Doubling Up On Road

[freecyclist]

This is all very well, but when is this "Mc Paul" fellow going to step up and throw down some wikkid rhymes here, Yo?

Yo best steer clear - this Mcpaul is ccs equivalent of vanilla ice - sounds legit on a first listen but when you look a bit closer you realise hes just hes just a shifty pretender spouting sh8te.

 

[dellzeqq]

58 miles to Brighton mostly in primary.. what a naughty boy I am...

and that's before we get to our sweaty, breathless encounter in the MaccyD's toilets!!!!!

 

[MissTillyFlop]

Yo best steer clear - this Mcpaul is ccs equivalent of vanilla ice - sounds legit on a first listen but when you look a bit closer you realise hes just hes just a shifty pretender spouting sh8te.

I guess that makes you MC Hammer. Cause you're 2 legit 2 quit.

Not that I bought that single or anything...

 

[snailracer]

My suggestion was merely that cyclists should take some sort of test as well as motorists Any extra training could only be a good thing couldnt it...

AFAICT, inexperienced and unskilled cyclists are more likely to be gutter huggers, so more cyclists taking tests -> more riding in primary, more riding 2 abreast, which would be a good thing because more motorists would be more used to it.

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

AFAICT, inexperienced and unskilled cyclists are more likely to be gutter huggers, so more cyclists taking tests -> more riding in primary, more riding 2 abreast, which would be a good thing because more motorists would be more used to it.

+1. Before we can hope to get a culture change amongst non-cycling drivers, we need them to get a consistent message from the people they see on bicycles.

On more than one occasion, I have had a car come up the side of me and push me in towards the kerb when I was approaching the back of a slow-moving queue in primary position, and when I've spoken to them, they've said "I assumed you would go up the inside of the queue".

I've even begun to suspect that some drivers' brains tell them that a cyclist is in the gutter, just because that's what they are expecting, even though their eyes tell them otherwise. Human perception is a weird phenomenon.

 

[freecyclist]

Link please.

http://www.cyclechat...d/page__st__150

"Trust me, you are wrong. We have all "considered" the idea that we are an inconvenience to motor traffic and that our default response should be to get out of the way - we are obliged to "consider" it every time we are deliberately intimidated by someone who holds that view. Having considered it at enormous length, few of us are prepared to accept it. Some of us are clearly prepared to make concessions to it, but some of us have had enough, and are not. The latter category are stronger, happier, more confident cyclists, more affable companions and better citizens. If you want to try and make a virtue of spinelessness, then go ahead, but don't expect everyone to be impressed. "

Unwilling to make concessions to the idea that we are an inconvenience to motor traffic.
Cyclists are legally entitled to ride 2abreast , therefore to ride single file out of a considerate impulse not to inconvenience is a concession.
Unwilling to make concessions to the idea that we are an inconvenience to motor traffic = not being prepared to change our 2abreast riding solely out of a consideration for motorists convenience.

 

[dellzeqq]

Unwilling to make concessions to the idea that we are an inconvenience to motor traffic.
Cyclists are legally entitled to ride single file , therefore to ride single file out of a considerate impulse not to inconvenience is a concession.
Unwilling to make concessions to the idea that we are an inconvenience to motor traffic = not being prepared to change our 2abreast riding solely out of a consideration for motorists convenience.

quoi?

 

[mickle]

blah blah blah a 1972 Austin 1300 GT: Hinting at what might have been had Messrs Cooper and Issigonis blah blah blah

Excuse me? Does Sergio Pininfarina not feature in your re-writing of history?

 

[freecyclist]

As that was Claud's post, I'll leave her to explain how you are misinterpreting her.

