Newcastle's Critical Mass

MsPiggy

:!: Critical Mass coming to Newcastle

Meet at Haymarket at 17:30 every last Friday of the month and reclaim the streets.

Visit www.newcastlebybike.co.uk
or join our facebook group http://tinyurl.com/NewcastleCM

See you on 30 July 2010,
Ms Piggy

Thick Tester

Bunch of Hippies who care nothing for tyre pressures

Crapaud

Thick Tester wrote:

Bunch of Hippies who care nothing for tyre pressures

pneumatic

Yawn yawn, another 'kin hippie joins a discussion forum and posts once.

What would you like to discuss, oh porcine one?

Knit your own yoghurt?

Back to nature with a Barclaycard?

Top tips for scrounging off others?

What crystals should I put on my bike to make it better?

"Reclaim the streets"; from whom? and when did they ever belong to you anyway?

Come on, converse with us, don't just bark orders!

:evil: Oh dear! all those years living in Totnes have got to my karma! :evil:

shouldbeinbed

MsPiggy wrote:

:!: Critical Mass coming to Newcastle

Meet at Haymarket at 17:30 every last Friday of the month and reclaim the streets.

Visit www.newcastlebybike.co.uk
or join our facebook group http://tinyurl.com/NewcastleCM

See you on 30 July 2010,
Ms Piggy

or to put it another way - Play up to the stereotype bolshy cyclist, deliberately obstruct the highway, piss off a whole bunch of drivers at rush hour once a month hypocritically doing to cars with deliberate planning what you are objecting to happening to you as an unfortunate by product of too many cars and cities unable to cope with them all and then wonder why all of us get grief on the roads.

grow up and engage properly with the movers and shakers to try to make a real difference.


one of the more stupid and misguided protest movements that do no good for the vast majority of cyclists IMO

spen666

Well Miss Piggy,

Unlike the rest of those on here, I salute you and say good luck to you.

don't let the bullies on here keep you from your right to use the roads

rake

no cars = no roads. they dont grow like trees. are you going to maintain the roads when youve claimed them. you can start by filling in some potholes.

shouldbeinbed

spen666 wrote:

Well Miss Piggy,

Unlike the rest of those on here, I salute you and say good luck to you.

don't let the bullies on here keep you from your right to use the roads

and how pray are we doing that? when was critical mass ever abut the right to use the roads? theres never been an attemnt to remove that right and 99.99% of motorists just get on with overtaking us and leaving us alone - why upset and alienate them for the sake of proving a pointless point to utterly the wrong audience?

I was brought up in Newcastle and know Haymarket very well - at that time on a Friday night particularly it is the CM that are the bullies, deliberately creating congestion and inconvenience at an area that is chokka most of the time already, simply by the hundreds of years of building and its pivotal proximity into and out of the city centre, it has a poor road layout and is a quite dangerous intersection of major feeds from various parts of the city out towards residential suburbs and coast routes, It is a major hub for public transport and the metro too, so they're not only putting themselves and other road users uneccesarily in real danger of collisions and injuries all round just to get all giggly inconvenienceing the 'evil motorist' but also indiscriminately hitting out at people not using cars too.


ace PR, What next kicking peoples pets and calling their kids ugly.

It is however right at the heart of studentland and I suspect that it is a whizzo student idea to show how anarchic and 'young ones' they are and will be a procession of anything-for-a-protest transient to the city tossers and the sort of myopic bike uber alles commandos that Andy M would get teary eyed in admiration for

spen666

rake wrote:

no cars = no roads. they dont grow like trees. are you going to maintain the roads when youve claimed them. you can start by filling in some potholes.

Really?

So before the end of the 19th Century there were no roads?

sorry mate you are living in a fantasy world if you believe that



However, who is suggesting there should be no cars or that cars should have even a reduced right to use the roads.

Promoting and using your right to cycle is nothing to do with preventing or restricting the right of others to use motor vehicles.

spen666

shouldbeinbed wrote:

spen666 wrote:

Well Miss Piggy,

Unlike the rest of those on here, I salute you and say good luck to you.

don't let the bullies on here keep you from your right to use the roads

and how pray are we doing that? when was critical mass ever abut the right to use the roads? theres never been an attemnt to remove that right and 99.99% of motorists just get on with overtaking us and leaving us alone - why upset and alienate them for the sake of proving a pointless point to utterly the wrong audience?

