YouTube Dilema

[Origamist]

Where does the cs put you on the doorzone? I can only recall it going through parking spaces and thus not actually promoting a bad position when passing parked cars.

View: http://vimeo.com/12031490
at 9 secs in. The buffer needs to be bigger between the loading bays and the CS lane.

 

[gaz]

View: http://vimeo.com/12031490
at 9 secs in. The buffer needs to be bigger between the loading bays and the CS lane.

I see. I agree, I think I missed that as I totally ignore that section and just take primary. I also don't like how the cs gets narrower as you approach a side junction. It should be wider, surely?
Although I guess it isn't promoting undertaking. Not that overtaking safely in the cs is possible (bike vs bike)

 

[BentMikey]

Yes, whatever, and I think I'll leave it at that.

So you laugh about calling me a liar? I'm not impressed, not at all.

I distinctly recall just how uncomfortable you were about going through that light on camera. I'm not making a mistake, and it's p1ss poor when you have to call someone a liar just because you didn't like losing your point. That's a real good way to lose all credit with me.

 

[Sheffield_Tiger]

On the "why film?" question there's another angle other than confrontation/preaching/etc..

Went out on a quick tootle to Sainsburys to take the recycling, just as an excuse to try out the newly purchased cam - not the nicest of days to do so but new toys must be used straightaway, instructions read later.

View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LG1O31pKA1c


Nothing to write home about, the car pulling out was a minor niggle, not like it was dangerously close, just something a non-cyclist wouldn't understand, the loss of momentum when the road slopes up, and it was obvious he was going to go anyway from his nose-out positioning.

No, the real thing I noticed when watching an incident-free ride was my poor positionng in one short section. Only watching back do I realise that I lost my confidence to keep up with traffic and without realising it, edged to the side, not far enough to make a clear path for an overtaking vehicle but enough to open the door to a close pass.

The following car didn't succumb to temptation and no-one was held up since I was keeping average pace with traffic, just at the cyclist's constant(ish) pace rather than the car's erratic speed-up-slow-down pace.

I only did it the once but the value of the footage is there, for me, to acknowledge my own mistake and bear it in mind. Hopefully then lessening the number of "angry" videos captured by the camera in future...

 

[Mark_Robson]

IMO the only purpose that a camera serves is to provide a source of evidence in the event of an accident and to help the cyclist improve his own road skills.

I agree with you Sheffield Tiger

 

[BentMikey]

What light?

Now this is pure trolling Lee. It was the traffic light that you were unwilling to jump on camera, and you know exactly what I'm talking about.

Your own words as agreed before that ride. NOthing to do at all with me RLJing on camera - as I said before you're lying and I would go as far to say you are full of shoot but I won't.

Now that's all true, that we agreed to make the ride about your ability. It's also true that you wouldn't jump the light on camera because of what the CC lot would say. You were taking a lot of strain about your RLJing at the time on the forum, and you couldn't take the pressure of having it on video. You only went through after I promised not to put it on the video clip.

Here's another lie of yours shown up - your faux concern for me having a collision through that light. You tried desperately hard to lose me through the traffic, and you simply weren't good enough or fast enough. You went out the back in a sweating panting heap when I turned up the power in the second half, not that I have that much power. You didn't show the slightest bit of concern for my safety at any stage during that ride.

We're seeing your real morals here, Lee. Stop calling me a liar when it's you that's lying just because you hate losing debates so much. IMO that is very scummy behaviour.

 

[dondare]

The debate is about cameras, how they are used, how they should be used and whether cameras modify behaviour or attitudes. (Not least that of the camera user.)
It is about whether the posting of other cyclist's or motorist's transgressions on Youtube and similar internet sites can improve road safety.

One thing is clear to me, the camera cannot show what the cyclists felt at the time. Near misses may not look that bad, so the poster is told, both by motorists and by other cyclists, to stop whining and MTFU. The really nasty happenings don't happen that often.

This is an interesting and useful debate and both Lee and BM have opinions and arguments to support their opinions which are getting lost in the rising noise of various side arguments. Please leave personal accusations out of it except when they have real relevance to the topic. (That would be like "You forced a confrontation because you had a camera" rather than "You're a liar/troll".)

