Is there any way to change the narrative?

[jefmcg]

How can a car stop and block a roadway while at the same time allowing a following car to safely squeeze past? Either the roadway is blocked and squeezing past isn't safe, or the roadway isn't blocked. In any event the very concept of squeezing past suggests an awareness of heightened risk-taking.

There is clearly a circumstance where a road is wide enough for a careful driver to move cautiously parked a stationary vehicle, but is not wide enough enough if both cars are moving.

 

[bonsaibilly]

There is clearly a circumstance where a road is wide enough for a careful driver to move cautiously parked a stationary vehicle, but is not wide enough enough if both cars are moving.

It's not that clear but in any event we already know there is enough uncertainty in the given situation that to assume the driver will not be moving off equates to making a black and white decision about a scenario that is at best 50/50. Legally in the right or otherwise, you'll be the one driven into or open-doored while shouting out in vain, or you might get through and get to your destination a minute earlier, nursing a mild resentment towards pensioners. I'll be the one arriving a minute or two later with a calmed mind and a little more appreciation of my evenings ride.

 

[classic33]

It's not that clear but in any event we already know there is enough uncertainty in the given situation that to assume the driver will not be moving off equates to making a black and white decision about a scenario that is at best 50/50. Legally in the right or otherwise, you'll be the one driven into or open-doored while shouting out in vain, or you might get through and get to your destination a minute earlier, nursing a mild resentment towards pensioners. I'll be the one arriving a minute or two later with a calmed mind and a little more appreciation of my evenings ride.

So you'd be happy to stay in the road whilst the driver makes their mind up. On your vehicle.

 

[bonsaibilly]

Though there are several who won't accept that my point of view (and that of others too) is not the same as theirs. Hopefully the original poster will learn from their experience and not just expect everyone else to buck up.
BB

 

[50000tears]

It's not that clear but in any event we already know there is enough uncertainty in the given situation that to assume the driver will not be moving off equates to making a black and white decision about a scenario that is at best 50/50. Legally in the right or otherwise, you'll be the one driven into or open-doored while shouting out in vain, or you might get through and get to your destination a minute earlier, nursing a mild resentment towards pensioners. I'll be the one arriving a minute or two later with a calmed mind and a little more appreciation of my evenings ride.

Very well put. The forums are ruined by too many people who rufuse to see things other than in absolutes and will argue with different opinion. The fact that two riders might approach the same situation differently and neither be wrong is unfathonable to many.

 

[classic33]

How one individual deals with a set of circumstances may not be how another would. I don't think anyone has said, or even expected, that theirs is the only way of dealing with it.

 

[50000tears]

How one individual deals with a set of circumstances may not be how another would. I don't think anyone has said, or even expected, that theirs is the only way of dealing with it.

If that is the case then why have you, and others, derided and spoken down to anyone who found disagreement with the narrative version?

You would faced with the situation described have gone through the narrow gap without hesitation, I would have been more wary of doing so. I ride with people who would wait and others who would probably not. That is their choice and I exercise mine.

Life is all about choices but I do think the forum lets itself down when it fails to respect other views outside of an often very narrow viewpoint that they see as definitive. More often than not it is nothing but opinion. Yes you can argue a point of view but it is the lack of respect for opposing views which lets individual posters down.

 

[classic33]

If that is the case then why have you, and others, derided and spoken down to anyone who found disagreement with the narrative version?

You would faced with the situation described have gone through the narrow gap without hesitation, I would have been more wary of doing so. I ride with people who would wait and others who would probably not. That is their choice and I exercise mine.

Life is all about choices but I do think the forum lets itself down when it fails to respect other views outside of an often very narrow viewpoint that they see as definitive. More often than not it is nothing but opinion. Yes you can argue a point of view but it is the lack of respect for opposing views which lets individual posters down.

I have said exactly what I did in a similar situation, which is completely different to what anyone else said.

