Silly BBC appeal to cyclists

[spindrift]

What's the worst place to cycle?


How could things be improved? Do you know of any ludicrous cycle
lanes?


Or, maybe you hate cyclists and think they just make things worse for
all road users.


If you've got stories or pictures of cyclists behaving badly we want
to hear from you.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2007/09/13/cycling_feature.shtml


Sensible reply, from the Guardian Cycling Thread:

My two cent's worth . . . Later I may also send a couple of photos of
people parked in cycle lanes.

I can't believe how negatively you've couched the introduction to
this.

So cyclists only encounter problems and you want to hear stories about
cyclists behaving badly? Are you not interested in the possibility
that many of us find our daily commute by bicycle the highlight of the
day? It's quicker, healthier and far less frustrating than using
public transport.

I do hope this is not yet another attempt to garner sensational copy
by tapping into the tensions that do unfortunately exist between
motorists, cyclists and pedestrians.

You have the opportunity to do something positive about the situation
- despite this rather negative start.

[Haggis McMutton]

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 01:19:09 -0700, spindrift wrote:
> How could things be improved? Do you know of any ludicrous cycle
> lanes?
>
> Or, maybe you hate cyclists and think they just make things worse for
> all road users.

There are bad cyclists. There are bad motorists.

As a motorist I've seen completely idiotic cycling. As a cyclist I've seen
idiotic driving.

But idiotic driving is something I see on a daily basis, whereas idiotic
cycling is something I see very occasionally.

[Peter Clinch]

Haggis McMutton wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 01:19:09 -0700, spindrift wrote:
>> How could things be improved? Do you know of any ludicrous cycle
>> lanes?
>>
>> Or, maybe you hate cyclists and think they just make things worse for
>> all road users.
>
> There are bad cyclists. There are bad motorists.
>
> As a motorist I've seen completely idiotic cycling. As a cyclist I've seen
> idiotic driving.
>
> But idiotic driving is something I see on a daily basis, whereas idiotic
> cycling is something I see very occasionally.

But OTOH idiotic driving is drawn from a much bigger sample base, so
you'd expect to see more of it in the UK simply because there are more
cars about than bikes. It would be interesting to see if both sets of
morons had a similar distribution within their respective populations.

But OTOOH I often see idiotic driving that puts numerous lives in
considerable danger for a single incident. This often involves madmen
in overtaking manoeuvres on the A9...

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

[Dylan Smith]

On 2007-09-14, Haggis McMutton > wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 01:19:09 -0700, spindrift wrote:
>> How could things be improved? Do you know of any ludicrous cycle
>> lanes?
>>
>> Or, maybe you hate cyclists and think they just make things worse for
>> all road users.
>
> There are bad cyclists. There are bad motorists.

I don't think so - in the main there are just bad road users. An asshat
on a bike is probably also an asshat when driving a car, and vice versa.
The relevant distinction isn't really cyclist or motorist, it's really
asshat or non-asshat.

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de

[Matt B]

Haggis McMutton wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 01:19:09 -0700, spindrift wrote:
>> How could things be improved? Do you know of any ludicrous cycle
>> lanes?
>>
>> Or, maybe you hate cyclists and think they just make things worse for
>> all road users.
>
> There are bad cyclists. There are bad motorists.

It's possibly down one level further than that - at the person level. A
good "person" (in terms of road use skills) would probably make a good
cyclist and/or a good motorist.

The questions are:
1) What makes a good road user?
2) How can we turn bad road users into good road users?
3) Can we provide a road environment which will safely accommodate, and
tolerate, bad users?
4) Even, is it not so much bad users, but bad roads making bad users
that are the problem?

> As a motorist I've seen completely idiotic cycling. As a cyclist I've seen
> idiotic driving.

And as a motorist seen idiotic driving, and as a cyclist seen idiotic
cycling?

> But idiotic driving is something I see on a daily basis, whereas idiotic
> cycling is something I see very occasionally.

Perhaps you need to divide those by the total number of each type you
see - to get a more representative number.

--
Matt B

[spindrift]

On 14 Sep, 12:56, Dylan Smith > wrote:
> On 2007-09-14, Haggis McMutton > wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 01:19:09 -0700, spindrift wrote:
> >> How could things be improved? Do you know of any ludicrous cycle
> >> lanes?
>
> >> Or, maybe you hate cyclists and think they just make things worse for
> >> all road users.
>
> > There are bad cyclists. There are bad motorists.
>
> I don't think so - in the main there are just bad road users. An asshat
> on a bike is probably also an asshat when driving a car, and vice versa.
> The relevant distinction isn't really cyclist or motorist, it's really
> asshat or non-asshat.
>
> --
> Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
> Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute:http://oolite-linux.berlios.de

The BBC have apologised and are changing their wording.

[[email protected]]

On 14 Sep, 14:12, Matt B > wrote:
> The questions are:
> 1) What makes a good road user?

Consideration for other traffic?

> 2) How can we turn bad road users into good road users?

Education, enforcement, encouragement.

We could do with a bigger carrot.

> 3) Can we provide a road environment which will safely accommodate, and
> tolerate, bad users

Arguably, we have.

> 4) Even, is it not so much bad users, but bad roads making bad users
> that are the problem?

No.

> Perhaps you need to divide those by the total number of each type you
> see - to get a more representative number.

I wonder when the number of "motorists" on UK roads exceeded the
number of "cyclists" (quotes intended to divert the pedantic from
arguments about number of cars vs number of road-miles vs time spent
traveling etc).
This might mark a significant turning point in the Decline Of
Society :-).

Cheers,
W.