I was brought up in Newcastle and know Haymarket very well - at that time on a Friday night particularly it is the CM that are the bullies, deliberately creating congestion and inconvenience at an area that is chokka most of the time already, simply by the hundreds of years of building and its pivotal proximity into and out of the city centre, it has a poor road layout and is a quite dangerous intersection of major feeds from various parts of the city out towards residential suburbs and coast routes, It is a major hub for public transport and the metro too, so they're not only putting themselves and other road users uneccesarily in real danger of collisions and injuries all round just to get all giggly inconvenienceing the 'evil motorist' but also indiscriminately hitting out at people not using cars too.


ace PR, What next kicking peoples pets and calling their kids ugly.

It is however right at the heart of studentland and I suspect that it is a whizzo student idea to show how anarchic and 'young ones' they are and will be a procession of anything-for-a-protest transient to the city tossers and the sort of myopic bike uber alles commandos that Andy M would get teary eyed in admiration for

You could turn your argument around and say all that you have said re cycling against the motorists

If you know Newcastle well, you will know it has an excellent public transport system with the metro system and park and ride facilities at places like Four Lane Ends and Kingston Park. There is no need to be driving in that Area.

However, this is not about stopping people using the roads. Critical Mass is different things for different people.

When I attend CM in London , its to see friends, have a ride with them before going off for some food. Its not about protesting about anything for me. I neither want to ban motor cars, nor save the gay whales, nor call for destruction of the capitalist fascist state etc.

shouldbeinbed

spen666 wrote:

You could turn your argument around and say all that you have said re cycling against the motorists

If you know Newcastle well, you will know it has an excellent public transport system with the metro system and park and ride facilities at places like Four Lane Ends and Kingston Park. There is no need to be driving in that Area.

100% agree but staying in the real world, even with such an excellent and well established inrfrastructure people still drive in absurd numbers, you can't deliver mass retail goods by metro or bus and the park and rides don't serve all sides of the city, the west side is poor to get to Haymarket from without your own means of transport (car or bike). I'm not defending cars per-se but there are valid resons why they're there and it is an inherently dangerous bit of the city to be deliberately and maliciously snarling up on a Friday rush hour. A trip along the quayside and a nice climb up Grey Street or Pilgrim Street with a bit of a rally round Greys Monument or in Eldon Gardens would do just as well for publicity but with the potential for a lot less harm to cyclists and drivers alike.

If they are in it for the disruption then a ride over the Tyne Bridge would be symbolic, equally aggravating but a hell of a lot safer for them.

spen666 wrote:

However, this is not about stopping people using the roads. Critical Mass is different things for different people.

When I attend CM in London , its to see friends, have a ride with them before going off for some food. Its not about protesting about anything for me. I neither want to ban motor cars, nor save the gay whales, nor call for destruction of the capitalist fascist state etc.

I refer you to miss P's 'reclaim the roads' IMO that seems a bit more militant than prelude to a nice evening out.

you can't make those arrangements and enjoy these social activitieswithout being part of some mass protest and undoubtedly being perceived as a lycra lout / thuggish / holier than thou cyclist first?

A sunday morning ride with the friends wouldn't do the trick?

spen666

shouldbeinbed wrote:

spen666 wrote:

....I'm not defending cars per-se but there are valid resons why they're there and it is an inherently dangerous bit of the city to be deliberately and maliciously snarling up on a Friday rush hour. A trip along the quayside and a nice climb up Grey Street or Pilgrim Street with a bit of a rally round Greys Monument or in Eldon Gardens would do just as well for publicity but with the potential for a lot less harm to cyclists and drivers alike.

If they are in it for the disruption then a ride over the Tyne Bridge would be symbolic, equally aggravating but a hell of a lot safer for them.
...

ot sure I agree with you on any of this

Firstly CM- or this version is encouraging everyone onto their bikes. To make a route up the steepest hill in Newcastle is rather pointless as most people will not be able to ride up it


Secondly- to suggest the quayside is quieter to traffic than the route suggested is non sense. Some ofthe route proposed is limited to bus/ cycle route only. It is chosen to avoid St James boulevard which takes most traffic And in particular the through traffic.

It is the flattest safest town centre route that can be proposed.

To suggest riding over the Tyne Bridge is safer is complete nonsense- that is a road that joins to/ from the Urban motorway . Yes - very safe idea - lets pick a route that has fast moving cars and lorries on it.

However, the aim of this CM is not to disrupt motorised traffic, but to promote cycling and as it says to reclaim the streets- not reclaim the streets at the exclusion of others. There is a big difference. You can promote cycling on the roads without trying to ban other use of the road.

