Flashride Wednesday 22nd

iPete

Perhaps unavoidable for some as the next flashride is in parliament square this Wednesday 22nd from 6:30pm. Not sure it'll see 2500 with all the fair weather riders still hibernating but you never know, perhaps the Times will throw its weight behind the event.

http://road.cc/content/news/52676-londo ... ing-debate

http://ibikelondon.blogspot.com/2012/02 ... -next.html

http://lcc.org.uk/articles/ride-to-show ... oad-danger

Koncordski

I'll be there.

SimonAH

Totally bizarrely I might even be there too.

veronese68

SimonAH wrote:

Totally bizarrely I might even be there too.

Well in that case there should be a special midweek Morpeth drink. Won't be able to make it myself unfortunately, bit of a manic week next week.

iPete

Of interest: London 2012: Chain reaction - how cycling went mainstream
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16966089

iPete

Achooooo

notsoblue

I'll be there.

aeon

i'll be there... with annoying flashy tyrefly valve caps. yup.

HamishD

I'll be there (first post on the new board . . .)

roger_merriman

Possibly, a little concerned that the pressure groups/bloggers are taken as spokesperson for cyclists as a whole. but on the whole i'd like more people friendly cities.

so i'll probably be there.

spen666

I will NOT be there

notsoblue

spen666 wrote:

I will NOT be there

Why not?

spen666

notsoblue wrote:

spen666 wrote:

I will NOT be there

Why not?

I've got a note from my mummy excusing me


I have to be in York on Wednesday

DonDaddyD

I'm not a fan of critical mass, but will research into this a little more.

My one experience of a flashmob/ride was to witness the riders ignore red lights, other vehicles and generally not respecting other road users right to use the road. I see very little being achieved with these actions.

Yes, OK, it will generate attention to cyclists and maybe there will be more regulations and rules around cycling (segregation for example, which I'm not a fan of) in cities as a response. I quite like my favourite past time un-regulated.

As I said this is all being said at first glance. I may be back to contradict this initial position.

notsoblue

spen666 wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

spen666 wrote:

I will NOT be there

Why not?

I've got a note from my mummy excusing me


I have to be in York on Wednesday

Yeah, but you clearly don't approve of it (unless I misunderstood your emphasis). Just wondering why not.

spen666

notsoblue wrote:

spen666 wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

spen666 wrote:

I will NOT be there

Why not?

I've got a note from my mummy excusing me


I have to be in York on Wednesday

Yeah, but you clearly don't approve of it (unless I misunderstood your emphasis). Just wondering why not.

Please tell me where I have expressed a view as to whether I approve of the ride or not?

I have simply said I will NOT be attending the ride. I am working in York on Wednesday and not in London.

You are inventing views and projecting them to me - falsely

rick_chasey

Spen -do you approve of flash-rides?

notsoblue

spen666 wrote:

Please tell me where I have expressed a view as to whether I approve of the ride or not?

I have simply said I will NOT be attending the ride. I am working in York on Wednesday and not in London.

You are inventing views and projecting them to me - falsely

Ok, I will NOT ask you what you think of flashrides :P

spen666

Rick Chasey wrote:

Spen -do you approve of flash-rides?

I've generally not got a problem with the concept of them at all.

I was a regular at CM for years until changes in my personal life meant it was not possible for me to attend on a Friday night. Did I go to protest? No, I went for Pancakes afterwards

Rides can serve positive purposes. They can also serve negative reinforcement of views about cyclists

roger_merriman

DonDaddyD wrote:

I'm not a fan of critical mass, but will research into this a little more.

My one experience of a flashmob/ride was to witness the riders ignore red lights, other vehicles and generally not respecting other road users right to use the road. I see very little being achieved with these actions.

Yes, OK, it will generate attention to cyclists and maybe there will be more regulations and rules around cycling (segregation for example, which I'm not a fan of) in cities as a response. I quite like my favourite past time un-regulated.

As I said this is all being said at first glance. I may be back to contradict this initial position.

I have mixed feelings, to be honest I think segregation is unlikely, at least mandatory any way.

cycling is regulated just not as much as some other forms of traffic.

now cycling is becoming a mainstream issue which also means that, they will turn to "community leaders" much like other things these tend to be nothing of the sort, just folks with loud voices.

notsoblue

Be the change you want to see, people :P

Personally I don't really relate to the type of person who goes to CMs and Flashrides dressed like a mad max extra with trance playing from a boom box on a trailer. There are some who embrace cycling as something inherently counter cultural. More power to them, but we're after different things from society. Which is why I think its pretty important that "normal" people (for want of a better term) form a larger proportion of cyclists at events like this.

