dumbass LCC bike lane on Stratford High Street

[Fab Foodie]

Brando?

Go to the top of the class!

 

[Fab Foodie]

I like cycling in London. As it is.

And he's not the only one ....

 

[knocksofbeggarmen]

I like cycling in London. As it is.

Yep, we got that. But otherwise there are areas of unclarity.
Like, apart from standing for the Orthodox Easter service alongside a multicultural Tipper Truck, what is it you most like?

The casualty rates?
The gender imbalance?
The cheap access to danger-sport without having to fly off to the Alps?
The sense of exclusivity that goes with mastering the fear?
The sheer dog-fight right-stuff of the survivor?

Or is it all of the above?

 

[Learnincurve]

People are mocking things people in non-major cities would dearly love to have

All this talk of not wanting to use bike lanes and whatnot is extra for me today. There is one beautifully well thought out and positioned bike lane on a well maintained bit of road in our town..Cars, cars parked along it, all day every day. I told the traffic warden just down to road a bit today and was told "not my patch". It's a A road with no pavement on one side btw, this is the side they park. Just next to the walls smack bang in the bike lane like it's a neatly marked out parking lane just for them.

It's hard to get in the mind set of someone who parks in a bike lane. Especially when it would be a dangerous place to park without the bike lane there anyway, it really is a choice between double yellows and the lane. I would imagine that they parked there before the lane came in and they will be damned if they move their car to the ally 10 yards away or to the actual car park 50 yards away now.

 

[dellzeqq]

Yep, we got that. But otherwise there are areas of unclarity.
Like, apart from standing for the Orthodox Easter service alongside a multicultural Tipper Truck, what is it you most like?

The casualty rates?
The gender imbalance?
The cheap access to danger-sport without having to fly off to the Alps?
The sense of exclusivity that goes with mastering the fear?
The sheer dog-fight right-stuff of the survivor?

Or is it all of the above?

The sheer number of cyclists of all abilities and none wandering up and down CS7, outnumbering private cars by three or four to one. Taking the Brompton to the supermarket and parking right outside the door. Knowing that my daughter can get home from work at two in the morning. And, (dare I mention), the delight of leading a ride of 100 cyclists on bikes that range from carbon fibre dream machines to 'ladies bikes' along the Embankment. The very Embankment this scheme will ruin - not just to the detriment of cyclists, but to the detriment of bus passengers and pedestrians.

 

[srw]

Yep, we got that. But otherwise there are areas of unclarity.
Like, apart from standing for the Orthodox Easter service alongside a multicultural Tipper Truck, what is it you most like?

The casualty rates?

The casualty rates are fantastic. I may have linked to this article once or twice before...
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&s...vcMt5iPN6U76_nguQ&sig2=JbwBuWiuLWV-7q4xBFeHuA

The gender balance isn't so bad, either, and if you avoid one or two obvious roads there's no conflict or adrenaline-junkie stuff

 

[Pete Owens]

what is it you most like?
...

The gender imbalance?

I'm quite happy with the balance of my gender thankyou - And I don't really appreciate facility enthusiast attemps to alter it:
http://www.warringtoncyclecampaign.co.uk/facility-of-the-month/January2005.htm

 

[knocksofbeggarmen]

All of this is marvellous, simply marvellous- fantastic information for my research into the London Cycling Community. It turns out that the three people on this thread who want things kept exactly as they are (three!! three of them!! count them!! three!! -did I say there were three?) ...that the three people on this thread who want things kept exactly as they are admit of the following reasons for their preferences.

1.

Embankment this scheme will ruin - not just to the detriment of cyclists, but to the detriment of bus passengers and pedestrians.

- I assume this is because of the new pedestrian crossings that the scheme will add... or it might be to do with the near total absence of bus routes along the embankment.

2.

The casualty rates are fantastic.

- Satire, I think... and meant to draw attention to the vast gap between UK death rates and Dutch... though these days you can't be too sure. For example... why it was Alf Garnet was NOT seen at a Tory Party Conference has never been satisfactorily explained.

3.

