To you maybe. Not me. I don't let a little rudeness upset me and can see past it to see a point being made.
Cyclists gets a finger wag !
- Thread starter ozboz
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Indeed - very good.Would that be a finger wag, Shaun?
nickyboy
Norven Mankey
- Location
- You want hills? We got hills
This thread has been interesting at points along the way, but in the last few pages has become somewhat personal. Please be civil to each other or we'll intervene with exclusions and locks. Thanks, Shaun.
Dammit....a warning's no good to me at #245
martint235
Dog on a bike
- Location
- Welling
I'm still good!! I should just launch a torrent of abuse at various people in my next post and the job's a good 'unDammit....a warning's no good to me at #245
Mugshot
Cracking a solo.
Bloody good effort though!!Dammit....a warning's no good to me at #245
Dammit....a warning's no good to me at #245
You need to get a few people to delete some posts further up thread, then causally throw in a few helmet comments.
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
Nobber
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
Probably on ignore but...
a) Reg doesn't have a little clique.
b) Meaning is important. Clarity of usage is critical. We only have the written word to go by and should not have to waste energy decoding people's posts. E.g Helping your uncle jack off a horse is an entirely different thing to helping your uncle Jack off a horse, and folk claiming "but that's not what I meant" when it is what they wrote is just dull. All we have are the words. Helpful if the right ones are used, in the right order, with a spot of punctuation, et cetera.
c) calling other people small minded is a teeny bit... small minded. Some of your side's posts on this thread are a bit nasty, dismissive, and come across slightly angry. Is that better than coming across as a smart arse?
If folk want to dress like Space Lemons; they can fill their boots. If they want to be lit up like Christmas Trees; go ahead. But please don't propose anecdata about safety, "common sense", or any other "but it's obvious" drivel on the issue of Hi Viz making a cyclist or horse rider, safer.
Science. Data. Facts. Invisible Gorillas. Please.
All else is just opinion and a vain waste of air.
Last edited:
"when it is what they wrote" I guess you meant.
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
Hoist, rather amusingly, on my own petard!
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
That's a pov. CycleChat isn't an echo chamber. Opposing points of view are allowed.
Your post doesn't advance any worthwhile counter-argument to 'if they are looking they will see you, no matter what you wear, and if they aren't looking they won't see you, no matter what you wear, so it doesn't matter what you wear."
And my main objection to the "what you wear matters, it's obvious" argument is two fold.
Hardly anyone, apart from Brit expats, in countless cities and towns in mainland Europe where cycling is the norm, that is, a normal everyday activity, undertaken by the masses, by normal people in normal clothes, rather than an activity undertaken by weird people in weird clothes, wears hi-viz.
Hi Viz cyclists, wearing weird clothes, portray cycling as a weird activity, for weird people, which requires special safety equipment to take part in. It screams "cycling is dangerous". It isn't.
You may find this uninteresting and unintelligent. Others may not.
Last edited:
Hardrock93
Guru
- Location
- Stirling
With your own petard.
glasgowcyclist
Charming but somewhat feckless
- Location
- Scotland
You're telling me; just look at the riders in Utrecht. They must getting slaughtered by the dozen... right?