Edit: And to be fair, lately there have been a lot of "normal" people at the recent Blackfriars protest rides

DonDaddyD

roger merriman wrote:

I have mixed feelings, to be honest I think segregation is unlikely, at least mandatory any way.

cycling is regulated just not as much as some other forms of traffic.

now cycling is becoming a mainstream issue which also means that, they will turn to "community leaders" much like other things these tend to be nothing of the sort, just folks with loud voices.

Who decides that these people should speak for "us" cyclists? I don't want segregation or a Dutch system, because Rick thinks it's cool and that, by and large, Holland is a better Country than England.

The responsiblity of safety should be on the shoulders of all road users.

I don't want kerbed bike lanes that force us into single file (because the lane isn't wide enough - Some cycle superhighways), I don't want be forced to ride at the speed of the person in front of me - yesterday that was 7mph - with no other viable or safe option to overtake. Likewise, I don't want to ride in a shared space with pedestrians. Pedestrians are erratic, their movements unpredictable and I'm forced, again, to drop from my preferred 17mph - 20mph to a sub 12mph speed, for their safety and mine.

These 'great ideas' are brilliant if you are on a Boris bike or see cycling as a utilitarian activity and happy to sit on a shopper. That isn't the way I want to ride my bike.

These suggestions simply aren't for me.

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

roger merriman wrote:

I have mixed feelings, to be honest I think segregation is unlikely, at least mandatory any way.

cycling is regulated just not as much as some other forms of traffic.

now cycling is becoming a mainstream issue which also means that, they will turn to "community leaders" much like other things these tend to be nothing of the sort, just folks with loud voices.

Who decides that these people should speak for "us" cyclists? I don't want segregation or a Dutch system, because Rick thinks it's cool and that by and large, Holland is a better Country than England.

The responsiblity of safety should be on the shoulders of all road users.

I don't want kerbed bike lanes that force us into single file and destroys any chance of overtaking, I don't want be forced to ride at the speed of the person in front of me - yesterday that was 7mph - with no other viable option. Likewise, I don't want to ride in a shared space with pedestrians. Pedestrians are erratic, their movements unpredictable and I'm forced, again, to drop from my preferred 17mph - 20mph to a sub 12mph speed, for their safety and mine.

These 'great ideas' are brilliant if you are on a Boris bike or see cycling as a utilitarian activity and happy to sit on a shopper. That isn't the way I want to ride my bike.

These suggestions simply aren't for me.

Well, clearly the best way to have your view represented is to not take part.

DonDaddyD

notsoblue wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

roger merriman wrote:

I have mixed feelings, to be honest I think segregation is unlikely, at least mandatory any way.

cycling is regulated just not as much as some other forms of traffic.

now cycling is becoming a mainstream issue which also means that, they will turn to "community leaders" much like other things these tend to be nothing of the sort, just folks with loud voices.

Who decides that these people should speak for "us" cyclists? I don't want segregation or a Dutch system, because Rick thinks it's cool and that by and large, Holland is a better Country than England.

The responsiblity of safety should be on the shoulders of all road users.

I don't want kerbed bike lanes that force us into single file and destroys any chance of overtaking, I don't want be forced to ride at the speed of the person in front of me - yesterday that was 7mph - with no other viable option. Likewise, I don't want to ride in a shared space with pedestrians. Pedestrians are erratic, their movements unpredictable and I'm forced, again, to drop from my preferred 17mph - 20mph to a sub 12mph speed, for their safety and mine.

These 'great ideas' are brilliant if you are on a Boris bike or see cycling as a utilitarian activity and happy to sit on a shopper. That isn't the way I want to ride my bike.

These suggestions simply aren't for me.

Well, clearly the best way to have your view represented is to not take part.

If you have a right to protest, then so do I and I think I may protest against this Flashride and the proposals it's making on behalf of 'all cyclists'.

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

Well, clearly the best way to have your view represented is to not take part.

If you have a right to protest, then so do I and I think I may protest against this Flashride and the proposals it's making on behalf of 'all cyclists'.

Are they claiming to speak on behalf of 'all cyclists' though?

DonDaddyD

notsoblue wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

Well, clearly the best way to have your view represented is to not take part.

If you have a right to protest, then so do I and I think I may protest against this Flashride and the proposals it's making on behalf of 'all cyclists'.

Are they claiming to speak on behalf of 'all cyclists' though?