I do not agree that everyone is saying that cyclists should be considerate to other road users and allow other traffic to overtake whenever safe to do so.
It has been argued that cyclists should not make concessions to motorists (link provided to r2d2) - given that it is agreed that riding 2abreast is entirely legal it follows that for cyclists to single out / not ride 2abreast specifically to allow motorist to overtake safely quite clearly constitutes making a concession.
I would regard such concessions as highly commendable but others have described them as spineless.
My opinion is that cyclists should be considerate to other road users and allow other traffic to overtake when safe to do so.
The cycling militants ability to offer such courtesies is cloudied by their procycling/anti motorist ideology of asserting cyclists rights , reclaiming the roads from motorists and redressing the cyclist/motorist powerbalance - not making concessions to motorists is one manifestation of this ideology.
Asserting cyclist rights to be on the road obviously goes from the entirely legitimate (to be recommended) right to the other end of the spectrum where it interferes with best practice regarding consideration for other road users and thats when it is extreme and selfish and gives cyclists in general a bad name and should be unequivocaly condemned by all responsible cyclists.

 

[theclaud]

http://www.cyclechat...d/page__st__150

"Trust me, you are wrong. We have all "considered" the idea that we are an inconvenience to motor traffic and that our default response should be to get out of the way - we are obliged to "consider" it every time we are deliberately intimidated by someone who holds that view. Having considered it at enormous length, few of us are prepared to accept it. Some of us are clearly prepared to make concessions to it, but some of us have had enough, and are not. The latter category are stronger, happier, more confident cyclists, more affable companions and better citizens. If you want to try and make a virtue of spinelessness, then go ahead, but don't expect everyone to be impressed. "

Ah - thanks for digging that up, FC - it was rather a good post, I think. The "spineless" bit seems to have touched a raw nerve...

 

[theclaud]

Or not, as she sees fit.

I think the orginal post was sufficiently clear. FC's strange riffing on it, on the other hand, is incomprehensible and desperately confused, so I'll leave the explaining to him...

 

[freecyclist]

quoi?

Edited -
Unwilling to make concessions to the idea that we are an inconvenience to motor traffic.
Cyclists are legally entitled to ride 2abreast , therefore to ride single file out of a considerate impulse not to inconvenience is a concession.
Unwilling to make concessions to the idea that we are an inconvenience to motor traffic = not being prepared to change our 2abreast riding solely out of a consideration for motorists convenience.

 

[Bicycle]

Excuse me? Does Sergio Pininfarina not feature in your re-writing of history?

Well... I'm not re-writing it, but yes he does. However, all he did for the 1100/1300 was style the thing.

The layout was 100% Issigonis. That was the marvel. Pinifarina just made it OK to look at.

There was talk at the time of a Cooper version. This was not followed up for one reason or another. Had it been produced, it might have been seen as the true archetype of today's hot hatch - albeit without the hatch.

As it was, the 'hottest' version was the dull-but-worthy 1300GT. I'm not ignoring the Italian styling; it's just that the 'lost sportscar' would have been lost whether it had been styled by Pinifarina, Ghia or even some in-house bod at BMC.

Meanwhile, I went for a spin on the fixie thois morning and the conditions were almost criminal. Very slippery surface, leaves everywhere and the most frigid, penetrating breeze this side of Siberia. I blame the Government.

As I was riding alone and no-one else was fool enough to venture out, I rode in file.

 

[freecyclist]

I think the orginal post was sufficiently clear. FC's strange riffing on it, on the other hand, is incomprehensible and desperately confused, so I'll leave the explaining to him...

Ive quoted you directly.
You say quite clearly that you are not willing to make concessions for the convenience of motorists, ie - you will ride as you want without consideration for motorists convenience.
You equate considerate with being spineless.
On behalf of the considerate majority i condemn you for your selfish , inconsiderate behaviour. Please correct yourself as this gives all cyclists a bad name.

 

[MissTillyFlop]

Unwilling to make concessions to the idea that we are an inconvenience to motor traffic.
.

I'm sorry, but I am not an inconvenience to traffic. I AM traffic.

If we're talking motorised traffic, then it works both ways - we can both be inconvenient to each other, or we can both be helpful to each other.

I'm all for being considerate, but I'm not apologising for my existence.