Page 5 of 11

Re: New shell policy

Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 10:22 am
by Simon_100
-Ralph- wrote: Whoopie doo! Once upon a time, in a land far far away, there was a fire.

So all we can find is a YouTube video? Where are those statistics I asked for? How many times a year this happens in the UK would be a good start. My guess is on average, zero times!

Best not ride your motorcycle if you can't cope with those odds chaps, it FAR too dangerous. About 500 people a year die in the UK doing that.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Well Ralph, if I was being serious - and that's a big 'if' as you should know well from my usual posts :whistle: - this is a perfectly valid 'statistic', in fact anecdotal evidence is a very useful check to conventional statistical analysis of independent variables, i.e. even if the 'odds' are, say for outcome 'x' to be 1,000,000,000,000,000 to 1 greater than outcome 'y' that doesn't mean to say that 'y' won't happen the very first time the test is made, nor that last, nor anywhere in between, or, in fact, in every single one of the 1,000,000,000,000,000 times you might be fool enough to repeat the test - or in Plan English, "If it can happen it will happen."

That's why when I have spare € coin in my pocket when I pass the ONCE lottery stall with the pretty blind girl in it - that's the one who doesn't step back in horror when I say ¡Hola! - I happily buy a ticket that has an approximate chance of winning of zilch times 'x' ('x' being the biggest number you can say without stopping for breath times 2). Why? Because the odds of winning when you haven't bought a ticket are zero, whereas any probability above zero is in fact infinity more than zero - which sound more appealing doesn't it.

Back in the real world - where I manage to struggle by despite having studied stats as part of my various university degrees and diplomas - if we all made all of our decisions based on statistics the world would grind to a halt pretty darned quickly. I guess more than a few on this here forum earn their living assessing the probability of undesirable outcomes, say a bridge falling down or an airplane engine falling off, and weigh these up against the costs, or even possibility, of preventing these from actually happening ... and as to anecdotal evidence, look though the video all the way and see how much more harm came about by the chain reaction following the 'incident' - then work out the probabilities of all of that happening, then go buy an accumulator from William Hill, pop outside and give it to a beggar! (thumbs)

Regs

Simon

PS - I ride an X-Country with an X-tank - I would certainly get a slipped disk if I tried to fill up from the saddle :evil: :evil:

Re: New shell policy

Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 10:47 am
by boboneleg
You're all doing it wrong, Ralph is right because in the world according to Ralph no one knows anything but Ralph.

Oh ! and he'll be back soon to say 'I told you so' because that's his favourite saying ;)

Re: New shell policy

Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 10:54 am
by Crossrutted
Not quite sure why anyone would change their riding or fuelling habits according to what is said on an internet forum.

Lets face it, most of the internet content is rubbish and the remainder is bollox! (thumbs)

(including this....)

Re: New shell policy

Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 12:42 pm
by Stewie
ollydog wrote:has it actually ever happened, is there any evidence or is this another dont go near the swans cause they will break yer arms with their wings of which there has been no recorded incident

steve
Of course there's 'no recorded incident' you try filming a mad swan with a broken arm.... :laugh:

Re: New shell policy

Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 12:54 pm
by Zookman
I always fill up when the bike is on the sidestand anyway... But if were expected to only do this and didn't have a center stand, it wouldn't bother me. Same with being asked to remove my helmet, although that's never happened to me.
If you enter someone else's business or property, you have to respect their rules or go elsewhere.

Re: New shell policy

Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 12:57 pm
by Crossrutted
Zookman wrote:I always fill up when the bike is on the sidestand anyway... But if were expected to only do this and didn't have a center stand, it wouldn't bother me. Same with being asked to remove my helmet, although that's never happened to me.
If you enter someone else's business or property, you have to respect their rules or go elsewhere.
Except I'm not going through the faff of removing my helmet unless it suits me - I ride on if "helmets off" is stated.

Re: New shell policy

Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 12:59 pm
by gooseneck
I really don't see what the fuss is about...complying with a companies safety regs is to be expected...and this is not some draconian regulation,it really is no hassle.

Re: New shell policy

Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 2:10 pm
by gspod
Crossrutted wrote:Not quite sure why anyone would change their riding or fuelling habits according to what is said on an internet forum.

Lets face it, most of the internet content is rubbish and the remainder is bollox! (thumbs)

(including this....)
You're right there - and I posted it :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Re: New shell policy

Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 3:59 pm
by ollydog
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Re: New shell policy

Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 5:13 pm
by Benson-1215
-Ralph- wrote:
Benson-1215 wrote:Is getting off your bike a big issue ? its not like your racing at the IOM TT .
Don't think i have ever tried doing still sat on the bike please enlighten me to the benefits.
Full tank for a start

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Define full