Classic youtube replies

[Origamist]

I'm not disagreeing with you, but it doesn't help to ignore the infringement, however, minor. Was it not in Benborp's case that the driver was done for overtaking at a crossing. Yes, the circumstances are very different, but how can we celebrate that, and yet, ignore the infraction, even if there were mitigating circumstances in Martin's case. We need to be as fair and even handed as possible. Now I am not suggesting that Martin deserves to be punished, nothing like it, but an acknowledgement of what happened would be reasonable, I would suggest.

I have done this myself, in one video where I cut over a mini roundabout. I acknowledge that by the letter of the law it is wrong, however, I explained the mitigating circumstances. Then the reader/viewer can make their own mind up. Just ignoring, and in this case censoring debate just raises suspicion and builds barriers. His action has alienated me, and I suspect a couple of others who's comments were deleted. That isn't helpful, is it?

By removing comments that are of limited relevance on Youtube, the focus of his video/campaign is not blurred. I also suspect Martin Porter is disappointed and disaffected by the responses he receives from fellow cyclists who miss the elephant in the room.

 

[BenM]

/me does a BentMikey...

but then you also see that the cyclist brakes the law.

breaks

or more properly 'commits an offence'

B.

 

[magnatom]

By removing comments that are of limited relevance on Youtube, the focus of his video/campaign is not blurred. I also suspect Martin Porter is disappointed and disaffected by the responses he receives from fellow cyclists who miss the elephant in the room.

Personally I don't care if Martin is 'disappointed'. If he is, and I assume you are only making assumptions here, then that is a very arrogant stance to take. I can assure you Origamist, that I can quite clearly see the Elephant, but it appears there are those that cannot understand the importance of self reflection, honesty and openness.

 

[Origamist]

Personally I don't care if Martin is 'disappointed'. If he is, and I assume you are only making assumptions here, then that is a very arrogant stance to take. I can assure you Origamist, that I can quite clearly see the Elephant, but it appears there are those that cannot understand the importance of self reflection, honesty and openness.

It seems odd that you claim to have spotted the "elephant" when the only comments that you posted on the vid did not pertain to said "elephant", but related to tangential issues. This led to MP's response about "hyper-critical" cyclists. Can you now see where he's coming from and why he would be less than keen to continue a debate with people intent on carping about his "imperfect" attempt at avoiding poor driving as there is v little, if any, equivalence.

 

[magnatom]

It seems odd that you claim to have spotted the "elephant" when the only comments that you posted on the vid did not pertain to said "elephant", but related to tangential issues. This led to MP's response about "hyper-critical" cyclists. Can you now see where he's coming from and why he would be less than keen to continue a debate with people carping about his "imperfect" attempt at avoiding poor driving?

Oh yes, I missed the overtake and hook completely!

Indeed I did focus on the cyclist, for the very reasons I have stated previously, i.e. that it is important to self reflect if one is to gain any sort of credibility outside cycling circles.

Of course there is a big difference between discontinuing a debate (i.e. ignoring posts) and censoring them....

 

[downfader]

I think Origamist is on to something here. Porter has tried to highlight the greater threat here and has been put in a difficult position because of it.

Its the same mentality that took over the Brazil CM story on the Guardian;s bikeblog this week... in that "who cares" that some people were hurt by a psycho, "lets have a moan about cyclists riding slowly up hill in a completely different country.."

Porter's aims are the same as the rest of us, ultimately. Safer roads a little more politeness by all.

 

[HLaB]

I posted a while back that they had deleted my comment too after having bothered to respond to it, but hey ho its their prerogative.

I cant remember the full post but it was something simple like: 'that was muppet driving although it didnt look to safe to undertake the muppet, Safe Cycling :-)'

It must have been something to do with a nasty elephant

 

[Origamist]

Oh yes, I missed the overtake and hook completely!

Indeed I did focus on the cyclist, for the very reasons I have stated previously, i.e. that it is important to self reflect if one is to gain any sort of credibility outside cycling circles.

Of course there is a big difference between discontinuing a debate (i.e. ignoring posts) and censoring them....

Your comments suggest you are "missing" what's important here; I didn't think you failed to watch the vid closely enough and missed the hook!

Given the way our little discussion has proceeded, it has only served to confirm my view that Porter was right to nip your comments in the bud. Sorry.

 

[BentMikey]

I'm with Origamist here. Dave, it's heading to prima donna territory.

 

[BSRU]

My comment was deleted even though I stated my opinion about the bad driving and as a note I pointed out his illegal manoeuvres.

He took umbridge big time and his reply focused totally on my points about his "legal" riding trying to justify them as OK as he does it all the time.

He also disliked my comment about keeping such a bad driver in front rather than overtaking it and putting himself into a bad situation again.

 

[gaz]

I delete some of your (all of you!!) comments from my videos

Mainly those of you that reply to the trolls, i don't mind the fun in replying back to them, hell i do it. But in the long run i don't want them feeding the thoughts of other people.

 

[Origamist]

My comment was deleted even though I stated my opinion about the bad driving and as a note I pointed out his illegal manoeuvres.

He took umbridge big time and his reply focused totally on my points about his "legal" riding trying to justify them as OK as he does it all the time.

He also disliked my comment about keeping such a bad driver in front rather than overtaking it and putting himself into a bad situation again.

At least he's consistent on the deleting front.

It seems he took your advice on board BSRU - read the amended description:

I will accept that having been squeezed to the side, it woud have been better to adopt a primary position behind him at 0:06. We cannot all be perfect all of the time and unlike the Toyota driver I posed no danger to myself, the pedestrian, or anybody else

This suggests that he has reflected on his own riding during the incident...

 

[downfader]

I delete some of your (all of you!!) comments from my videos

Mainly those of you that reply to the trolls, i don't mind the fun in replying back to them, hell i do it. But in the long run i don't want them feeding the thoughts of other people.

I do the same if the troll has wound people up or is spreading malicious or wrong stuff.

 

[BSRU]

At least he's consistent on the deleting front.

It seems he took your advice on board BRSU - read the his amended description:



This suggests that he has reflected on his own riding during the incident...

At least he eventually took on board something of what I had written in good faith.

 

[magnatom]

So let me just recap if I may, as threads can often get confusing and difficult to follow.

One of the things I have always strived for (not always met of course) is honesty and openness when posting videos and discussing them. If appropriate I have tried to accept criticism, and where I have agreed with it, I have changed my ways, for the better. I don't always agree, but then deleting views apposed to mine would be hypocritical, wouldn't it?

I think honesty and openness, and importantly, the appearance of being so, is very important when posting these videos if you want to be taken seriously.

However the vibe I am getting here is that it is reasonable to stiffle debate if it doesn't fit the youtubers agenda. In this case it would appear that Martin is deleting any comments that do not conform to his view, i.e. that the driving is terrible etc. Now I'm not saying the driving wasn't terrible, but as BSRU has suggested (I might not agree of course) that there may have been a way to reduce the conflict, and as I have pointed out there was a , yes admittedly minor, infraction. If I and others can see these issues, then many others who view the video will see them. So why not discuss them out in the open so we can all learn?

So what is better, openness and honesty, or furthering an agenda, which I agree is probably a good one?

Look at this as an outsider? Watching that video, and reading the comments below. The youtuber deletes all comments that in any way criticise him? That can't be good can it?

Personally this is important. If the majority here think agenda itself is more important then I am in the wrong place.