Bad Name

[doog]

But the traffic was still flowing here albeit it not as fast as the motorised traffic would have liked. The road was obviously not wide enough for traffic to pass and I would suggest it wouldn't have made any difference if the cyclist was riding at 10 mph or 18 mph.

sorry , I wasnt responding to your posts...nothing at all aimed at you. (teach me not to read 13 pages before sticking my oar in)

 

[youngoldbloke]

We don't really 'know' anything about the situation reported in the original post. It is perfectly possible that the motorists were being delayed by the lead driver who having noted the slow, and possibly erratic, progress of the cyclist using their phone, was concerned for the safety of the cyclist in being overtaken, and was thus driving ultra cautiously - who knows?

 

[Noodley]

Maybe the cyclist was phoning the Police to complain about the piss poor driving of one of the cars behind him?

 

[4F]

Maybe the cyclist was phoning the Police to complain about the piss poor driving of one of the cars behind him?

 

[apollo179]

Have we established how we 'know' these motorists were peed off yet? Or it another assumption, cos you think they would/should have been.

You have had this repeatedly explained to you ;
"We are dependant on the ops relating of events.
If you want to second guess and reinterpret things for your own ends then thats up to you."
"Your posts (for instance suggesting there is no safety issue cycling when on the phone) suggest a level of intransigence which is beyond reason."

 

[apollo179]

In June I cycled from Spain back to the UK. As an experienced cyclist, before I made that trip I made an unusual purchase - unusual for me that is.

I purchased a mirror that fits in the drops.

I got it for one reason and that was to monitor the traffic situation behind me. As a **normal*** cyclist I dont want to impede the traffic flow. I guess thats where I differ from many people on here.

The mirror was great. I found I could use advanced observations both ahead and behind to keep the traffic flowing freely around me.

Why wouldnt any sane person want this? (keep the traffic flowing)

There was an occasion when I was spinning up a Col in the Pyrenees. There were crash barriers to my right and I was on a long up hill. I looked in my my mirror and an HGV was matching my 5.6 mph uphill slog. He couldnt pass and even if I stopped he still couldnt pass. I gave him a thumbs up and pulled in at the next pull in about 3 mins later. (that was a long 3 minutes)He tooted and passed, so did 20 cars, most of the waved, nodded and thanked me. As a matter of fact this scenario was repeated numerous times.

Its threads like that remind me I belong to an idiot clan.

Yes quite - some of our clan do make one cringe with some of the stuff they come out with.
Anyway - console yourself with the thought that they are a small (but vocal) minority and that most cyclists , like most motorists are decent polite and courteous members of society.

 

[John the Monkey]

I got it for one reason and that was to monitor the traffic situation behind me. As a **normal*** cyclist I dont want to impede the traffic flow. I guess thats where I differ from many people on here.

Oh ffs. We think it's unreasonable that a "delayed" motorist should feel irritated to the point that it becomes justifiable to use their car as a weapon.

Further, that the idea that we should cringe in the face of these bullies, and worry that we're being given a bad name by those who do not, is a silly, meretricious argument.

That is VASTLY different from "wanting" to impede traffic flow.

Why wouldnt any sane person want this? (keep the traffic flowing)

TAKE THAT, STRAWMAN!

Its threads like that remind me I belong to an idiot clan.

If you insist on misinterpreting them, I'd suggest you not rely too heavily on the conclusions you draw.

 

[John the Monkey]

(fade in Bon Jovi, the chorus sings

Traffic's slow!
And you're to blame!
You give bikes, a bad name!

On your phone,
But Not at 40 mph,
You give bikes, a bad name!

(fades out)

 

[apollo179]

Oh ffs. We think it's unreasonable that a "delayed" motorist should feel irritated to the point that it becomes justifiable to use their car as a weapon.

Further, that the idea that we should cringe in the face of these bullies, and worry that we're being given a bad name by those who do not, is a silly, meretricious argument.

That is VASTLY different from "wanting" to impede traffic flow.


TAKE THAT, STRAWMAN!



If you insist on misinterpreting them, I'd suggest you not rely too heavily on the conclusions you draw.

Everyone agrees that it is totally "unreasonable that a "delayed" motorist should feel irritated to the point that it becomes justifiable to use their car as a weapon. "
Its is never justified for any motorist "to use their car as a weapon".
However cyclists should cycle with courtesy and consideration to other road users - its dissapointing that some of the clan just dont seem to get this.

 

[John the Monkey]

Maybe the cyclist was phoning the Police to complain about the piss poor driving of one of the cars behind him?

I think he'd received a call saying that little Timmy was stuck down the well. He was trying to text "OMG! I M on my way" and maintain his place on the road so that he could zoom to the rescue without having to filter past all the cars at the lights. On the way to the well. And that.

 

[John the Monkey]

However cyclists should cycle with courtesy and consideration to other road users - its dissapointing that some of the clan just dont seem to get this.

Only cyclists need be courteous though, eh?

"If the guy was in primary then i would hope the traffic behind would start tooting horns or yelling abuse out of there windows."

STAY CLASSY.

 

[Norm]

Oh ffs. We think it's unreasonable that a "delayed" motorist should feel irritated to the point that it becomes justifiable to use their car as a weapon.

Given that no-one has attempted to justify such actions, can I suggest...

TAKE THAT, STRAWMAN!

For the blinkered cycling apologists, one simple question and please try to consider the question itself rather than setting up such figures as JtM created above.

If a journey was needlessly delayed by someone who was travelling unnecessarily slowly because they were concentrating on something completely unrelated to their journey, would they get frustrated?

Note that there is no mention of the respective forms of transport, what else they were concentrating on, what speed they were actually doing and no suggestion of anything beyond frustration.

 

[twobiker]

How do you think that white van man got a bad reputation?, by the actions of a few ignorant drivers that's how, we have people on this forum who drive white vans and do not wind up everyone with their behaviour, yet the term white van men denotes a certain kind of driver, people see a caravan and think "bloody caravans"and the same goes for cyclists, it only takes a few inconsiderate ones to tarnish the reputation of the majority, and some cyclists seem to relish their reputation.

 

[apollo179]

Given that no-one has attempted to justify such actions, can I suggest...



For the blinkered cycling apologists, one simple question and please try to consider the question itself rather than setting up such figures as JtM created above.

If a journey was needlessly delayed by someone who was travelling unnecessarily slowly because they were concentrating on something completely unrelated to their journey, would they get frustrated?

Note that there is no mention of the respective forms of transport, what else they were concentrating on, what speed they were actually doing and no suggestion of anything beyond frustration.

Well said.
I like blinkered cycling apologists (bcas) (i dont mean i like bcas themselves , i like the description)

 

[4F]

If a journey was needlessly delayed by someone who was travelling unnecessarily slowly because they were concentrating on something completely unrelated to their journey, would they get frustrated?

I think we are still waiting for it to be established on how slow is to slow ? After all apparently this cyclist "had all the gear" and of course should have been riding much quicker.

It is quite clear that if traffic was unable to pass then it meant the road was not wide enough and it would not matter what speed the cyclist was doing irrespective of whether he was on his phone, i pad etc etc.

I am suprised that so many are missing this simple fact.