Daily Fail stiring up cyclist hate yet again.

[captain nemo1701]

Rubbish article from a tiny little angry shouty man. Funny how the comments keeps changing from 154 to 1500+ Like it's sibling, the Bristol Post, the site is so ad-heavy, if you must go there, get Ad Blocker installed.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

It's a bit naughty, not to mention a breach of copyright, to cut and paste the full article.

Whatever you think of the Daily Mail and its staff, they are entitled to protection of their intellectual property in the same way as any other author or publisher.

I'd say it's fair use to enable criticism or review of the article quoted.

 

[Pale Rider]

I'd say it's fair use to enable criticism or review of the article quoted.

The legal concept of 'fair dealing' for the purpose of criticism is limited to extracts of the published work.

It has to be, otherwise a book review site could publish the full text of the latest best seller, which soon wouldn't be because no one would buy it.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

The legal concept of 'fair dealing' for the purpose of criticism is limited to extracts of the published work.

Since the entire article is a pile of shite, it's only fair to review the whole thing.

 

[Inertia]

[QUOTE 4671668, member: 9609"]I very much dislike the tone of the article, but I see nothing wrong in disguising cyclists causing problems on pavements in isolation to other events. I'm not a fan of the 'there is something worse happening somewhere else argument'.[/QUOTE]
Im not a fan of pavement cycling but its just another lazy anti cyclist rant with few facts. When they start their argument saying they would rather inhale toxic fumes from cars than some imagined moral emissions you know they are nuts. Where is his outrage at the deaths and injuries on the road caused by cars?

Its clickbait, nothing more.

 

[Gixxerman]

"Unlike motorists bikers don't pay road tax, so they can just ride away after a crash if they want"

I fail to see any logic or reasoning in the whole article.

Yeah that bit was the most absurd bit in the whole rambling mess. It implies that paying road tax (even if it existed) somehow prevents a person from leaving the scene of an accident. Go figure.

 

[Pale Rider]

Since the entire article is a pile of shite, it's only fair to review the whole thing.

You could try that defence in a breach of copyright action, but I doubt it would get very far.

 

[jefmcg]

You could try that defence in a breach of copyright action, but I doubt it would get very far.

The people who might get in trouble are me (unlikely) or @Shaun (more likely). So report my post and let the moderators decide. I nearly did that myself.

Then let it go.

 

[jonny jeez]

It's a bit naughty, not to mention a breach of copyright, to cut and paste the full article.

Whatever you think of the Daily Mail and its staff, they are entitled to protection of their intellectual property in the same way as any other author or publisher.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...news/article-4197968/Is-safe-Lycra-louts.html

Its a bit naughty to create an article for the sole purpose of encouraging clicks to the website and then demanding personal information (that can be sold for profit) just so that you can comment.

I think their IP rights are pretty much washing along the gutter with the other turds.

 

[al78]

I wouldn't worry about it, the DM have probably got bored with demonising immigrants, so they have pulled something else out of their collection of irrational primative tribal group hatred files, and it happens to be cyclists turn this month. Next month, they'll be back to demonstrating their complete ignorance of climate science, or demonising the yoof of today.

 

[Tim Hall]

It's by Brendan O'Neill. One of these new fangled libertarian, former Living Marxism, Revolutionary Communist Party bundles of joy.

 

[Drago]

We'll have the last laugh. In 20 or 30 years when cars are too expensive for the ordinary mortals, they'll be stuck at the bus stop while we go zipping past.

 

[johnnyb47]

I don't understand the comment that bikes actually cause pollution by causing vehicles to come to a grinding halt by the massive influx of bikes and bike lanes. It may well be the case, that motor traffic could get held up by the increasing culture of cycling but in all honesty what are the alternatives. Would it be solved if every cyclist ditched there bikes and took the car. The roads would be bursting with the extra cars ,even if the cycle lanes were banished. The buses and tube trains are all ready full to the seams. The other scenario is that as more and more people take to cycling through the city streets there will be less motor vehicles on the road in which results in less congestion. If you are capable of cycling who in their right mind would what to endure using a car though London ,day in day out. High insurance costs, the congestion charge , extortionate parking charges ( that's if you can find one ) and travelling at a snails pace. Just imagine if private cars became a rare site in the city and was replaced by bikes. Quiet peaceful streets. No congestion, No pollution, and ample parking.
It's in no interest financially for the government to promote cycling because they lose tax revenue but they do so none the less because it's the way forward for our crowded Streets. Every body has a choice in life. If they don't want to give up their cars then I'm afraid they will have to put up with traffic jams and all the other headaches that go with it.

 

[vickster]

It's not really private cars that are the issue nowadays in central London at least - black cabs, Ubers, buses, trucks, WVM, motorbikes/scooters seem to make up the bulk of the traffic, at least in the week (more private cars at the weekend when no CC and parking can be easier)

The majority, like myself, use public transport to get to work in the centre (buses, but also tubes, trains)

Sometimes cycling isn't a practical option for WVM

 

[pplpilot]

So many DM haters on this forum (understandable) Which is why I'm always surprised just how many threads are started with links to it. Just stop it. Ignore it.