[Mike Sales]

"Dylan Smith" wrote >> There are bad cyclists. There are bad motorists.
>
> I don't think so - in the main there are just bad road users. An asshat
> on a bike is probably also an asshat when driving a car, and vice versa.
> The relevant distinction isn't really cyclist or motorist, it's really
> asshat or non-asshat.
>
I know which I would prefer to meet on the road, and so find the distinction
important.

Mike Sales

[CoyoteBoy]

I sent them a 2 page reply. It will likely be ignored but I invited
them to come here and discuss it further.

[Simon Brooke]

in message >, Haggis McMutton
') wrote:

> On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 01:19:09 -0700, spindrift wrote:
>> How could things be improved? Do you know of any ludicrous cycle
>> lanes?
>>
>> Or, maybe you hate cyclists and think they just make things worse for
>> all road users.
>
> There are bad cyclists. There are bad motorists.
>
> As a motorist I've seen completely idiotic cycling. As a cyclist I've
> seen idiotic driving.
>
> But idiotic driving is something I see on a daily basis, whereas idiotic
> cycling is something I see very occasionally.

The reason for this is simple: idiotic cycling kills the cyclist. Idiotic
driving kills the cyclist.

And the pedestrian, of course.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; Good grief, I can remember when England won the Ashes.

[Tony Raven[_2_]]

spindrift > wrote in news:1189777924.105496.22670
@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com:
>
> The BBC have apologised and are changing their wording.
>

Well....errr...they changed "Maybe you hate cyclists" to "Maybe your
experiences of cyclists is negative" and that's all.

--
Tony

" I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong."
Bertrand Russell

[spindrift]

"Well....errr...they changed "Maybe you hate cyclists" to "Maybe your
experiences of cyclists is negative" and that's all. "

****ty bum clowns.

[Roger Merriman]

Peter Clinch > wrote:

> Haggis McMutton wrote:
> > On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 01:19:09 -0700, spindrift wrote:
> >> How could things be improved? Do you know of any ludicrous cycle
> >> lanes?
> >>
> >> Or, maybe you hate cyclists and think they just make things worse for
> >> all road users.
> >
> > There are bad cyclists. There are bad motorists.
> >
> > As a motorist I've seen completely idiotic cycling. As a cyclist I've seen
> > idiotic driving.
> >
> > But idiotic driving is something I see on a daily basis, whereas idiotic
> > cycling is something I see very occasionally.
>
> But OTOH idiotic driving is drawn from a much bigger sample base, so
> you'd expect to see more of it in the UK simply because there are more
> cars about than bikes. It would be interesting to see if both sets of
> morons had a similar distribution within their respective populations.
>
> But OTOOH I often see idiotic driving that puts numerous lives in
> considerable danger for a single incident. This often involves madmen
> in overtaking manoeuvres on the A9...
>
> Pete.

yes thats the point really, it would take some timing to attaully kill
others with a bike, while with a car, it's mass means that it's not hard
at all.

so for instance the bloke i saw a while back riding the wrong way along
the bus lane, is unlikely to harm any one but him self. what he's doing
is just as wrong as say tailgating but, the chances are he will not kill
any one doing that.

roger
--
www.rogermerriman.com

[Mark[_3_]]

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 14:12:43 +0100, Matt B
> wrote:

>Haggis McMutton wrote:
>> On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 01:19:09 -0700, spindrift wrote:
>>> How could things be improved? Do you know of any ludicrous cycle
>>> lanes?
>>>
>>> Or, maybe you hate cyclists and think they just make things worse for
>>> all road users.
>>
>> There are bad cyclists. There are bad motorists.
>
>It's possibly down one level further than that - at the person level. A
>good "person" (in terms of road use skills) would probably make a good
>cyclist and/or a good motorist.
>
>The questions are:
>1) What makes a good road user?

Considerate, consciencious, non agressive, observant, experienced,
alert ....

>2) How can we turn bad road users into good road users?

I'm sure some can be with suitable education. I feel strongly that
one's attidute is the main indicator for safety of a road user. I
doubt very much a user with an agressive, selfish attidude would ever
become a 'good' user.

>3) Can we provide a road environment which will safely accommodate, and
>tolerate, bad users?

I don't believe this is possible or even desirable. Creating such
environment could lead to a greater overall level of danger. For
example we don't want to change the behaviour of safe users and it
would be unlikely that any scheme would avoid this.

>4) Even, is it not so much bad users, but bad roads making bad users
>that are the problem?

I don't believe so (see above).

>> As a motorist I've seen completely idiotic cycling. As a cyclist I've seen
>> idiotic driving.
>
>And as a motorist seen idiotic driving, and as a cyclist seen idiotic
>cycling?
>
>> But idiotic driving is something I see on a daily basis, whereas idiotic
>> cycling is something I see very occasionally.
>
>Perhaps you need to divide those by the total number of each type you
>see - to get a more representative number.

An idiotic car/van driver can do a lot more damage than an idiotic
cyclist IMHO.

M

[[email protected]]

On Sep 14, 9:19 am, spindrift > wrote:
[snip]
> If you've got stories or pictures of cyclists behaving badly we want
> to hear from you.
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2007/09/13/cycling_featu...
>

I sent in something upbeat and positive and got a call back from a
researcher asking if I could give an on air contribution (some kind of
pre-screened call affair). I am in a meeting tomorrow but they said
they would read out the email on the Nanessa Feltz show (BBC London
94.9 9-1200 tomorrow, lots of cycling discussion throughout show)

I guess it will appear on on listen again (possibly here
http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2005/07/21/ondemand_feature.shtml
) for any fans of low quality talk radio :-)

best wishes
james