London Cycling Campaign gets cash boost from Trek

[HJ]

London Cycling Campaign gets cash boost from Trek read all about it here.

 

[chap]

Great, although I'm starting to have some serious reservations about the LCC. For all the money they rake in, there is very little achieved, plus it seems to have a rather misguided 'elitist' tone about it, perhaps there is a thread in that later on. I am seriously considering cancelling my membership.

 

[style over speed]

Great, although I'm starting to have some serious reservations about the LCC. For all the money they rake in, there is very little achieved

+1

they seem to exist only to pay themselves wages.

The excellent Crap cycling and walking blog post on what they are totally failing to campaign on is worth a read:

[url]http://crapwalthamforest.blogspot.com/2010/02/whats-wrong-with-london-cycling.html[/URL]

 

[chap]

Its worse than I thought
It would appear that the LCC are no better than a bunch of parasites!

 

[Crankarm]

Its worse than I thought
It would appear that the LCC are no better than a bunch of parasites!

Easy .........

 

[chap]

Easy .........

Don't worry, I will get my moneys worth in 10% discounts (using their card) then I may very well relinquish my support.

 

[Crankarm]

Don't worry, I will get my moneys worth in 10% discounts (using their card) then I may very well relinquish my support.

I was rather more concerned with your comment not whether you felt you were getting your monies worth. Had you thought of volunteering either helping arrange some activities or giving a hand in campaigning? They have quite a few hard working volunteers at local level and behind the scenes. Are you saying that these people are parasites ? Are you only a member of the LCC for what you can get out of them and the discounts you can obtain from bike shops in London? Chap - Do you not think that your comment could apply to yourself?

 

[chap]

I was rather more concerned with your comment not whether you felt you were getting your monies worth. Had you thought of volunteering either helping arrange some activities or giving a hand in campaigning? They have quite a few hard working volunteers at local level. Are you saying that these people are parasites ? Are you only a member of the LCC for what you can get out of them and the discounts you can obtain from bike shops in London? Chap - Do you not think that your comment could apply to yourself?

There are plenty of decent people there, my understanding is that these roles are done voluntarily and unpaid. Therefore, it would make no sense to say that those members of the LCC are parasites.

I was mildly entertained by your attempt to turn my accusation back on myself, sadly it lacks any real vigour, consideration, nor thought thus relies on tired generalisations and loose interpretation - much like many of the high-school (and sadly some undergraduate) debates; one almost expects you to pull the whole 'if God is evil why do bad things happen' clincher

When talking about the organisation and the money involved for results gained, this would normally imply which part of the organisation (or individuals) I am referring to. I am sure that you were well aware of this but favoured the 'Question Time' styled disingenuous and convenient misinterpretation.

The voluntary section, as implied by the name, is not core to the organisation; there is a reason it is called the London Cycle Campaign. The core part which is involved with defining their policies, acting upon them, and using money from members to do this, are where the attack is aimed.

Now at risk of yet another ill-thought retort I will go ahead to say, yes I am a member of the LCC for what I can get out of them. I want London to be a safe and better place for me and others to cycle, I believe that more cyclists and a cycling culture shall enrich the city thus I will be able to partake and enjoy this. I also want to be able to take efficient routes across, and around the city whether it be for my commute, sightseeing, shopping, meeting friends, or as part of a leisurely pootle across the city. To deny that humans have self-interest in these matters is at best laughably dishonest.

Or perhaps you are voluntarily contributing an extra part of your salary to institute the cycling infrastructure or Bosnia and Poland. If so, good for you, you've gone above and beyond - and there is a reason why that phrase exists.

 

[Crankarm]

Well I'm still none the wiser from your post above. I would suggest that if you feel strongly that the LCC is not representing the interests of cyclists in London that you terminate your membership with immediate effect and return your membership card to them. I am sure they would give you a full or partial refund pro rata if you presented cogent and compelling reasons for wanting to do so. Insulting an organisation and it's representatives that are endeavouring to promote cycling and the facilities for cyclists on a public cycling forum seems rather .

Surely the cash that Trek has committed to the LCC is good news? Ok they might have a pecuniary interest, but good news none the less.

 

[chap]

Oh most definitely, I am happy to see more cycle manufacturers - and associated companies get more behind campaigns to promote cycling.

What I am not happy about is when those who really ought to know better, especially dedicated Cycling Campaign Organisations, decide to waste it on ineffective solutions, making a noise about nothing, and as a result squandering money.

