It makes my blood boil!

[SportMonkey]

Well, yes, but imagine the vitriol if the cyclist had been a female, gay, black, muslim, immigrant on benefits?

 

[downfader]

Thinking about it, I think I shouldn't have made my remarks. Not because it's not what I believe, but because I think it derails the more important issue. My views on the subject are less important than the debate on the incident itself.

I respect your remarks a far greater deal than I do theirs.

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

So today I have recieved this from the ES team:

"It has come to our attention that you have been consistently spamming our comments with apparent reports of abuse. "

It looks like you are wasting your time communicating with idiots. They don't even know what spam is (unsolicited commercial bulk email).

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

I kind of get the feeling I was the only one with the sense to report those comments. They as a Newspaper have an obligation to inform - not to give people a platform for their ill-conceived and wrong viewpoints, certainly in the wrong time and place.

That's a mistake. They as a newspaper have an obligation to maximise profits for their shareholders; nothing else. (Yes, I know it's wrong, but that's the way it is.)

 

[downfader]

That's a mistake. They as a newspaper have an obligation to maximise profits for their shareholders; nothing else. (Yes, I know it's wrong, but that's the way it is.)

Thats their business approach, which in fairness would be nothing without their readers.

 

[Digital_Cowboy]

Indeed they were taken by surprise. And happily we live in a society where the majority don't take to fisticuffs whatever the provocation. If somebody had taken it upon themselves to go after one of these thugs, there's no telling where this could have ended up (I bet this carload of rubbish have been in a similar situation before). In a way it's better this way where, hopefully, the video evidence is enough to bring the assailant to book. But I still would prefer his employers to see this and then sack the violent tw*t. I hope the chap on the end of that 'punch' goes full out for justice.

Why? Was he wearing any sort of company uniform? Was he driving a company car? Was he on the company time?

I don't think that he was. As isn't part of the claim by the cars rightful owner is that he didn't know who was driving it?

If he was on the clock, driving a company car, I could him getting fired. But he wasn't, so why should his boss be involved in this?

 

[Digital_Cowboy]

As a slight aside, what have his Employers got to do with it? Could they get rid of him as he's comitted an offence (hopefully they'll shop him to the Police too!) or could they only do that if the offence was against the firm itself? Genuine question.

Agreed, there's another web site that I'm a member of. A member posted about an encounter that he had with a woman who was walking her dog while he was riding his bike to work. He was riding on the sidewalk/pavement. He passes her with 5' or more to spare. She starts chasing him telling him that it's illegal to ride on the sidewalk/pavement (he's never told us where he is so we don't know if what she's saying is true or not). He calls her a "f*(#en b)(&^" and continues on his way to work. He works at McDonald's.

After being at work for about 30 mins the woman shows up, opens the door and motions for the manager to come out. Where she starts in about the employee (he was wearing his McDonald's uniform and parked/locked his bike in front of the restaurant that he works at) and the encounter that they had. When the manager makes it clear that she (I think it the manager was a she) isn't interested in something that didn't happen on the clock or company property she tries to say that the cyclist tried to steal her purse, which according to the poster she wasn't carrying at the time.

A few people feel that the manager should have fired him for his actions, even though it didn't happen on company time or on company property. Some felt that he should have a warning placed in his file.

Was he wrong for riding on the sidewalk? Not knowing where he lives we can't say. Was he wrong for cussing the woman out, yes. It would have been better if he had just passed her and continued on his way to work. Should he be fired for it, no. Should he have a warning placed in his file, no it didn't happen on the clock or while on company property.

 

[Digital_Cowboy]

OK, I reported a few posts on the Evening Standard and the Mail website versions of this story. I felt it completely unnacceptable that people were allowed to distract from the assault to launch a tirade about cyclists or create conjecture.

So today I have recieved this from the ES team:



I have replied asking why allowing such comment is acceptable? I have also pointed out that they would not tolerate such comment on any other story of violence be that normal assault or sexual, and I have strongly asked them to either screen more closely or turn off the commenting ability on such stories.

I'd like to know why they consider comments about buzzing cyclists acceptable, tirades about non existant taxes that all bear a) no relevance and b) just incite the idiots out there...!

So let's get this straight. It's okay for people to post comments calling for violence against cyclists and that's acceptable, but you flag those posts as being unacceptable and they chastise you? That's incredible.

 

[Digital_Cowboy]

Somebody once said. American justice - The best that money can buy

Sadly, at times it does seem like that.

 

[Digital_Cowboy]

Do you think perhaps that the ES people have a point?

If those were the type of comments you flagged then I'm inclined to agree with the ES people. As ignorant as I find those posts too, it is just comment. Yes, comments provide a soup box for idiots to spout, and is in danger of reinforcing unacceptable behaviour, but the platform is equally there for you to balance that debate. Simply flagging posts you don't agree with as abusive is, well, a bit like running and crying to mummy... sorry, I wanted to phrase that a bit more tactfully but couldn't.

I know it's frustrating (and why I very very rarely bother reading comments on any article) but sometimes you just have to take it in your stride. Sadly, there are idiots. Perhaps I am one too? I'm sure my comments will have some thinking so but, as I say, it is just comment that you can simply disagree with!

I've made the "mistake" of reading the comments for some of these articles and sadly most of them seem to be one-sided. And a lot of them also seem to attack those who defend cyclists.

Given the violence that some of these comments advocate flagging them as abusive is appropriate.

As an aside one of the other web sites that I visit just now started talking about this.

 

[Digital_Cowboy]

That's a mistake. They as a newspaper have an obligation to maximise profits for their shareholders; nothing else. (Yes, I know it's wrong, but that's the way it is.)

You mean it isn't about reporting the news in an unbiased manner?

 

[fimm]

Totally off topic, and highly pedantic, but may I point out that it is a Soap Box and not a Soup Box? (I do appreciate you could have made a simple typo.) Apparently soap used to come in large solid packing cases that, once emptied of their contents, were excellent for standing on to make a speech to a crowd.

Pedant moment over.

(Edited for spelling, of course)

 

[TheBoyBilly]

Digital Cowboy, I don't know, obviously, if the assailant is employed or not. But if I were the head of a large company that relied on (amongst other things) image to attract my customers, and found that one of my staff was a known violent thug I would seriously question his value to my firm.
In my opinion this bloke could easily (especially as this case has now got national exposure) wind up with a criminal record for a violent offence. Would you want such a person on your books? What if the cyclist suffered severe injury? He was lucky in that he was wearing a helmet. But if he hadn't and his head had struck the kerb we could be looking at something far, far more serious. You just don't go round attacking people.
A lot of 'ifs' and 'buts' but I think losing his job would serve a far greater purpose than a likely community service order.

Bill

 

[DamoDoublemint]

Driver has handed himself in apparently:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-14150913

 

[Nigeyy]

Great, just don't think it will be a happy ending. Going by one of the previous threads he'll get 5 minutes community service with a 4 hour suspended sentence and a slap on the wrists with a wet noodle.

Sorry, just my jaded cynicism coming out here......

p.s. in all fairness, I didn't see what led up to this confrontation. As always, it's better to get a full picture of what happened. I'm in no way suggesting what this bloke did is right, but I do in all honesty wonder what happened to motivate his behaviour?

Driver has handed himself in apparently:

http://www.bbc.co.uk...london-14150913