Games Lanes

A ****wit on uk.rec.cycling has posted how hilarious it was for him, as part of
a group of cyclists, to cycle along the inside lane, (outside lane being a
Games Lane) - holding up the traffic. As he said:

"Ahead of us the road was clear all the
way to our turn off to Stratford. But behind us was a long line of
beeping and fuming motor vehicles."

Cannot vehicles (legally) enter the Games Lane in order to overtake a peloton
of ****wits?

On 25/07/2012 23:22, Judith wrote:



A ****wit on uk.rec.cycling has posted how hilarious it was for him, as part of
a group of cyclists, to cycle along the inside lane, (outside lane being a
Games Lane) - holding up the traffic. As he said:

"Ahead of us the road was clear all the
way to our turn off to Stratford. But behind us was a long line of
beeping and fuming motor vehicles."

Cannot vehicles (legally) enter the Games Lane in order to overtake a peloton
of ****wits?

Whoever did that must be incredibly immature and a really sad ****.


--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster
University

On Jul 25, 11:22*pm, Judith wrote:
A ****wit on uk.rec.cycling has posted how hilarious it was for him, as part of
a group of cyclists, to cycle along the inside lane, (outside lane being a
Games Lane) - holding up the traffic. *As he said:

"Ahead of us the road was clear all the
way to our turn off to Stratford. But behind us was a long line of
beeping and fuming motor vehicles."

Cannot vehicles (legally) enter the Games Lane in order to overtake a peloton
of ****wits?

ROTFLMFAO

Ooh my chest, can someone advise whether a claim for inducement of a
coughing fit by a ****, leading to considerable pain and
breathlessness for a considrably extended time and a bump on my head,
is likely to succeed in a UK court? I'd like to seek damages in the
region of 14k.

On Jul 25, 11:22*pm, Judith wrote:
A ****wit on uk.rec.cycling has posted how hilarious it was for him, as part of
a group of cyclists, to cycle along the inside lane, (outside lane being a
Games Lane) - holding up the traffic. *As he said:

"Ahead of us the road was clear all the
way to our turn off to Stratford. But behind us was a long line of
beeping and fuming motor vehicles."

Cannot vehicles (legally) enter the Games Lane in order to overtake a peloton
of ****wits?

Games lanes are for runners and their rich sponsors. They are NOT for
doctors, nurses, people caring for the elderly, people trying to get
hospital appointments, gravediggers, vicars, train drivers, bus
drivers (on their way to work), dentists, solicitors, teachers, prison
staff, cleaners, airport staff, airline passengers etc etc. Olympic
lanes are for people who like running and throwing things and are too
self-obsessed to get a job helping people. So we hinder everyoner
else in London to make sure that politicians don't get embarrased by
the fact that London is always at a standstill.

The public come last as usual.

Turk182

On 26/07/2012 03:42, Turk182 wrote:
On Jul 25, 11:22 pm, Judith wrote:
A ****wit on uk.rec.cycling has posted how hilarious it was for him, as part of
a group of cyclists, to cycle along the inside lane, (outside lane being a
Games Lane) - holding up the traffic. As he said:

"Ahead of us the road was clear all the
way to our turn off to Stratford. But behind us was a long line of
beeping and fuming motor vehicles."

Cannot vehicles (legally) enter the Games Lane in order to overtake a peloton
of ****wits?

Games lanes are for runners and their rich sponsors. They are NOT for
doctors, nurses, people caring for the elderly, people trying to get
hospital appointments, gravediggers, vicars, train drivers, bus
drivers (on their way to work), dentists, solicitors, teachers, prison
staff, cleaners, airport staff, airline passengers etc etc. Olympic
lanes are for people who like running and throwing things and are too
self-obsessed to get a job helping people. So we hinder everyoner
else in London to make sure that politicians don't get embarrased by
the fact that London is always at a standstill.

The public come last as usual.

You are, in many cases, preaching to the converted.

"Olympic lanes" are merely the latest manifestation of the "privileged versus
non-persons" mentality of traffic planners since the late 1960s. We normally
call them "bus lanes". The principle is the same.

On Thursday, July 26, 2012 8:54:35 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 26/07/2012 03:42, Turk182 wrote:
> On Jul 25, 11:22 pm, Judith > wrote:
>> A ****wit on uk.rec.cycling has posted how hilarious it was for him, as part of
>> a group of cyclists, to cycle along the inside lane, (outside lane being a
>> Games Lane) - holding up the traffic. As he said:
>>
>> "Ahead of us the road was clear all the
>> way to our turn off to Stratford. But behind us was a long line of
>> beeping and fuming motor vehicles."
>>
>> Cannot vehicles (legally) enter the Games Lane in order to overtake a peloton
>> of ****wits?
>
> Games lanes are for runners and their rich sponsors. They are NOT for
> doctors, nurses, people caring for the elderly, people trying to get
> hospital appointments, gravediggers, vicars, train drivers, bus
> drivers (on their way to work), dentists, solicitors, teachers, prison
> staff, cleaners, airport staff, airline passengers etc etc. Olympic
> lanes are for people who like running and throwing things and are too
> self-obsessed to get a job helping people. So we hinder everyoner
> else in London to make sure that politicians don't get embarrased by
> the fact that London is always at a standstill.
>
> The public come last as usual.

You are, in many cases, preaching to the converted.

