Flashride Wednesday 22nd

notsoblue

spen666 wrote:

Your words, not me putting anything into your mouth

As to the last question - yes, a counter protest would be as respectable for those opposing these proposals as the protest is for those supporting the protest

Seems you sir are rather hypocritical in supporting the right to protest for those who agree with you and calling people who have different views and want to protest p*icks

You're determined to think I'm calling you a bit of a pr*ck aren't you . Put it this way, I'm not calling you one now for disagreeing with me, but if you turn up on Wednesday night in car and start shouting people down and getting in the way of a marshalled flashride, then I will. Clear enough for you?

notsoblue

Rick Chasey wrote:

Out of interest, what's your take on Unite Against Fascism?

For the sake of the churlish, I wouldn't consider a flashride consisting of "concerned cyclists" as being equivalent to an EDL march in any meaningful sense. While I respect what UAF are trying to do, I think that the groups they counter-protest like the EDL don't need the UAF to highlight how awful they are. They kinda speak for themselves. If anything, fascist groups *want* the conflict that the UAF provide when they counter protest.

spen666

notsoblue wrote:

spen666 wrote:

Your words, not me putting anything into your mouth

As to the last question - yes, a counter protest would be as respectable for those opposing these proposals as the protest is for those supporting the protest

Seems you sir are rather hypocritical in supporting the right to protest for those who agree with you and calling people who have different views and want to protest p*icks

You're determined to think I'm calling you a bit of a pr*ck aren't you . Put it this way, I'm not calling you one now for disagreeing with me, but if you turn up on Wednesday night in car and start shouting people down and getting in the way of a marshalled flashride, then I will. Clear enough for you?

You are determined to call me or someone a p*ick aren't you

You lie that people are putting words in your mouth- when its you who has typed them

You are now accusing me of opposing this ride- in fact as you have done from the start of this thread when I dared to say I wqasn't going to attend. Not because I disagreed, but because I am 200 miles away.

If anyone does want to turn up on Wednesday and protest against the original protest or protest against the plans, then I would support their right to do so.

They would be no more p*icks than those on the original protest.

Just because someone wants to protest doesn't make them immune from counter protest.

Protestors are expressing their right to protest as are counter protestors

notsoblue

W1 wrote:

At least he's consistent.

Diddums.

rick_chasey

How do you counter-protest a flash-ride?

greg66_tri_v2.0

Rick Chasey wrote:

How do you counter-protest a flash-ride?

Machine gun them to death?

W1

notsoblue wrote:

W1 wrote:

At least he's consistent.

Diddums.

QED.

notsoblue

spen666 wrote:

You are determined to call me or someone a p*ick aren't you

You lie that people are putting words in your mouth- when its you who has typed them

You are now accusing me of opposing this ride- in fact as you have done from the start of this thread when I dared to say I wqasn't going to attend. Not because I disagreed, but because I am 200 miles away.

If anyone does want to turn up on Wednesday and protest against the original protest or protest against the plans, then I would support their right to do so.

They would be no more p*icks than those on the original protest.

Just because someone wants to protest doesn't make them immune from counter protest.

Protestors are expressing their right to protest as are counter protestors

What counter protesters? Thats not actually going to happen. I didn't accuse you of anything, I was describing the hypothetical situation in which I would call you a bit of a pr*ck

This is exactly what I said
"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."
Go back and check my post, I haven't edited it. I wasn't calling anyone names for disagreeing with me. I didn't say anyone was immune from counter protest, I didn't say anyone didn't have a right to protest, I didn't accuse you of anything. All I did was ask you why you weren't going to protest because I was interested why, and the only reason I even asked you was because you wrote "NOT" in your response. Which would indicate to me that you felt quite strong antipathy towards the flashride. Unless I was mistaken, and you've just started randomly putting some of words you type in large all caps. :?

This is hilarious, I'm sure you guys are trolling me. You're not serious, right?

rick_chasey

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/lat ... rsday.html

notsoblue

Rick Chasey wrote:

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/531867/parliament-to-debate-cycle-safety-on-thursday.html

The campaign called for a wide-ranging review of road safety for cyclists, and included better education of road users, lower speed limits in urban areas, improvements to road infrastructure and better long-term investment in cycling.
British Cycling, the national governing body for cycle sport, has also called for mutual respect among road users and has made representations at the APPCG.
According to the Times, 58 MPs across all political parties have already backed the paper's campaign.

rick_chasey

notsoblue wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/531867/parliament-to-debate-cycle-safety-on-thursday.html

The campaign called for a wide-ranging review of road safety for cyclists, and included better education of road users, lower speed limits in urban areas, improvements to road infrastructure and better long-term investment in cycling.
British Cycling, the national governing body for cycle sport, has also called for mutual respect among road users and has made representations at the APPCG.
According to the Times, 58 MPs across all political parties have already backed the paper's campaign.

