If there was compulsory training for cyclists, would that put you off cycling?

modsandmockers

Johnmcl7 wrote: »

Based on what? (and don't cite your own opinion as a source)

John

Correction - where I live, there is an increasing tendency for cyclists to seek refuge by riding on the pavements. There is also official support for the idea that cyclists should be allowed to ride the pavement, even though it is still illegal.

Tobster86

I think Mods' statement ref stress levels/fun is unusually credible; commuter city cycling is generally quite fraught and adrenaline fuelled. Whether you find it fun or not would largely depend on your testosterone levels; which if you lack, the place that feels the safest is the pavement.

It doesn't make pavement cycling right, but charging about like savages just because it's rush hour isn't right either.

I drive around urban areas at rush hour at a very sedate pace now (in fact, pretty much all times); partly because of cycling, but mainly because it's just not worth doing it any other way.

Johnmcl7

modsandmockers wrote: »

Correction - where I live, there is an increasing tendency for cyclists to seek refuge by riding on the pavements.

Based on what? (and don't cite your own opinion as a source)

John

InsideInsurance

Norman_Castle wrote: »

Why you got a picture of a leprechaun with a roast chicken on a stick?

modsandmockers

Johnmcl7 wrote: »

Based on what? (and don't cite your own opinion as a source)

John

It's a fact...

esuhl

modsandmockers wrote: »

Surely, it’s obvious that Tilt doesn’t hold any individual cyclist responsible for the behaviour of cyclists in general...

So what was the point of Tilt mentioning the racing cyclists at the level-crossing then having a tantrum because, instead of being able to bask in a mass tutting and shaking of heads, his comments were rightly seen as irrelevant trolling?

Tilt wrote: »

Oh really? So you (and your little forum club) would rather not have any negative points or comments made about the type of cyclist which gives responsible cyclists (like yourself) an bad rep?

Despite your (and Tilt's) denials, Tilt clearly blames responsible cyclists for the behaviour of cyclists in general. Otherwise, how could a responsible cyclist get a "bad rep"?!

If that's how "rep" works and responsible cyclists can be blamed for the actions of others, I'll ask again. What are you and Tilt and other responsible trolls doing to improve your terrible rep as car drivers?

Is "attacking" drivers on social media really the answer? Does Tilt have no friends and nothing better to do than actively search for examples of bad driving/cycling to criticise, in a feeble attempt to feel superior to everyone else?

Is "attacking" drivers on social media going to change his "rep", or improve driving standards, or make the world a better place with "fluffy clouds and bees and honey" and psychedelics for all?!

Or are you both bored, lonely, spiteful people who just want to point out other people's faults in a feeble attempt to improve your own self-esteem?

The funny thing on this thread is you're blaming resposnsible cyclists simply for not caring about your one-man battles on forums and social media... because... no one cares. Your actions and complaining are irrelevant. If you want to complain about someone's actions, go and complain to them! Don't waste your time finding people who also use the same form of transport and shout at them until they agree that the other's actions were very naughty! Go out for a bike ride, make some friends, stop hating the world so much!

modsandmockers

esuhl wrote: »

Despite your (and Tilt's) denials, Tilt clearly blames responsible cyclists for the behaviour of cyclists in general. Otherwise, how could a responsible cyclist get a "bad rep"?!

If that's how "rep" works and responsible cyclists can be blamed for the actions of others, I'll ask again. What are you and Tilt and other responsible trolls doing to improve your terrible rep as car drivers?

Is "attacking" drivers on social media really the answer? Does Tilt have no friends and nothing better to do than actively search for examples of bad driving/cycling to criticise, in a feeble attempt to feel superior to everyone else?

Is "attacking" drivers on social media going to change his "rep", or improve driving standards, or make the world a better place with "fluffy clouds and bees and honey" and psychedelics for all?!

Or are you both bored, lonely, spiteful people who just want to point out other people's faults in a feeble attempt to improve your own self-esteem?

