Bridge Collapse

[DanaC]

Or even better, DanaC - rephrase that first paragraph to be political correct? You know what my point was. Post the rewrite.

ok.

Demonstrated is a difference between what yesman065 saw and what I saw. That yellow school bus: time to worry about it was long ago when this failure was predictable. Whereas contents of that bus were immediate concern to those on the bridge, instead, the rest of us should be worrying about all school busses.

or

It's been pointed out that the eye is drawn immediately to the yellow school bus...the time to worry about that schoolbus was was long ago when this failure was predictable. Whereas contents of that bus were immediate concern to those on the bridge, instead, the rest of us should be worrying about all school busses.


tw. I rarely post in such a manner as to make you take umbrage. Yet how rapidly you resort to nastiness. I pointed out to you (as several others did) why that post was percieved by yesman to be insulting to him. The reason he felt insulted, is that he was in fact insulted. That you intended no insult, does not negate the fact that what you posted was insulting. If you really cannot see how what you posted could be construed as an insult then perhaps you should read through the posts in this thread again.

Which brings us right back, again, to two questions. One, what is Uisge Beatha posting? And two, what are your biases that caused you to see something in a post that did not exist? Do you condemn people for worrying about one school bus – or see that worry about one school bus as an example of how people think differently? To see insult in that post, does DanaC assume those who are quick to entertain their emotions considered evil? I do expect answers because these questions only imply exactly what they ask. Those questions were never asked to imply anything. They were asked to elicit an answer.

The fact that two people had different responses to this situation is indicative of very little. You weighted that difference with implied criticism. The implied criticism? That you, unlike Yesman, see the bigger picture.....therefore your insult to yesman, is that he, like the city officials, doesn't see the bigger picture.

Do I ask these questions to attack you? In those questions is only what those questions ask. If your personal biases see them as an attack (as Yesman065 would), then terminate your biases. Those questions only imply exactly what they ask.

This is not about personal biases. Your post was either a) intentionally insulting, or b) unintentionally insulting.

I am quite happy to think that you intended no insult, that indeed, you cannot see why your post would have insulted anybody. For yesman to read an attack into that post required no 'personal biases', nor did it require his being 'childish', it merely required that he have a basic understanding of how the english language works and that he applied that understanding to your post.

DanaC - I don't imply insults. If I was insulting you, then it would be clear how bad I thought your cunt smells. Did I insult your cunt? No. But those who read with implication into everything will now assume so.

There was absolutely no need for that. You have just plummeted in my estimation.

[Griff]

Wow. tw, I think you need to take a step back. We can usually count on you to dig into tech stuff, but here you're taking us off-task. If de-icing is ruining our bridges we need to know it.

[xoxoxoBruce]

In the past, road salt has proven problematic for bridges. Because of the numerous bridges in this area, Indeed, I-95 through Philly is all bridge (elevated highway), I've been concerned about the caustic brines they have started routinely spraying in the last couple years.
When I read an automatic liquid deicing system was installed on this bridge six years ago, it aroused my suspicion because of prior concern.

tw is right in that it's wild speculation at this point and like I said, we won't know for a year, if ever, what caused this failure.