RLJer gets nicked
Comments
-
I think there it, and therefore respectfully disagree with you.Wallace1492 wrote:Mr Sworld wrote:Wallace1492 wrote:However, getting back to the point, the psycologist did not express a view on whether RLJing was safer or not, therfore has nothing to add to the debate.
Of course not! This thread is just about mud-slinging and the 'spitting out of dummies' now! No matter how 'highbrow' the relative arguments become. And it will continue to be as long as the mythical 'evidence' is not produced.
It is, however, very funny to read! :twisted:
I think there will be evidence that is is safer, and evidence that is is not safer. Each traffic light, each road and weather situation, each new day and new driver/rider and their behaviour all goes into the pot and makes each situation unique, and some will prove that RLJing is better, others that it is not. There is no correct answer here.
Fight after school?0 -
Always Tyred wrote:
I think there it, and therefore respectfully disagree with you.Wallace1492 wrote:Mr Sworld wrote:Wallace1492 wrote:However, getting back to the point, the psycologist did not express a view on whether RLJing was safer or not, therfore has nothing to add to the debate.
Of course not! This thread is just about mud-slinging and the 'spitting out of dummies' now! No matter how 'highbrow' the relative arguments become. And it will continue to be as long as the mythical 'evidence' is not produced.
It is, however, very funny to read! :twisted:
I think there will be evidence that is is safer, and evidence that is is not safer. Each traffic light, each road and weather situation, each new day and new driver/rider and their behaviour all goes into the pot and makes each situation unique, and some will prove that RLJing is better, others that it is not. There is no correct answer here.
Fight after school?
Aye go on then. Some people are hurt because they RLJ, some are hurt because they did not RLJ, that is fact. In general it may be best practice not to, but I am not blinkered enough to stick to one side. I do not generally RLJ, but if a certain situation told my experienced cyclists brain to jump, I would have no hesitation in doing so. e.g. Big lorry turning left."Encyclopaedia is a fetish for very small bicycles"0 -
man...if only i had agreed more with some folks on other threads, then i could be in the in-gang....
'cept I seem to disagree with everyone...first bent mikey, then spen, then DDD, then AT....
I feel so excluded
anyone know a pop-psychologist that I can speak to so I can sort my life out and get back on board in the topics that don't matter?
Part of my job role is to have different ideas to other people....you know, to disagree, and not just go with the general consensus.... so that healthy debate can had, coupled with some datumtetumtetumtums so that a better understanding can be had....
That was one of the rasons I got the job above others....
I am afraid it doesn't cut it where I work to say I can prove that my idea is better/more valid, and then completely fail to prove it, but instead try to bring down the other participants...
can we see the study that proves the it is safer to do than not...even tell me the name of the study so i can find it myself.......Whenever I see an adult on a bicycle, I believe in the future of the human race.
H.G. Wells.0 -
-
Wallace1492 wrote:
Aye go on then. Some people are hurt because they RLJ, some are hurt because they did not RLJ, that is fact. In general it may be best practice not to, but I am not blinkered enough to stick to one side. I do not generally RLJ, but if a certain situation told my experienced cyclists brain to jump, I would have no hesitation in doing so. e.g. Big lorry turning left.
I do not think that anyone ever got hurt becasue they did not red light jump.
they may have got hurt because someone crashed into the back of them, or left hooked them, or were in a poor road position, or some other contributory factor...
Big lorry turning left.....you wont get run over by it if you stay behind it.....AND you still didn;t have to red light jump.Whenever I see an adult on a bicycle, I believe in the future of the human race.
H.G. Wells.0 -
cee wrote:man...if only i had agreed more with some folks on other threads, then i could be in the in-gang....
'cept I seem to disagree with everyone...first bent mikey, then spen, then DDD, then AT....
I feel so excluded
anyone know a pop-psychologist that I can speak to so I can sort my life out and get back on board in the topics that don't matter?
Part of my job role is to have different ideas to other people....you know, to disagree, and not just go with the general consensus.... so that healthy debate can had, coupled with some datumtetumtetumtums so that a better understanding can be had....