In a way, yes. Where was the consultation to assess all our views before running this campaign?

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

Well, clearly the best way to have your view represented is to not take part.

If you have a right to protest, then so do I and I think I may protest against this Flashride and the proposals it's making on behalf of 'all cyclists'.

Are they claiming to speak on behalf of 'all cyclists' though?

In a way, yes. Where was the consultation to assess all our views before running this campaign?

Isn't that kinda how campaigns work though? A group of people put forward a view, people support them, or don't. Flashrides are the consultation. If nobody turns up, it has no support, and the campaign goes nowhere. If loads of people turn up, then theres clearly support for the campaign and that lends it merit. Sounds fairly democratic to me.

I'm fairly pragmatic about the campaign, I think its broadly positive. I don't agree with everything. But I do want there to be more debate about this. I've found that the more people take part in these actions, the more sensible the campaigns become. Thats why I'm going. If you don't agree with anything about this, and don't really care about improving cycling in London then just don't go. Cherrypicking the bits of the campaign you don't like is pretty churlish. Someone who would counter-protest a positive campaign like this would come across as a bit of a pr1ck, so I'm not sure why you're posturing that you would.

DonDaddyD

notsoblue wrote:

Isn't that kinda how campaigns work though? Flashrides are the consultation.

That's absolute bollocks.

So at the Flashride I will be able to say (and be listened to) that I disagree with the suggestions and then put forward my own suggestions which would then be considered in a civilised fashion.

Sure it will. It's a protest, any action contary to the purpose of the protest will be met with a measure of aggression. (Just as your post has done).

If you don't agree with anything about this, and don't really care about improving cycling in London then just don't go.

Please tell me where I have expressed a view as to whether I do or don't care about improving cycling in London?

You are inventing views and projecting them to me - falsely (To quote spen666)

I have expressed the view that, (i) I don't agree with the actual suggestions made within this campaign and (ii) I don't really agree with Flashmobs. You harp on about wanting more discussion but then when faced with someone, a cyclist (and no one can dare challenge how much I love cycling), who disagrees with your position you jump to the most negative conclusion.

How about first listening and trying to understand if you expect the same considerations in turn.

Cherrypicking the bits of the campaign you don't like is pretty churlish. Someone who would counter-protest a positive campaign like this would come across as a bit of a pr1ck, so I'm not sure why you're posturing that you would.

Le sigh. The obligatory quip and then attack appraoch. Yes sure, you clearly want more debate around this. You see the campaign as positive, I don't, not aspects of it and I don't have to be 100% in agreement with any policy, proposal to side with or against it.

The only one being a prick right now is you. I'm done.

W1

notsoblue wrote:

Be the change you want to see, people :P

Personally I don't really relate to the type of person who goes to CMs and Flashrides dressed like a mad max extra with trance playing from a boom box on a trailer. There are some who embrace cycling as something inherently counter cultural. More power to them, but we're after different things from society. Which is why I think its pretty important that "normal" people (for want of a better term) form a larger proportion of cyclists at events like this.

Edit: And to be fair, lately there have been a lot of "normal" people at the recent Blackfriars protest rides

Yeah, I'm sure all the people stuck in traffic trying to get home will differentiate between this event full of "normal" people, and the CM tossers. Or maybe they'll just wonder why there are a bunch of self important cyclists deliberately causing chaos, and care less for cyclists as a result?

And before you call me a prick that doesn't care about cycling - don't waste your bandwidth. I just don't agree that this is the best, or right, way to go about it.

DonDaddyD

W1 wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

Be the change you want to see, people :P

Personally I don't really relate to the type of person who goes to CMs and Flashrides dressed like a mad max extra with trance playing from a boom box on a trailer. There are some who embrace cycling as something inherently counter cultural. More power to them, but we're after different things from society. Which is why I think its pretty important that "normal" people (for want of a better term) form a larger proportion of cyclists at events like this.

Edit: And to be fair, lately there have been a lot of "normal" people at the recent Blackfriars protest rides

Yeah, I'm sure all the people stuck in traffic trying to get home will differentiate between this event full of "normal" people, and the CM tossers. Or maybe they'll just wonder why there are a bunch of self important cyclists deliberately causing chaos, and care less for cyclists as a result?

And before you call me a prick that doesn't care about cycling - don't waste your bandwidth. I just don't agree that this is the best, or right, way to go about it.

THANK YOU!!!

notsoblue

Well, some people will only ever see an interrupted commute when they look at a protest. Can't change that