The roads are for sharing. That means the motor vehicles sharing with the non motorised traffic and vice versa

Crapaud

spen666 wrote:

... Critical Mass is different things for different people. ...

Yes, but why is so much of it nothing to do with cycling? There are many ways to promote one's lifestyle / ideology / politics / diet / whatever than taking over a cycling event.

spen666 wrote:

... When I attend CM in London , its to see friends, have a ride with them before going off for some food. Its not about protesting about anything for me. I neither want to ban motor cars, nor save the gay whales, nor call for destruction of the capitalist fascist state etc.

The strangely quiet Ms Piggy's take on it would be of more interest. It is after all her project (in a movement that's famous for not having any organisers or leaders).

rake

spen666 wrote:

rake wrote:

no cars = no roads. they dont grow like trees. are you going to maintain the roads when youve claimed them. you can start by filling in some potholes.

Really?

So before the end of the 19th Century there were no roads?

sorry mate you are living in a fantasy world if you believe that



However, who is suggesting there should be no cars or that cars should have even a reduced right to use the roads.

Promoting and using your right to cycle is nothing to do with preventing or restricting the right of others to use motor vehicles.

your words in bold above, leaves me with one question, why the protest?
like wise who is suggesting bikes have a reduced right to use the roads.

shouldbeinbed

spen666 wrote:

shouldbeinbed wrote:

spen666 wrote:

....I'm not defending cars per-se but there are valid resons why they're there and it is an inherently dangerous bit of the city to be deliberately and maliciously snarling up on a Friday rush hour. A trip along the quayside and a nice climb up Grey Street or Pilgrim Street with a bit of a rally round Greys Monument or in Eldon Gardens would do just as well for publicity but with the potential for a lot less harm to cyclists and drivers alike.

If they are in it for the disruption then a ride over the Tyne Bridge would be symbolic, equally aggravating but a hell of a lot safer for them.
...

ot sure I agree with you on any of this

Firstly CM- or this version is encouraging everyone onto their bikes. To make a route up the steepest hill in Newcastle is rather pointless as most people will not be able to ride up it


Secondly- to suggest the quayside is quieter to traffic than the route suggested is non sense. Some ofthe route proposed is limited to bus/ cycle route only. It is chosen to avoid St James boulevard which takes most traffic And in particular the through traffic.

It is the flattest safest town centre route that can be proposed.

To suggest riding over the Tyne Bridge is safer is complete nonsense- that is a road that joins to/ from the Urban motorway . Yes - very safe idea - lets pick a route that has fast moving cars and lorries on it.

However, the aim of this CM is not to disrupt motorised traffic, but to promote cycling and as it says to reclaim the streets- not reclaim the streets at the exclusion of others. There is a big difference. You can promote cycling on the roads without trying to ban other use of the road.

The roads are for sharing. That means the motor vehicles sharing with the non motorised traffic and vice versa

not to disrupt motor traffic AT HALF PAST FIVE ON A FRIDAY EVENING AROUND ONE OF THE BUSIEST BITS OF THE CITY CENTRE not even in uber lawyer mode can you defend that as a coincidence of timing

I think you've misunderstood other bits (am I surprised )

safer relative to the haymarket- I always hate driving, walking riding that area as it's always dicey, each to their own. the routes I suggest aren't safe full stop but are wider and with better visibility and why do they have to be flat in a city and surround that isn't for large parts, makes me wonder who these cyclists are how regular they are and and why they bother with CM if they need mollycoddling with flat traffic free routes.

I did say if they wanted to cause aggro, pootling along blocking the TB would do just that for exactly the reasons you suggest, though fast moving cars might be a bit of an overstatement but moving sure.

roads are for sharing, whayhey we agree on something, though why you feel the need to preach this to me as if I'm arguing the opposite is completely beyond me. - how does a whole bunch of cyclists deliberately and premeditatedly blocking the roads at one of the busiest times of the entire week and inconveniencing everyone else for no practical commuting/travelling purpose achieve that? It goes against everything you claim CM is about and is the reason why I'm anti them.

spen666

So lets get this right?

Motorists are fine to block the road every day of the week having a critical mass at least twice a day

Cyclists however are wrong to use this road once a month?

Where is the sharing in that?





I think if you read what I have ever posted, I have not made claims that CM is about anything at all. it is different for different people.

For some its to protest against capitalism, for some its to protest against cars, some to protest against persecution of gay whales, for others its a chance to have a social ride with friends after work.

MsPiggy

And that is that.

