The Canal. The cycle rage.

[Jayaly]

Heaven forbid that people should control their dogs!

I can throw no stones on that one. I have a dog who is a fool of the first order.

 

[Deleted member 23692]

I felt that @Ffoeg @User259 @ianrauk @Shut Up Legs @vickster were setting up the false dichotomy there - and there's plenty of other threads with similar setups.

Some towpaths are one type of cycleway - not a great one, but cycling is permitted on it - and while I'd agree both that riders have greater responsibility and walkers have priority, this doesn't mean that walkers should be unnecessarily-obstructive dicks about it!

Why do so many people think the answer is to abandon the towpath to nobbers and go ride on the less nice roads? After all, in theory, a pedestrian has priority on many roads too, although the current trend of might-is-right from some motorists means that walkers rarely assert priority, unless it's against a someone on a bike!

Only replying because you tagged me. False dichotomy? As someone who has worked in public access for the best part of 20 years I was simply stating fact. Point me towards any of my posts in this thread that have implied anything close to what you seem to think I've implied please. Then again, don't bother.

 

[shouldbeinbed]

You could always use an airzound. They seem perfectly suitable for commuting as some folk say.

Oooh and you being one of management too

 

[subaqua]

Gosh. I can't understand why anyone would want to spend their time arguing, can you?

funily enough i spend most of the time on the cycle path arguing with nobbers who cant read. the big painted words on the paving saying DROP YOUR PACE.

generally all the gear no idea riders, but that might be anecdotal so inadmissible. the ones who must have some sort of means of seeing through brick bridges so don't need to slow down to avoid the woman with the pram and the toddler on the reins.

as it stands at the moment , we are tolerated by permission on the paths. the canal and river trust could quite easily blanket ban cycling along them and that would be a shame if that happened due to a load of cycling nobbers

 

[glenn forger]

I gave up on the canals, I'd pick up the Regents near Pitfield St and ride east but there was too much grief even at half four when I was on the way home. Joggers, dogs, kids learning to ride, anglers who a couple of times shouted "Where's your pass", beer users, dawdlers, and idiots on bikes going too fast. I did actually collide with a jogger but in my defence I rang the bell and went right to overtake and she swung right at the same time. She had earphones in that I hadn't noticed.

I gave it up and used the roads, it was faster with less grief.

 

[mjr]

generally all the gear no idea riders, but that might be anecdotal so inadmissible. the ones who must have some sort of means of seeing through brick bridges so don't need to slow down to avoid the woman with the pram and the toddler on the reins.

Bit of a difference between them and the "you shouldn't be cycling here" deliberately-obstructive walkers described in the opening post, though?

 

[subaqua]

Bit of a difference between them and the "you shouldn't be cycling here" deliberately-obstructive walkers described in the opening post, though?

maybe if they were riding like a nobber ringing a bell to say out of my way , a bit like toad of toad hall . then they have the reason to be saying that. or is that too difficult a concept to understand. the same concept where the canal and river trust have specifically stated peds have priority. if i want to ride fast i will go on a road. i wont try a segregated lane as they are full of pootlers ( which is fine) i will go on road. i want a slow relaxed ride I use the canal towpath, and give way to peds and , MORE VULNERABLE users. now where do we hear that bleated about - they should give way to us more vulnerable users.

you are a spinnners sockpuppet and ICMFP

 

[mjr]

Only replying because you tagged me. False dichotomy? As someone who has worked in public access for the best part of 20 years I was simply stating fact. Point me towards any of my posts in this thread that have implied anything close to what you seem to think I've implied please.

#4 and #29. I'll grant you that those and the other post are factually correct, but the implied dislike of cyclists wanting to use towpaths as reasonable transport routes seemed pretty clear to me.

Then again, don't bother.

Don't like being called on it, eh?

 

[subaqua]

#4 and #29. I'll grant you that those and the other post are factually correct, but the implied dislike of cyclists wanting to use towpaths as reasonable transport routes seemed pretty clear to me.

Don't like being called on it, eh?

NFN is being demonstrated to such good effect by you today

 

[mjr]

maybe if they were riding like a nobber ringing a bell to say out of my way , a bit like toad of toad hall . then they have the reason to be saying that. or is that too difficult a concept to understand.

That's fine, but on what do you base calling @Snoopeh a nobber?

the same concept where the canal and river trust have specifically stated peds have priority.

Priority, but not carte blanche to obstruct. Or is sharing nicely too difficult a concept for you?

if i want to ride fast i will go on a road. i wont try a segregated lane as they are full of pootlers ( which is fine) i will go on road.

Ah, there we go. We shouldn't ever have mass cycling because the pootlers might flood the streets and get in the way of the fast riders, right?

i want a slow relaxed ride I use the canal towpath, and give way to peds and , MORE VULNERABLE users. now where do we hear that bleated about - they should give way to us more vulnerable users.

Give way, not BOGU.

you are a spinnners sockpuppet and ICMFP

Huh? I'm no-one's sockpuppet but you're a Vehicular Cycling zealot and ICM£10.

 

[Deleted member 23692]

Me, dislike cyclists? Only the self-righteous, self-victimising, arrogant, argumentative ones who only serve to get everyone's backs up be they motorists, horse riders, walkers and, most of all, other cyclists.

Ring any bells?

 

[andyfraser]

Priority, but not carte blanche to obstruct.

That's one of two bugbears I have about shared paths. I slow down and take care. I stop if I have to. So why do some pedestrians have to be obstructive? Maybe they've encountered idiots on bikes but why take it out on me? I'm showing that I'm being considerate by staying over on the side of the path, slowing right down and letting you know I'm here.

I find older people to be the worst. Kids, teens and young adults seem more than happy to share the path. Twice recently I've encountered groups of older people walking together, taking up the entire width of the path and not moving over until the last minute when I'm practically stationary. On one of those occasions I had nowhere to go except through a fence on one side and some trees on the other. They may have priority but that's just being obstructive. It costs nothing to play nice.

One guy just wanted to argue that I shouldn't be on the path despite me pointing out the large blue sign indicating that I was indeed allowed to cycle there.

 

[mjr]

NFN is being demonstrated to such good effect by you today

I live here (just, like 9 miles from the border). I'm not from here, you racist

 

[subaqua]

That's fine, but on what do you base calling @Snoopeh a nobber?

Priority, but not carte blanche to obstruct. Or is sharing nicely too difficult a concept for you?

Ah, there we go. We shouldn't ever have mass cycling because the pootlers might flood the streets and get in the way of the fast riders, right?

Give way, not BOGU.


Huh? I'm no-one's sockpuppet but you're a Vehicular Cycling zealot and ICM£10.

Yes I understand share. Now put all your comments as coming from a car driver. How much of a selfish nob do you look now . But you crack on with wanting all the " rights" and wanting none of the responsibilities .

So peds block the path and I have to stop . Big hardship innit. Ooh delayed me by all of 10 seconds. Even if it delays me more than 5 mins it really isn't a problem. I leave a little earlier. Like I would in a car.

As for segregated . Well look at CS2 . I ride in the road as it's safer as it isn't flooded or full of shite. But it's the way forward apparently

 

[subaqua]

I live here (just, like 9 miles from the border). I'm not from here, you racist

You have integrated very well then .