The funny thing on this thread is you're blaming resposnsible cyclists simply for not caring about your one-man battles on forums and social media... because... no one cares. Your actions and complaining are irrelevant. If you want to complain about someone's actions, go and complain to them! Don't waste your time finding people who also use the same form of transport and shout at them until they agree that the other's actions were very naughty! Go out for a bike ride, make some friends, stop hating the world so much!

Is that what goes through your mind every time you choose to take on an innocent motorist?

Marco_Panettone

modsandmockers wrote: »

Is that what goes through your mind every time you choose to take on an innocent motorist?

Where has ANYONE "taken on an innocent motorist"? Is this seen on the 'motoring' board?

brat

modsandmockers wrote: »

Surely, it’s obvious that Tilt doesn’t hold any individual cyclist responsible for the behaviour of cyclists in general, and to suggest otherwise is, by Norman Castle’s definition, the behaviour of a troll.

It would appear he does. A quick search reveals the following.

Tilt wrote: »

No wonder cyclists have such a bad reputation which give responsible cyclists a bad name.

and

Tilt wrote: »

brat wrote: »

..so I do wonder why you feel the need to think that the poor cyclists "give the responsible, law abiding cyclists a bad name."

Maybe because they do?

and

Tilt wrote: »

Some cyclists however ride if they are on a death wish and it is them who give the responsible, law abiding cyclists a bad name.

Then this.

Tilt wrote: »

...seeing as you are a fully fledged responsible and competent cyclist, one of the motorists that gave you "due consideration" could [STRIKE]of[/STRIKE] have been me!

The irrebuttable inference in this last post being that I would be treated better on the road by Tilt because I was a good cyclist.

So while it's not exactly penalising good cyclists for the behaviour of bad ones, he clearly offers a different level of driver consideration to cyclists depending on their ability. Furthermore looking at Tobster's video thread, it would appear that Tilt in many ways misunderstood the safe actions of cyclists, deeming Tobster's position to be unnecessarily obstructive. So he doesn't even have an appropriate grasp of what cyclist behaviour is right and what is wrong to judge how well or how badly to behave towards them.

modsandmockers wrote: »

The friction between motorists and cyclists is most apparent when both are in commuter/innercity mode, and it’s almost certainly generated by the stress levels which are created by that environment. But, for many road users, it is those very stress levels which make road usage ‘fun’. As a truck driver, I regularly gained enormous pleasure from threading my truck safely and successfully between Waitrose at Swiss Cottage and Waitrose in King’s Road Chelsea. Cyclists in general were just a small part of the conundrum, and I was frequently surprised by the risks which some cyclists were happy to take. But, so long as they were having fun, then it was OK by me.

We all have fun in different ways. Skillful driving is one of those ways. Most cyclists enjoy cycling, and they would like motorists to respect their equal right to be on the road. Your early responses to Tobster's video thread likewise don't fill me with confidence that you would be likely to give cyclists adequate consideration.

modsandmockers wrote: »

Rightly or wrongly, it is easy for motorists to perceive cyclists as a nothing but a nuisance. Cyclists, on the other hand, are well-advised to regard motorists as a threat. Unfortunately, there is an increasing tendency for cyclists to seek refuge by riding on the pavements.

I do actually think you're right. But you shouldn't state it as fact, unless you have evidence. Anecdote and notion is not evidence of fact.
In our area, many footpaths have been designated shared paths, without any widening of the path. many other footpaths that run from these paths are not designated as shared, but many cyclists still use them, and I think that use is on the increase.

Norman_Castle

Tobster86 wrote: »

I drive around urban areas at rush hour at a very sedate pace now (in fact, pretty much all times); partly because of cycling, but mainly because it's just not worth doing it any other way.

I've been cycling regularly for about 12 years and had a year without a car after 20+ years of owning either cars or motorbikes. In the last 5 or so years my attitude when driving is much more relaxed. I think using the roads in a different way gives a much wider and more intelligent perspective when driving.