Crapaud

MsPiggy wrote:

And that is that.

What is what?

rake

MsPiggy wrote:

And that is that.

how exactly do cars prevent cycles from using the road?

downfader

If those who join critical mass over road safety issues and cycle facilities actually bothered to write letters to their MPs, Councils and even the Police to ask them to do something then it might be a different prospect for us.

Critical Mass is seen by noncyclists as a petty persuit and anticar.

cervelors

downfader wrote:

If those who join critical mass over road safety issues and cycle facilities actually bothered to write letters to their MPs, Councils and even the Police to ask them to do something then it might be a different prospect for us.

Critical Mass is seen by noncyclists as a petty persuit and anticar.

And I suggest by most cyclists as well. Having read a little into the CM strategies and modus operandi, the main focus seems to be about creating a nuisance and hoping it will change attitudes . I suggest that that your actions will have exactly the opposite effect and will harden attitudes against cyclists. The vast majority of whom, get on well on our roads. So, piss off and create mayhem in the middle of somewhere unimportant - how about a forest on the North York Moors.

Crapaud

downfader wrote:

If those who join critical mass over road safety issues and cycle facilities actually bothered to write letters to their MPs, Councils and even the Police to ask them to do something then it might be a different prospect for us.

Critical Mass is seen by noncyclists as a petty persuit and anticar.

Or if CM was actually about cycling and had some method of publicising it.

Where's M Spiggy gone? Your thoughts on the subject please. Why should we join CM?

spen666

cervelors wrote:

downfader wrote:

If those who join critical mass over road safety issues and cycle facilities actually bothered to write letters to their MPs, Councils and even the Police to ask them to do something then it might be a different prospect for us.

Critical Mass is seen by noncyclists as a petty persuit and anticar.

And I suggest by most cyclists as well. Having read a little into the CM strategies and modus operandi, the main focus seems to be about creating a nuisance and hoping it will change attitudes . I suggest that that your actions will have exactly the opposite effect and will harden attitudes against cyclists. The vast majority of whom, get on well on our roads. So, wee-wee off and create mayhem in the middle of somewhere unimportant - how about a forest on the North York Moors.

Try telling that to the motorists who clog the roads EVERY day, morening and night.

Cyclists have actaully more right to use the roads than those in motor vehicles ( right v licence issues)

Your attitude is the sort that may easily result in cyclists not being able to use the roads either by fear or by legislation.

ban CM, what next? ban groups of more than 1 cyclist- how about banning all cyclists?

Thje roads are for everyone to use and a ride around the city centre is a perfectly legitimate use. Turn it around the other way - why not ban motor cars from driving at rush hour when they pee off other road users. If they want to drive there cars, why not go off to North yorks to do it?

This ride has never made any claims about being anything other than a ride. you and others are assuming the aim of CM is to disrupt motorists. It is to assert the rights of cyclists to use the road. That is a different thing.

Are you opposed to cyclists having the right to use the road?

downfader

Personally I dont want anyone to ban anything. I would like to see a bit of common sense. I will point out that the moped and motorbikers in London seem to be having their own critical mass over parking charges, and also a similar backlash. Though the difference there is its very public what their complaint is. The cycling CMs suffer from ambiguity where others seem to invade their rally.

Make things simple, and dont denegrate those that deserve a bit of leeway (sp?). It is better to have people on your side even if they dont cycle in any form. :?

spen666

downfader wrote:

Personally I dont want anyone to ban anything. I would like to see a bit of common sense. I will point out that the moped and motorbikers in London seem to be having their own critical mass over parking charges, and also a similar backlash. Though the difference there is its very public what their complaint is. The cycling CMs suffer from ambiguity where others seem to invade their rally.

Make things simple, and dont denegrate those that deserve a bit of leeway (sp?). It is better to have people on your side even if they dont cycle in any form. :?

Again, you seem to be assuming that those taking part in a CM have a complaint.

Its often for many participants not about complaining but about exerting their right to ride

downfader

spen666 wrote:

downfader wrote:

Personally I dont want anyone to ban anything. I would like to see a bit of common sense. I will point out that the moped and motorbikers in London seem to be having their own critical mass over parking charges, and also a similar backlash. Though the difference there is its very public what their complaint is. The cycling CMs suffer from ambiguity where others seem to invade their rally.

Make things simple, and dont denegrate those that deserve a bit of leeway (sp?). It is better to have people on your side even if they dont cycle in any form. :?

Again, you seem to be assuming that those taking part in a CM have a complaint.