That was one of the rasons I got the job above others....
I am afraid it doesn't cut it where I work to say I can prove that my idea is better/more valid, and then completely fail to prove it, but instead try to bring down the other participants...
can we see the study that proves the it is safer to do than not...even tell me the name of the study so i can find it myself.......
Surely the whole point of a hypothesis is to create a target for others to attempt to disprove
I think it was better when we were discussing epilation amongst roadies
0 -
Anyway back to may hair removal;
I'm now having weekly back epilations(?) and it's getting less painful and slightly pleasant. I'm tempted to do the top of my shoulders, although, that's starting to get near my chest so where do I stop? Any suggestions?
I might get my legs waxed first and keep on top of it with the epilator because the first back doing was the most painful thing that has ever, ever happened to me.
Oh BTW I would never let one of those machines near my sack, and crack? Oh dear.Saracen Tenet 3 - 2015 - Dead - Replaced with a Hack Frame
Voodoo Bizango - 2014 - Dead - Hit by a car
Vitus Sentier VRS - 20170 -
With apologies to all for the length of this.
My wife has a 1st class degree in Psychology. If I asked her to read this thread and draft a lengthy response, I'd get a withering look and be told that she has much more interesting things to do with her life. Strange that your "friend" doesn't have any such more interesting things to do given her generic criticisms of the social skills of us posting in the thread.She has a 1st class degree in Psychology.
We're crazy like that, we are. So far you haven't given us a reason (plenty of amusement, though) to think otherwise. Still waiting.The two questions why do they want to believe it is not safe to jump traffic lights
Not for a long time, I'm afraid. And I'm by no means the oldest person on this board. (I'll admit to being male, I guess, though you seem a little more confused.)I think they are all men in their 20'sThey will think this gives them status and authority. It would have been quite shocking for them to have you, previously not having posted, challenge their views and what they see as their legacy and their perceptions authority . They would feel any acknowledgement of your arguments would diminish them, especially in the eyes of their peer group.
I thought we'd established that you had posted before? Under a different username?
Perhaps more importantly, there are others who challenged and continue to challenge the status quo. "Headhunter" for example or "Wallace1492". Others of us might disagree with them, but they haven't mocked them in the same way as you have been mocked. It's not your opinion that results in the mocking, it's the comical way you claim you have proof. If your friend is any good at stats, why don't you get a copy of the fabled paper and see if (s)he thinks it backs up your assertion? Might give your argument more credibility than getting your friend to do some pop pyschology on us. Even if we are all such losers, your arguments for why jumping red lights is safer are still very weak.These people are quite well organised and precise by nature but basically they are compliant, risk averse and conventional.
Guilty. But you say it like it's a bad thing. :? Unlike you crazy, RLJing, life and soul of the party types.
And, really, those obeying red lights are compliant, risk averse and conventional? What insight! Did your friend get his/her degree from one of those American colleges where you send $50 and get a certificate in the post? Or is that the email equivalent of a big hug from your friend?You can see this in their inclination to dismiss the evidence of traffic light trials.
What evidence? Some mythical paper which has been buried by The Man because he doesn't want us all to turn into crazy, RLJing fools? And The Man would rather we died by obeying them?
Many of us have repeatedly said, show me the evidence! You can't. Instead, you want us to believe some counter-intuitive idea just because you said so? Aren't you guilty of (what's the phrase now?) evidence bias? That is, you RLJ because, say, you don't want to wait and so you find "evidence" that apparently gives you objective justification for why you do it? And you say we have issues?Basically they want rules because their lives have probably taught them the rules are generally there to protect the vulnerable and they are generally vulnerable.
Why do you think rules are there? I'm happy to accept that rules are generally there for good reason. That's not to say they are always the best rules and do what they are intended and I am happy to ignore them when I believe appropriate. But are you saying rules are a bad thing as - erm - a rule?They are not particularly sociable. Although they act collectively and appear to be friendly to one another the probability is that they have not met and the bonds between them are quite weak.
