the joke. But the statement doesn't suggest to me that the cyclist had much choice in the matter. Had he asked a cyclist to help it would have been unlikely the cyclist would have used his elbow.
So "I adjusted my" as in the motorcyclist changed the position of something he had, "with" by means or agency of. "The motorcyclist adjusted his right handle bar mirror using the left elbow of a cyclist. Lol" That's how I read it, and I can't read it so it means either he adjusted his mirror in order to hit a cyclist or that a cyclist was a willing participant in adjusting his mirror. "I hit a cyclist with my mirror." That's all I can see.
He's still a git mind