Its often for many participants not about complaining but about exerting their right to ride

Not assuming, there are many with complaints. You see them shouting nonsense at car drivers about then environment, safety etc.

We already have a right to ride, if we just get out there and do it part of it will come safety-wise and environment-wise. The rest needs to be done through a political approach.

cervelors

spen your confusion stems from your belief that the CM is equal to the normal commuter traffic. It is not. The commuter cars are not connected in any way. There is no decision to get together to block the roads. They are just people trying to get home, without any protest - just ordinary people. The CM is fundamentally different. Its aim is to block to create a problem of a scale comparable with normal traffic. The end result is confusion from the motorist and irritation. You are not serving any benefit for the cyclist except to have a protest. If protest is your thing - fine, but please do not wrap me as a law abiding cyclist into your silly counter - productive antics.

spen666

cervelors wrote:

spen your confusion stems from your belief that the CM is equal to the normal commuter traffic. It is not.

Erm I have no confusion thank you very much.

I have ridden with various CM groups in the past.

I fully know what CM is about and know why I attend it unlike you I suspect.

I have never said or suggested or even thought CM is equal to normal commuter traffic. So it would be helpful if you would stop inventing things that I am supposedly thinking or confused about

The commuter cars are not connected in any way. There is no decision to get together to block the roads.

A bit like CM there has been no decision on my part of those I have ridden with at any CM to block the road, merely to use the road, a bit like the cars vans bikes lorries pedestrians etc do

They are just people trying to get home, without any protest - just ordinary people.

Ahhh your prejudice escapes now. Cyclists are not normal people.

Debate over really isn't it. There is little point debating with someone who is so stupidand so offensively wrong

The CM is fundamentally different. Its aim is to block to create a problem of a scale comparable with normal traffic.

Erm no it is not - stop making things up. CM is not about blocking traffic or causing problems. It is about different things for different people. It is for me and those I have ridden with about riding a bike PERIOD - no protest, no intention or aim to do anything other than ride my bike with friends and acquaintances

You are inventing things that have no basis in fact

The end result is confusion from the motorist and irritation. You are not serving any benefit for the cyclist except to have a protest. If protest is your thing - fine, but please do not wrap me as a law abiding cyclist into your silly counter - productive antics.

Riding a bike is still a law abiding activity - unless people like you get your way.

No one is telling you to join a CM. You are no more tarred with the brush of CM than you are with the brush of being a murderer because someone else who used a bike committed a murder.

No one is saying you have to join a CM or not.

Cycling like life is a broad church. Attend a CM if you want - don't if you don't want to.

spen666

downfader wrote:

spen666 wrote:

downfader wrote:

Personally I dont want anyone to ban anything. I would like to see a bit of common sense. I will point out that the moped and motorbikers in London seem to be having their own critical mass over parking charges, and also a similar backlash. Though the difference there is its very public what their complaint is. The cycling CMs suffer from ambiguity where others seem to invade their rally.

Make things simple, and dont denegrate those that deserve a bit of leeway (sp?). It is better to have people on your side even if they dont cycle in any form. :?

Again, you seem to be assuming that those taking part in a CM have a complaint.

Its often for many participants not about complaining but about exerting their right to ride

Not assuming, there are many with complaints. You see them shouting nonsense at car drivers about then environment, safety etc.

you see many motorists at rush hour and other times shouting abuse at pedestrians and other road users- perhaps we should ban motorists as well?

Stupid point? its exactly your point except using the word motorist for cyclist.


It is a stupid point I agree.

We already have a right to ride, if we just get out there and do it part of it will come safety-wise and environment-wise.

Exactly , but when people excercise that right - you and others argue they should not be doing it. The right to ride needs to be defended from people like you.

The rest needs to be done through a political approach.

I have no idea what you are wanting a politcal approach to. I as have been repeatedly ssaid have no protest and am not trying to change the law on anything thank you very much!!!


You are importing on Cm a purpose that is not there.

You should try reading the judgements in the action the Metropolitan Police brought to have CM decalred illegal. It may correct a few misconceptions you seem to have about CM.

cervelors

We clearly are at opposite ends of spectrum. But I do not like being called stupid. The bottom line is that CM is aimed at creating blockages. I personally think this is making a negative impact amongst the public in general. But - crack on, you will convince yourself you are correct.

rake

you said its not illegal to ride your bike spen but i suspect organising a demonstration with no aim or purpose is. commuters have a purpose to get to work. they arent trying to organise chaos. you might have a job and need to drive there one day.