I take it neither you nor your friend have read the Morpeth Social Club thread? (Though I have to confess I've never been - too many other pulls on my life at present, not least my wife and two young sons.)Although they would not admit it they probably know their lack of what it takes to challenge a consensus will blight their careers. In time it will make them bitter. In terms of earnings you can expect them to be in the lower earning quartiles of their sectors. Should you consider dating them? Only if you want a house husband.
Bitter. Guilty of that occasionally. Isn't everyone?
Earnings. Nope, way off the mark for me and I know there are plenty of high-earners on here. (Although, I don't know if any of us have risen to the dizzy heights of selling t-shirts.)
And hold on? Your friend starts off by saying we are all conventional; then (s)he claims we would all want to be house husbands. Times are a-changing but the house husbands I know are still in a minority compared with the housewives (such old-fashioned terminology from such a wacky person as you) and it certainly isn't seen as the conventional choice.What shirts from your website would I recommend they wear? I think they should try The the Banksy: http://www.weadmire.net/product.aspx?productid=15860 and the Goethe: http://www.weadmire.net/product.aspx?productid=13092. One as an encouragement to take more risks and the other as encouragement to really speak their minds.
OMG! T-shirts as a statement. Have I hit a timewarp and headed back to the 80s? Where's my old, "Frankie says ..." t-shirt? Or is this some sort of Superman thing? Change into my superhero outfit consisting of a t-shirt with Goethe on it (and presumably some skinny jeans as I carry my latte) and my personality changes to SuperRiskTaker?
And does your friend become SuperHans when she wears her t-shirts?and probably physically weak too.
Did I miss "physically weak" in your friend's analysis? Or is that a bit of "evidence" that you've chucked in despite your source not actually saying that (hoping we wouldn't notice)? Hmmm.
And on the rest of your aside about methane. Not claiming to be anything like an expert on that subject, but have you considered the vast amounts of CO2 which would be released by using that methane?
And surely using methane is nothing to do with being environmentally friendly but simply trying to find a fuel source to replace dwindling oil supplies. Completely different point, surely?
I've mostly been an amused observer to date in the vain hope that you produce the "evidence". (Anyone else reminded of the Andrew Wakefield MMR scandal?) But, hey, I had a spare 20 mins.
Don't throw your toys out of the pram when we don't simply accept your word. Why don't you just come back when you have the data you need? Give yourself a new username (again) and persuade us using data rather than insults. You never know, you might actually convince some of us.Never be tempted to race against a Barclays Cycle Hire bike. If you do, there are only two outcomes. Of these, by far the better is that you now have the scalp of a Boris Bike.0 -
weadmire wrote:I could not work out what was motivating the behaviour of what might be described as the well tyred fraternity so I asked one of my longest standing friends to read the thread and let me have her thoughts. She has a 1st class degree in Psychology. By the way she describes the subject as stats with some human behaviour thrown in. I reproduce her email below.
Hi Amy,
I have had a look at the traffic light thread you sent me.
I have kept in mind the questions you asked me to consider and I have probably answered some you have thought of but forgot to ask.
The two questions why do they want to believe it is not safe to jump traffic lights and why the frenzy of posting when they thought you were your father are linked. These guys, and although they act like adolescents, I think they are all men in their 20's, have a lot of emotional capital vested in what they see as their contributions to these forums. The people you asked me to consider have all recorded large numbers of posts over quiet long periods of time. They will think this gives them status and authority. It would have been quite shocking for them to have you, previously not having posted, challenge their views and what they see as their legacy and their perceptions authority . They would feel any acknowledgement of your arguments would diminish them, especially in the eyes of their peer group.
What do I make of them as individuals? Collectively they are afraid of challenging a consensus because the authority they think they have established in these forums is dependent on collective approval. But they will likely only involve themselves with topics where they perceive a consensus is established or at least where the consensus is predictable.
