Two ugly and illegal Forestry Commission signs to a car park north of Shefford on the Bedford road, saying '250 metres', and two ugly and illegal signs at the entrance to the Priory Country Park, east Bedford, saying '2.0m', have been made beautiful and legal.

They now read '250 yds' and 6' 6" respectively

<<
Two ugly and illegal...
>>

Who has ever heard of a sign being "ugly" just because it is metric? Am I, Martin, Eric, Ross, Andy, etc all ugly because we support metrication?

I hope you kept the 2.0m on the sign aswell as it provides an alternative to a driver who does not know his vehicle height in feet.

re (Richard): "I hope you kept the 2.0m on the sign as well as it provides an alternative to a driver who does not know his vehicle height in feet".

REPLY: 100% of height signs in Britain must by law be imperial i.e. in feet and inches. There is no British driver who does not know either his height or the height of his car/van in feet and inches. Metric height signage is (a) optional and (b) uncommon. Of course the '2.0m' signs were covered over

From Tony Bennett:
<<
REPLY: 100% of height signs in Britain must by law be imperial i.e. in feet and inches. There is no British driver who does not know either his height or the height of his car/van in feet and inches. Metric height signage is (a) optional and (b) uncommon. Of course the '2.0m' signs were covered over
>>

What's your problem Tony? I'd have thought that Richard's point was quite reasonable. Are you so possesed by an obsessive hatred of all things metric that you cannot see beyond that ludicrous 100% claim of yours?

The more I see of your posts the more I begin to doubt you sanity!

<<Who has ever heard of a sign being "ugly" just because it is metric? Am I, Martin, Eric, Ross, Andy, etc all ugly because we support metrication?
>>>

Did you mean to put Eric in the same group as some very fine metric-supporters?

<<
Did you mean to put Eric in the same group as some very fine metric-supporters?
>>

Err not really but I have noticed that his posts have improved over the last couple of weeks. Less America hatred and pointless stuff about the American economy.

Richard, you are a backward lemming that can't see for your blinkers.

Your ignorance astounds me.

And your chronic stupidity leaves me breathless.

Just because you live a life of confusion every morning that you wake up doesn't mean that your drivel makes any sence - which, as you know, is a HABIT!

Maybe a spell in yankeeland will help you out with your isolated viewpoint?


Ok - I didn't mean any of that - not a word of it, but perhaps you can see what I was trying put across!

Hmmm?

I forgot to add this:

;-)

re (Stan): "What's your problem Tony...Are you so possesed by an obsessive hatred of all things metric that you cannot see beyond that ludicrous 100% claim of yours? The more I see of your posts the more I begin to doubt your sanity!"

REPLY: I doubt whether my claim would be considered 'ludicrous' by any one of thousands of British driving examiners who pass or fail tens of thousands of would-be motorists on our roads every year. It would certainly be a major problem if a person passed their driving test but couldn't understand: " Give Way 50 yds " or " Low bridge ahead 9' 6" ".

Now, about those who assert that claims are 'ludicrous' when they are demonstrobly true and not 'ludicrous'...