The way you two argue gives even popcorn a sour taste. Perhaps it's time for another ride. In dayilght, this time.

 

[BentMikey]

Being called a liar when I'm clearly not also leaves a sour taste in my mouth, dondare.

It's not really a side argument either - Lee says cameras don't change behaviour, and yet one changed his behaviour about jumping that one particular light that he wanted to.

 

[dondare]

Being called a liar when I'm clearly not also leaves a sour taste in my mouth, dondare.

It's not really a side argument either - Lee says cameras don't change behaviour, and yet one changed his behaviour about jumping that one particular light that he wanted to.

If people only behave legally and safely when they know they're being filmed then it's either an argument for blanket coverage or evidence that cameras alone are not effective.
Lee says that he now rljs less but if that's the case then it's because his attitude to rljing has changed, not because of that clip. I'm sure that you have better examples of the positive power of the camera.

 

[BentMikey]

Yeah, but it totally destroys his argument that cameras don't make any difference. I distinctly remember how he was stressed about the idea of the CC lot giving him more stick for RLJing on camera.

You can attribute his reduction in RLJing to the peer pressure on here, or to the worry of the camera exposing him, or to some of both. That is what cameras do - they make whatever behaviour it is more public, and allow peer pressure to become more effective and hard hitting.

My viewpoint is that cameras do make a difference. Just like traffic policing, they bring consequences. The effects of those consequences will probably be similar too, lasting a while and then fading away for each individual instance, being shared with friends and affecting those friends behaviour a smaller amount, etc.

 

[dondare]

One worry I have is that selectively posting hairy moments and confrontations gives the impression that cycling is dangerous and that confrontations are common.
What I remember about that ride is that before it you were flaming each other like now and after it you stopped for a while. Go for another one.

 

[Mark_Robson]

Personal attacks aside, both sides have valid points and each have merit.
I've already stated my opinion on headcams so I'm not going to go over it
but I was thinking about this issue in bed last night ( sad I know )

I remember many moons ago when the government gave the go ahead for everyone and his dog to install CC TV to protect their property or monitor the our roads, shopping centres, carparks and estates.
The reason that the cameras were installed was to capture or deter criminals. You could argue that they prevented crime by modifying the criminals behaviour but you could also argue that they didn't modify the criminals attitude to committing crime. Criminals simply got quicker at committing the crime, wore a mask, disabled the camera or more importantly targeted areas where there were no cameras.

The point that I am getting at is that CC TV is a visual deterrent that is used to deter crime, much the same as a burglar alarm but it doesn't change the criminals attitude.
So as Lee said rather than trying to fight a Youtube campaign we would all be better off if there were a government led campaign to educate motorists into believing that their actions against cyclist are visible and that they will be held accountable for their actions. Cyclists could be issued with warning stickers or tabards to make drivers aware that they are using a cam. I also think that a national reporting site where evidence could be deposited for investigation would be a good idea as well.

 

[BentMikey]

One worry I have is that selectively posting hairy moments and confrontations gives the impression that cycling is dangerous and that confrontations are common.
What I remember about that ride is that before it you were flaming each other like now and after it you stopped for a while. Go for another one.

Yeah, I agree, that's a worry of mine too. As for Lee, no, he's going on my ignore list now. His behaviour on this topic has passed into unacceptable territory now.

 

[dondare]

Yeah, I agree, that's a worry of mine too. As for Lee, no, he's going on my ignore list now. His behaviour on this topic has passed into unacceptable territory now.

That would be a shame.
I used to post on cyclingforums.com and there were a couple of real nasty flamers on there who were allowed to get away with it by the mods.
Both have died now (one killed by a texting motorist, the other natural causes) and the place is so boring now I don't bother with it.

(On the FAQs there's this about one of them:

Question: "Boudreaux pissed me off, what should I do?"

Answer: Nothing, just shut up and take his advice.)

 

[dondare]

...and it comes from the top when a company addresses the problem highlighted on the camera.

As to your claim that they don't change long term behaviour because you didn't change yours, that's just you. There are plenty on here who have changed their riding after camera discussions on the forum. And anyway, that's cyclists and not drivers.

I suspect that the only influences on Lee's behaviour are top down, that is the ones that originate in his own head.