These people are quite well organised and precise by nature but basically they are compliant, risk averse and conventional. They like rules, it provides reassurance and reduces the amount of responsibility they have to assume. You can see this in their inclination to dismiss the evidence of traffic light trials. They do not want to believe a system that relied on judgement would work. There is plenty of evidence of the above, sometimes it is obvious. For example one of them asked you how you felt given that no one was apparently agreeing with you. Others deal in “white van man and chav” generalities to try and establish that British traffic is worse than that in the countries where these experiments have proved successful. I am not sure about the particular issue of cyclists but British traffic has some of the world's lowest accident rates. It is generally boring from a psychologist's point of view.
Basically they want rules because their lives have probably taught them the rules are generally there to protect the vulnerable and they are generally vulnerable. They are not particularly sociable. Although they act collectively and appear to be friendly to one another the probability is that they have not met and the bonds between them are quite weak.
Although they would not admit it they probably know their lack of what it takes to challenge a consensus will blight their careers. In time it will make them bitter. In terms of earnings you can expect them to be in the lower earning quartiles of their sectors. Should you consider dating them? Only if you want a house husband.
What shirts from your website would I recommend they wear? I think they should try The the Banksy: http://www.weadmire.net/product.aspx?productid=15860 and the Goethe: http://www.weadmire.net/product.aspx?productid=13092. One as an encouragement to take more risks and the other as encouragement to really speak their minds.
Love
Hans
Well well gentlemen, what an attractive proposition you are. Boring, conventional, risk averse and probably physically weak too.
Tyred, I do not know why you raised the question about hydrogen fuel cells. But it is a remarkable coincidence that you did. I can't say I have a particular opinion, but I am sure hybrid cars are not a solution. On the matter of hydrogen fuel cells the technology seems pretty daunting, but if methane is used in the production of hydrogen we are not likely to run out of raw material any time soon.
Should I assume you are something of an eco warrior? If so you are probably aware that mammals and rotting organic matter produce prodigious amounts of methane that would be a serious green house gas but for the fact it is very soluble in water. At high pressure and at the sort of lowish temperatures that exist in very deep water methane precipitates out of solution as a solid. There are huge amounts of the stuff on the ocean floor particularly off the eastern seaboard of the United States. To quantify huge I am told there is enough to meet all the energy needs of the USA for several hundred years in the Atlantic alone.
The remarkable fuel cell coincidence comes from the fact we have recently been asked to consider producing shirt designs for engineers. You may have noticed that we ask our customers to tell us who they admire. One of the engineers mentioned was Sachito Fujimoto. This man is interesting because he challenged the fuel cell engineering consensus in a way that transformed the efficiency of the cell used in the Honda's FCX car. Every aspect of the performance of the cell was transformed: much more power, less weight and volume and much cheaper to manufacture. Essentially he changed the orientation of the cells from the horizontal to the vertical. Hitherto the cell was placed under the cars' floor pan and now it sits between the front seats. For the reasons detailed above this sort of challenge to a consensus is something you and your fellows are not likely to do. But remember it is never too late, you can change as Mr Obama has demonstrated.
Best post ever!
Thank you Theo, thank you Amy, thank you (gender confused) Hans, thank you Hans' equally confused crystal ball.- 2023 Vielo V+1
- 2022 Canyon Aeroad CFR
- 2020 Canyon Ultimate CF SLX
- Strava
- On the Strand
- Crown Stables
0 -
Il Principe wrote:Best post ever!
Thank you Theo, thank you Amy, thank you (gender confused) Hans, thank you Hans' equally confused crystal ball.
I think we've all been too hard on Theo, Theo's Dad, Amy (Theo's alter ego) Tstegers - who was previously Theo, Hans (Theo's made up mate/girlfriend) They are all both individually and as a mostly fictional collective great value - we would be poorer without them.
Theo.
If you want to flog some T-shirts (love the cross sell by the way - slick) I'd sugget you design one with with "I'm Amy's Dad!" on the back and a picture of Kirk Douglas as Spartacus. "Follow me to the stop line" may be another strap line.
I'd buy one and wear it to the Morpeth.
Straight up.Fixed gear for wet weather / hairy roadie for posing in the sun.
What would Thora Hurd do?0 -
*saunters idly back into thread*
*has no idea what's going on*
*adds fuel to fire*
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story ... ckets.html
*runs*0 -
-
weadmire wrote:I reproduce her email below.