That said I'd not be willing to wait, in the road, whilst a driver makes their mind up as to what they were going to do. I even asked if people would be willing to wait behind a vehicle, whose driver seemed unaware of the fact there was anything behind them. The simple reason being, they may just reverse out. Some appear quite happy to remain where they may not have been seen. I'm not one of them.

I speak for myself not the forum, or anyone else on this.

 

[50000tears]

The assumption you make in questioning other people waiting is that they will be behind a car tha may suddenly be put in reverse. For me waiting does not mean I am sat anywhere near their bumper, nor will I be sat in the middle of the road if I have parked cars on my left. There are other options to sitting on the bumper when not proceeding straight through. I might hang back a few lengths or over take it without entering the park so I come at the park entrance at an angle where I am far more likely to be seen. Cannot say for certain unless I was there.

The main point I was trying to make was that a car in the middle of a gateway half on/off a pavement is probably not going to stay in that position long despite the hazards. People can argue that hazards means it is not going to move but the car position says otherwise, and with the driver in the car with the engine on I am not assuming anything. In my opinion the fact that it did move was not some freak occurrence that couldn't be anticipated but a very likely scenario.

Not victim bashing as suggested by another poster as the driver is clearly at fault, Sara was blameless IMO and have said that before.

 

[Profpointy]

The assumption you make in questioning other people waiting is that they will be behind a car tha may suddenly be put in reverse. For me waiting does not mean I am sat anywhere near their bumper, nor will I be sat in the middle of the road if I have parked cars on my left. There are other options to sitting on the bumper when not proceeding straight through. I might hang back a few lengths or over take it without entering the park so I come at the park entrance at an angle where I am far more likely to be seen. Cannot say for certain unless I was there.



The main point I was trying to make was that a car in the middle of a gateway half on/off a pavement is probably not going to stay in that position long despite the hazards. People can argue that hazards means it is not going to move but the car position says otherwise, and with the driver in the car with the engine on I am not assuming anything. In my opinion the fact that it did move was not some freak occurrence that couldn't be anticipated but a very likely scenario.

Not victim bashing as suggested by another poster as the driver is clearly at fault, Sara was blameless IMO and have said that before.

Appologies for casting aspertions on your earier posts - albeit they did look a bit argumwntative, trollish even I'm afraid albeit not your intent. I see whatyou're getting at ie they could move off at any moment -but that said, someone parked up with hazards could be there a considerable time, typically is - else why put hazzards on, and is arguable as likely to reverse (into you) without looking as pull out without looking.

Anyhow, appologies for maligning your motives, although I still think your point is weak (in this case) even if (paraphrasing) "expect people to do something silly" isn't a bad counsel

 

[Pale Rider]

If cyclists want to 'change the narrative' they should stop characterising themselves as victims at every opportunity.

There is no victim here, just an inconsiderate driver and a cyclist who lacked the gumption to establish if a car might be about to move.

 

[winjim]

If cyclists want to 'change the narrative' they should stop characterising themselves as victims at every opportunity.

There is no victim here, just an inconsiderate driver and a cyclist who lacked the gumption to establish if a car might be about to move.

And an entire bowls club membership hurling abuse.

 

[TheJDog]

And an entire bowls club membership hurling abuse.

Exactly. This is the key issue in my mind about this event. Sara didn't do anything wrong (maybe slighly misjudged by the comments of some people here :S), but was harangued by a whole load of people who were definitely in the wrong. Those are the people she should be seeking an apology from. Not just an apology, but assurances from the club that they'll ask their members to behave in the future. And make sure that they are all aware that cycling in the park is perfectly OK. And parking in the middle of an entrance is not OK.

 

[glenn forger]

Ask locally if this geriatric delinquent has previously been reported for aggressive driving.

 

[Markymark]

Ask locally if this geriatric delinquent has previously been reported for aggressive driving.

Ask @Sara_H yourself.

Sorry