--- In [email protected], Guy Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, dave hearnden 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
> >
> >Richard wrote:
> >Complete and utter rubbish on the part of the Times, I'm afraid, 
though 
> >I suppose one shouldn't expect much from a Murdoch paper.Black 
Country 
> >and Sherwood partners were also urging people to vote as many ways 
as 
> >possible. And the same rules, of course, applied to all four 
competitors.
> >
> >Moose asks
> >
> >Why is it rubbish, as already been said others, we were urged to 
vote 
> >more than once.
> >
> >The fact they won by multi voting is wrong but then the other 
groups 
> >were playing by the same bent but not illegal rules.
> >
> >Moose
> Indeed.  I am aware of people who voted once for each email addy, 
once 
> on each mobile and once on the land line.    If I'd got round to 
doing 
> that Black Country might have won :-)}
> 
> Seriously though I think there was an inevitability about the 
Sustrans 
> project winning.   Given that most people voting probably didnt 
have 
> such a vested interest as us I suspect that the word "cycling" 
would 
> have had a wider appeal than any of the others.   Also as has been 
said 
> that project had a much wider geographical spread than the other 
> projects.   I wonder how many people thought that what they were 
voting 
> for would help to get cyclists off their pavements rather than 
providing 
> long distance routes for "serious" cyclists.
> 
> On the whole not a very fair way to choose how to spend lottery 
money 
> IMHO.
> 
> Just a thought!
> 
> Guy
> -- 
> Guy Morgan
> nb Virgo, WFB, Stockton GU
> Defend the waterways.
> Visit the web site www.saveourwaterways.org.uk
>

Have said my piece on the Times 'Have your say' bit, perhaps we all 
should, maybe from various e-mail addresses, or is that 
manipulation?  Aboslutely disgusting if you ask me.




Reply via email to