What a load of twaddle. :roll: I laughed when he included advertising/links to your Web site. I wonder if someone else write it at all.0 -
Those crazy outlandish Canucks.lost_in_thought wrote:*saunters idly back into thread*
*has no idea what's going on*
*adds fuel to fire*
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story ... ckets.html
*runs*
God, cycling in Canada is like a nice warm paddling pool wearing arm bands, compared to here.*
*Except in proximity of logging trucks, when it is your duty to get out of the way.
*And except when it isn't.0 -
-
-
Always Tyred wrote:Wasn't there a footballer called Hans Segers?
Kuntz.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_KuntzFixed gear for wet weather / hairy roadie for posing in the sun.
What would Thora Hurd do?0 -
cee wrote:Wallace1492 wrote:
Aye go on then. Some people are hurt because they RLJ, some are hurt because they did not RLJ, that is fact. In general it may be best practice not to, but I am not blinkered enough to stick to one side. I do not generally RLJ, but if a certain situation told my experienced cyclists brain to jump, I would have no hesitation in doing so. e.g. Big lorry turning left.
I do not think that anyone ever got hurt becasue they did not red light jump.
they may have got hurt because someone crashed into the back of them, or left hooked them, or were in a poor road position, or some other contributory factor...
Big lorry turning left.....you wont get run over by it if you stay behind it.....AND you still didn;t have to red light jump.
Big lorry turning left was just off the cuff example. Yes, there would have to be a contributing factor to being hurt by not RLJing, but paradoxically there is also a contrbuting factor to being hurt for RLJing. What I am saying is that I see certain circumstances where I feel much safer jumping than not jumping. I do not think there is anything wrong with doing it in these circumstances."Encyclopaedia is a fetish for very small bicycles"0 -
Those four way stop junctions all over Canada are a down right nuisance. Stupid road design and consequently stupid laws.lost_in_thought wrote:*saunters idly back into thread*
*has no idea what's going on*
*adds fuel to fire*
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story ... ckets.html
*runs*0 -
Wallace, what do you say to the general accusation that RLJing increases overall agression to cyclists? Ianment (spelling?) simply says, "no it doesn't", but in my experience, its one of the main accusations leveled at "us" in response to some piece of ignorant agressive driving, regardless of what the cyclist in question may have actually done.Wallace1492 wrote:Big lorry turning left was just off the cuff example. Yes, there would have to be a contributing factor to being hurt by not RLJing, but paradoxically there is also a contrbuting factor to being hurt for RLJing. What I am saying is that I see certain circumstances where I feel much safer jumping than not jumping. I do not think there is anything wrong with doing it in these circumstances.
I have therefore always surmised that it doesn't do much to ease relations, and that since its perfectly possible not to RLJ, its best not to - if only to have a leg to stand on.
Thoughts?0 -
So the resurfacing of Theo/Theo's Dad/Amy's Dad/Hans/Tstegers got me thinking.
I googled our man/girl/woman/improbable german sounding man/woman
You'll never guess what...
Now I'm sure there are many many people with the same name...... however.......The deep gravelly voice belonged to Theo S....s, an executive search specialist, or in everyday language, a headhunter.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/artic ... z0OdxDhUTL
Pure co-incidence - I'm sure.Fixed gear for wet weather / hairy roadie for posing in the sun.
What would Thora Hurd do?0 -
Ummm.... disagree. They work fine. They are positioned in back streets, where there's no need to be rushing along anyway, and people don't (rush). To be honest, Brun, they are just roundabouts without pointless painted circles and drivers *uck them up to the same extent they do roundabouts here._Brun_ wrote:
Those four way stop junctions all over Canada are a down right nuisance. Stupid road design and consequently stupid laws.lost_in_thought wrote:*saunters idly back into thread*
*has no idea what's going on*
*adds fuel to fire*
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story ... ckets.html
*runs*
On the whole, driving is a lot more laid back there and you get fewer fender benders resulting from hammering up to junctions and assuming that the other guy will do precisely what you think the law says they should do. Instead, they do all of this in slow motion, wind down windows and say, "So, you should have stopped, eh?"0 -
Greg T wrote:So the resurfacing of Theo/Theo's Dad/Amy's Dad/Hans/Tstegers got me thinking.