It would be unreasonable for me to expect the LCC to be free, for it to fulfil its duties properly it needs to have capital behind it. It also needs to have a good number behind it too When the focus switches from the interests of its members towards mere existance and more money, then that is where the problem starts.

The reason I joined the LCC initially was because I was not convinced about many parts of the CTC. Rightly, or wrongly, I interpreted the CTC to be an organisation trying to be a little of everything, bar actually advocating cycling. The LCC seems more targeted, even by definition of the fact that it is focused on London. Therefore, I thought it would be difficult for them to get much wrong, having an organisation focused on improving cycling facilities in a single city... However, on reading many of their proposals, it does seem as if their interests lie elsewhere.

I am in no hurry to leave the organisation, united being stronger etc, although if despite my input, they show no signs of improving towards a more inclusive membership then I shall simply not renew my mine.

 

[Crankarm]

Oh most definitely, I am happy to see more cycle manufacturers - and associated companies get more behind campaigns to promote cycling.

What I am not happy about is when those who really ought to know better, especially dedicated Cycling Campaign Organisations, decide to waste it on ineffective solutions, making a noise about nothing, and as a result squandering money.

It would be unreasonable for me to expect the LCC to be free, for it to fulfil its duties properly it needs to have capital behind it. It also needs to have a good number behind it too When the focus switches from the interests of its members towards mere existance and more money, then that is where the problem starts.

The reason I joined the LCC initially was because I was not convinced about many parts of the CTC. Rightly, or wrongly, I interpreted the CTC to be an organisation trying to be a little of everything, bar actually advocating cycling. The LCC seems more targeted, even by definition of the fact that it is focused on London. Therefore, I thought it would be difficult for them to get much wrong, having an organisation focused on improving cycling facilities in a single city... However, on reading many of their proposals, it does seem as if their interests lie elsewhere.

I am in no hurry to leave the organisation, united being stronger etc, although if despite my input, they show no signs of improving towards a more inclusive membership then I shall simply not renew my mine.

Perhaps your intemperate language describing the LCC as parasites is unsuitable and inappropriate? What ever your feelings for the way the organisation is run or the success of the projects that they promote the use of derogatory and inflammatory language to demean them is uncalled for.

 

[chap]

Perhaps your intemperate language describing the LCC as parasites is unsuitable and inappropriate? What ever your feelings for the way the organisation is run or the success of the projects that they promote the use of derogatory and inflammatory language to demean them is uncalled for.

Still got your knickers in a twist? Perhaps you ought to attack the argument rather than nurse hurt feelings. We are grown ups after all...



*I wonder what the chances of him cottoning onto 'grown up' shall be.

 

[chap]

Oh dear, that was a very immature debate (on my part). Apologies to all, especially when I usually hold little patience for the petulant and the infantile.

Of course it is a generalisation to claim that even the top-brass of the LCC are parasitic, and I completely retract that childish outburst. The LCC do a lot of good, and the city is far better off as a result of their work. Likewise, the organisation is well run by it's paid staff, and one only needs to follow the developments made over the past year to see that they are really going places.

Even if some cycle policies are disagreed upon, the organisation is open enough to allow members to voice concern. Name-calling will not get anybody very far - after-all this isn't Westminster.

So I apologise, and instead of idly complaining, henceforth my contributions will be considered posts based on better research.

Chap

 

[gouldina]

+1

they seem to exist only to pay themselves wages.

The excellent Crap cycling and walking blog post on what they are totally failing to campaign on is worth a read:

[url]http://crapwalthamforest.blogspot.com/2010/02/whats-wrong-with-london-cycling.html[/URL]

Epic link mate. Thanks.

 

[gouldina]

Well I'm still none the wiser from your post above. I would suggest that if you feel strongly that the LCC is not representing the interests of cyclists in London that you terminate your membership with immediate effect and return your membership card to them. I am sure they would give you a full or partial refund pro rata if you presented cogent and compelling reasons for wanting to do so. Insulting an organisation and it's representatives that are endeavouring to promote cycling and the facilities for cyclists on a public cycling forum seems rather .

Surely the cash that Trek has committed to the LCC is good news? Ok they might have a pecuniary interest, but good news none the less.

I'm not a member of the LCC and if I were I would terminate my membership on the basis of the intelligent points made on the link posted and subsequently reading the ineffectual nonsense on the LCC site. Just because some organisations have people working voluntarily for them doesn't make them necessarily good. That's not a sensible argument. Perhaps you'd be better off making a case for why they achieve good things rather than your rather oversensitive and hostile reaction to chap's fairly inoffensive (IMO) post.