Discussion in 'General' started by bitchcakes, Sep 27, 2014.
Yup, looks like him; the chin hair patch and the beady eyes!
as they say ' a picture tells a thousand stories' man if this one could talk
That is indeed a nice chick....
IMO, this is more a conversation piece than an advisory.
If only the rider hadn't of lost his front wheel.
Methinks the wheel is turned 90°, or that is what they're trying to convey.
Than again, the handlebars would be turned too...
If only the people looking out for our safety knew what they were on about. Then, again, maybe they went over their audience's heads by depicting a gooseneck that wasn't tight enough to prevent his wheel from torquing into the track.
what @tzrider and @fastfreddie said.
Engineer said they wanted the sign with the bike's front wheel in one of the groove and turned 90 degrees.
Art student created the sign.
Engineer accepted the sign for fabrication.
The requirements probably said to make a sign warning cyclists of groves in the road. The engineer commissioned a design then made the sign once the design was done. The technical aspects of the requirements were met. The spirit of the requirements were missed.
Problem: Too often, requirements lack specificity. This allows the engineers to much latitude in their design (typically the path of least resistance to meet cost and schedule), then falling back on "the requirements were met" to avoid repercussions. I deal with this allllllll daaaaay loooooong with the government acquisition community.
Those damn trees are everywhere.......
Cheapest bidder won...
Right there with you, @Cannoli. And adding to my sig...
Separate names with a comma.