I'm quite happy with the balance of my gender thankyou

Women of the world Unite- you have nothing to lose but the duffer with the sex-change quip.

 

[theclaud]

All of this is marvellous, simply marvellous- fantastic information for my research into the London Cycling Community. It turns out that the three people on this thread who want things kept exactly as they are (three!! three of them!! count them!! three!! -did I say there were three?) ...that the three people on this thread who want things kept exactly as they are admit of the following reasons for their preferences.

1.
- I assume this is because of the new pedestrian crossings that the scheme will add... or it might be to do with the total absence of bus routes along the embankment.

2.
- Satire, I think... and meant to draw attention to the vast gap between UK death rates and Dutch... though these days you can't be too sure. For example... why it was Alf Garnet was NOT seen at a Tory Party Conference has never been satisfactorily explained.

3.
Women of the world Unite- you have nothing to lose but the duffer with the sex-change quip.

I am a woman. I like cycling in London. So do lots of other women. Could you explain exactly why women need special crap infrastructure?

Oh, and people who oppose particular infrastructure schemes do not equal people who "want things kept exactly as they are". Lots of them spend their lives making things different - but in ways that actually work.

 

[theclaud]

There are probably loads more but the rest can't be arsed to engage with your heavy handed humour.

Oops. It seems I'm a sucker for the leaden wit brigade.

 

[dellzeqq]

- Satire, I think... and meant to draw attention to the vast gap between UK death rates and Dutch...

you, truly, know nothing

 

[knocksofbeggarmen]

people who oppose particular infrastructure schemes do not equal people who "want things kept exactly as they are". .

I did not myself make any such equation. But were you to read back into my exchanges with dellzeqq, you would find him saying:

I like cycling in London. As it is.

Perhaps I should have made it clearer I was addressing him -though the quote might have suggested this, up to a point.

As to your second point:

I am a woman. I like cycling in London. So do lots of other women. Could you explain exactly why women need special crap infrastructure?

I don't think I specifically insisted that the infrastructure be "crap" or indeed that it be "special" in the sense of specially for women. That facts (and god, they are unpopular) are that in places with more and better dedicated cycling infrastructure, more people cycle. This holds true for both genders. On the other hand, the empirically attested difference for women is particularly striking: with proper infra, women complete more cycling trips than men do: http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/2011/02/who-cycles-in-netherlands.html

As I was saying, I wouldn't want to claim that these facts are popular. The thing you might say in their defence is, they are the facts.

 

[knocksofbeggarmen]

you, truly, know nothing

If you must call black 'white', you could at least improve your wit.

 

[theclaud]

I did not myself make any such equation. But were you to read back into my exchanges with dellzeqq, you would find him saying:


Perhaps I should have made it clearer I was addressing him -though the quote might have suggested this, up to a point.

As to your second point:


I don't think I specifically insisted that the infrastructure be "crap" or indeed that it be "special" in the sense of specially for women. That facts (and god, they are unpopular) are that in places with more and better dedicated cycling infrastructure, more people cycle. This holds true for both genders. On the other hand, the empirically attested difference for women is particularly striking: with proper infra, women complete more cycling trips than men do: http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/2011/02/who-cycles-in-netherlands.html

As I was saying, I wouldn't want to claim that these facts are popular. The thing you might say in their defence is, they are the facts.

I read what DZ wrote. It doesn't say what you claimed.

See the picture posted by Zimmers at #285 above. There is less room for cyclists going in both directions on the proposed Special Crap Path than there was, is, or will be on a single lane of the road. Not only that, but the Special Crap Path is both stealing space from pedestrians and lumbering them with another two lanes of traffic to cross. And that's before we get to junctions.

Oh, and your feminist cycling paradise consists of women doing the shopping and ferrying the kids about. Your mate Hembrow reckons that men "don't get the chance" to do this. Presumably they are too busy bombing up and down mono-functional roads, enjoying some of the longest commuting times in Europe.

 

[dellzeqq]

]http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/2011/02/who-cycles-in-netherlands.html

ka-ching! It was only a matter of time