I googled our man/girl/woman/improbable german sounding man/woman
You'll never guess what...
Now I'm sure there are many many people with the same name...... however.......The deep gravelly voice belonged to Theo S....s, an executive search specialist, or in everyday language, a headhunter.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/artic ... z0OdxDhUTL
Pure co-incidence - I'm sure.
Dun dun DUUUUNN!Saracen Tenet 3 - 2015 - Dead - Replaced with a Hack Frame
Voodoo Bizango - 2014 - Dead - Hit by a car
Vitus Sentier VRS - 20170 -
So are we saying that Theo and Headhuunter are one and the same? :shock:
- 2023 Vielo V+1
- 2022 Canyon Aeroad CFR
- 2020 Canyon Ultimate CF SLX
- Strava
- On the Strand
- Crown Stables
0 -
Il Principe wrote:So are we saying that Theo and Headhuunter are one and the same? :shock:
I couldn't possibly suggest that on the basis of the "facts" presented to this kangaroo court that Tstegers/weadmire/headhuunter/Amy/Amy'sDad AND Hans are all figments of one man's lone voice crying out for "best practice" in playing frogger with the traffic.
It's just a co-incidence I tell you.Fixed gear for wet weather / hairy roadie for posing in the sun.
What would Thora Hurd do?0 -
The Hundredth Idiot wrote:And does your friend become SuperHans when she wears her t-shirts?
This is Super Hans!
0 -
Mr Sworld wrote:The Hundredth Idiot wrote:And does your friend become SuperHans when she wears her t-shirts?
This is Super Hans!
Super Hans- 2023 Vielo V+1
- 2022 Canyon Aeroad CFR
- 2020 Canyon Ultimate CF SLX
- Strava
- On the Strand
- Crown Stables
0 -
Always Tyred wrote:
Wallace, what do you say to the general accusation that RLJing increases overall agression to cyclists? Ianment (spelling?) simply says, "no it doesn't", but in my experience, its one of the main accusations leveled at "us" in response to some piece of ignorant agressive driving, regardless of what the cyclist in question may have actually done.Wallace1492 wrote:Big lorry turning left was just off the cuff example. Yes, there would have to be a contributing factor to being hurt by not RLJing, but paradoxically there is also a contrbuting factor to being hurt for RLJing. What I am saying is that I see certain circumstances where I feel much safer jumping than not jumping. I do not think there is anything wrong with doing it in these circumstances.
I have therefore always surmised that it doesn't do much to ease relations, and that since its perfectly possible not to RLJ, its best not to - if only to have a leg to stand on.
Thoughts?
I agree that RLJing does increase overall aggresion to cyclists, as does cycling up the inside of a slow or stopped line of cars, but RLJing most. However, I am not advocating that it is generally safer, or that it should be done when you can, all I am saying is that there are circumstances that for whatever reason it will be safer to jump. I know of two light set ups that illustrate this perfectly on my commute. My point is, that if it is safer for me, then i will do it, as my safely comes before the thought of upsetting a car/taxi/white van driver. And I will happily justify myself to Police/magistrage/Whatever."Encyclopaedia is a fetish for very small bicycles"0 -
Oh yes, I remember you asking about the M8 junction deathway heading up to Maryhill.Wallace1492 wrote:I agree that RLJing does increase overall aggresion to cyclists, as does cycling up the inside of a slow or stopped line of cars, but RLJing most. However, I am not advocating that it is generally safer, or that it should be done when you can, all I am saying is that there are circumstances that for whatever reason it will be safer to jump. I know of two light set ups that illustrate this perfectly on my commute. My point is, that if it is safer for me, then i will do it, as my safely comes before the thought of upsetting a car/taxi/white van driver. And I will happily justify myself to Police/magistrage/Whatever.
I sympathise. Presumably that falls into the "anticipating the lights" category. I personally didn't, but I can see why you would.0