"Olympic lanes" are merely the latest manifestation of the "privileged versus
non-persons" mentality of traffic planners since the late 1960s. We normally
call them "bus lanes". The principle is the same.

The pensioners and schoolkids on the bus will be nonplussed at being described as the elite.

On 26/07/2012 11:54, wrote:

On Thursday, July 26, 2012 8:54:35 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 26/07/2012 03:42, Turk182 wrote: > On Jul 25, 11:22 pm, Judith
> wrote:

A ****wit on
uk.rec.cycling has posted how hilarious it was for him, as part of
>> a group of cyclists, to cycle along the inside lane, (outside
lane being a >> Games Lane) - holding up the traffic. As he
said: >> >> "Ahead of us the road was clear all the
>> way to our turn off to Stratford. But behind us was a long line
of >> beeping and fuming motor vehicles.

Cannot vehicles (legally) enter the Games Lane in order to overtake a
peloton >> of ****wits? > > Games lanes are for runners and
their rich sponsors. They are NOT for > doctors, nurses, people
caring for the elderly, people trying to get > hospital appointments,
gravediggers, vicars, train drivers, bus > drivers (on their way to
work), dentists, solicitors, teachers, prison > staff, cleaners,
airport staff, airline passengers etc etc. Olympic > lanes are for
people who like running and throwing things and are too >
self-obsessed to get a job helping people. So we hinder everyoner >
else in London to make sure that politicians don't get embarrased
by > the fact that London is always at a standstill. > > The
public come last as usual.

You are, in many cases, preaching to the converted.

"Olympic lanes" are merely the latest manifestation of the
"privileged versus non-persons" mentality of traffic planners
since the late 1960s. We normally call them "bus lanes". The
principle is the same.

The pensioners and schoolkids on the bus will be nonplussed at being
described as the elite.

Apart from your use of it, I can't see the word "elite" used anywhere above.

But in relation to travellers (of any socio-economic stratum) who have
facilities reserved for them at the non-negotiable expense of others, the
word "elite" would have been appropriate if it had been used. In context, its
meaning is similar to "privileged" (which *was* used).


NB: What *is* going on with these weird characters in some people's postings?

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 12:00:23 +0100, JNugent wrote:

On 26/07/2012 11:54, wrote:

On Thursday, July 26, 2012 8:54:35 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 26/07/2012 03:42, Turk182 wrote: > On Jul 25, 11:22 pm, Judith
> wrote:

A ****wit on
uk.rec.cycling has posted how hilarious it was for him, as part of
>> a group of cyclists, to cycle along the inside lane, (outside
lane being a >> Games Lane) - holding up the traffic. As he
said: >> >> "Ahead of us the road was clear all the
>> way to our turn off to Stratford. But behind us was a long line
of >> beeping and fuming motor vehicles.

Cannot vehicles (legally) enter the Games Lane in order to overtake a
peloton >> of ****wits? > > Games lanes are for runners and
their rich sponsors. They are NOT for > doctors, nurses, people
caring for the elderly, people trying to get > hospital appointments,
gravediggers, vicars, train drivers, bus > drivers (on their way to
work), dentists, solicitors, teachers, prison > staff, cleaners,
airport staff, airline passengers etc etc. Olympic > lanes are for
people who like running and throwing things and are too >
self-obsessed to get a job helping people. So we hinder everyoner >
else in London to make sure that politicians don't get embarrased
by > the fact that London is always at a standstill. > > The
public come last as usual.

You are, in many cases, preaching to the converted.

"Olympic lanes" are merely the latest manifestation of the
"privileged versus non-persons" mentality of traffic planners
since the late 1960s. We normally call them "bus lanes". The
principle is the same.

The pensioners and schoolkids on the bus will be nonplussed at being
described as the elite.

Apart from your use of it, I can't see the word "elite" used anywhere above.

But in relation to travellers (of any socio-economic stratum) who have
facilities reserved for them at the non-negotiable expense of others, the
word "elite" would have been appropriate if it had been used. In context, its
meaning is similar to "privileged" (which *was* used).


NB: What *is* going on with these weird characters in some people's postings?



Ah - good that you are also experiencing them (if you know what I mean) - I had
asked if anyone else saw them - I thought it was just me.


Probably those who do not know how to use a newsreader and use Google Groups -
however I believe that a kill-file facility has now been developed.

On Thursday, July 26, 2012 12:00:23 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:

But in relation to travellers (of any socio-economic stratum) who have
facilities reserved for them at the non-negotiable expense of others, the
word "elite" would have been appropriate if it had been used. In context, its
meaning is similar to "privileged" (which *was* used).

It would be rather tedious to be restricted to the exact vocabulary of the previous poster.

Bus lanes were the inevitable consequence of selfish motorists. The "please give way to buses" signs on buses were ignored by the majority so a busload of people had to wait an age to move on from each bus stop while single occupant cars overtook them and the poor driver fretted over his schedule while seeking a gap in the traffic. Motorists have only themselves to blame.

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 08:54:35 +0100, JNugent wrote:

"Olympic lanes" are merely the latest manifestation of the "privileged
versus non-persons" mentality of traffic planners since the late 1960s.
We normally call them "bus lanes". The principle is the same.

I saw on the news that every country that has hosted the olympics has
installed these games lanes since a time when the athletes were failing
to turn up for their event due to traffic, Athens maybe?

I thought it was only something introduced this year.