Yeah.

The lot I do a bit of campaigning for were putting a lot of pressure on our local councillors as well.

spen666

notsoblue wrote:

spen666 wrote:

You are determined to call me or someone a p*ick aren't you

You lie that people are putting words in your mouth- when its you who has typed them

You are now accusing me of opposing this ride- in fact as you have done from the start of this thread when I dared to say I wqasn't going to attend. Not because I disagreed, but because I am 200 miles away.

If anyone does want to turn up on Wednesday and protest against the original protest or protest against the plans, then I would support their right to do so.

They would be no more p*icks than those on the original protest.

Just because someone wants to protest doesn't make them immune from counter protest.

Protestors are expressing their right to protest as are counter protestors

What counter protesters? Thats not actually going to happen. I didn't accuse you of anything, I was describing the hypothetical situation in which I would call you a bit of a pr*ck

This is exactly what I said
"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."
Go back and check my post, I haven't edited it. I wasn't calling anyone names for disagreeing with me. I didn't say anyone was immune from counter protest, I didn't say anyone didn't have a right to protest, I didn't accuse you of anything. All I did was ask you why you weren't going to protest because I was interested why, and the only reason I even asked you was because you wrote "NOT" in your response. Which would indicate to me that you felt quite strong antipathy towards the flashride. Unless I was mistaken, and you've just started randomly putting some of words you type in large all caps. :?

This is hilarious, I'm sure you guys are trolling me. You're not serious, right?

I put not in bold to indicate I will NOT be attending unlike most others before me who said they will be attending


I answered your question why I would not be there and confirmed additionally that I had no issue with the protest.

You however seem to want to attack anyone who is not going on the ride or who raises the fact they do not necessarily agree with the cause. You are the one referring to those who might want to oppose your protest as p*icks

I have never suggested I would counter protest anything let alone this event. If you were not so myopic, you might have recalled that I would not be within 200 miles of protest in any event

however, I do support the right of anyone to protest, and this includes the right of those who want to protest against the protest

Democracy requires th\aat those whose views you oppose have the right to those views and to protest

notsoblue

Going to reply to you in PM, Spen, because this must be boring the t*ts off everyone here.

spen666

notsoblue wrote:

Going to reply to you in PM, Spen, because this must be boring the t*ts off everyone here.

If you've got something to say, then say it in public. What have you got to hide - apart from the truth?

i'm not having secret debates

rjsterry

For all our sakes, can you just drop it.

notsoblue

spen666 wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

Going to reply to you in PM, Spen, because this must be boring the t*ts off everyone here.

If you've got something to say, then say it in public.

i'm not having secret debates

Its not really a debate though, is it?

spen666

notsoblue wrote:

spen666 wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

Going to reply to you in PM, Spen, because this must be boring the t*ts off everyone here.

If you've got something to say, then say it in public.

i'm not having secret debates

Its not really a debate though, is it?

Well why send me PM's on the same then?

Origamist

I'll be attending.

dhope

I'm not sure it's boring the tits off everyone else here, I tend to zone out when it becomes a NSB/Spence-off
It's like Godwins law for Commuting Chat

spen666

Notsoblue - I have told you once I am not going to enter into a debate by PM

Unless you want me to start publishing your PM's on here, please stop sending them. You have continued to send messages by PM despite my previous request not to debate this by PM.

If you have something to say, do it publically

notsoblue

dhope wrote:

I'm not sure it's boring the tits off everyone else here, I tend to zone out when it becomes a NSB/Spence-off
It's like Godwins law for Commuting Chat

:oops:

DonDaddyD

Oh for f*ck sake. NSB was calling me a prick because I suggested that I would counter protest.

What NSB doesn't get is that whether spen666 agrees with my reason to protest or not he is inherently wired to defend the right to protest.

For him protesting is a right of every individual and therefore, by extension, so is counter protesting (irrespective of the topic).

NSB I wasn't going to say this but you've irked me over the last couple of days.

The way you've conducted yourself in this thread is exactly why I don't go in for this type of thing. I'm not the brightest, most intelligent, well read or articulate person in this section. I'm not above admitting that or the fact that I get a hell of a lot of things wrong and equally I fully acknowledge that I have my sometimes less than brilliant moments. But on this occassion I was actually willing to read and consider your view on why this is a good thing and the virtues of the campaign. You'll notice I didn't (and actually never) shout down RJSterry.

Yes I was objectionable to 'the cause'. It is not wrong or bad to hold a different opinion on subjects like this. We are all entitled to our opinions.

If I had to be brutally honest I feel all you've done is shout me down, call me a prick (or say that you would if I took an action you disagreed with, despite you taking up the exact same action, protesting = hypocrite), accuse me of not caring about cycling safety and accuse me of being churlish. If anything, I've gained or learned nothing from you about why I should reconsider my view and support this campaign and participate in the flashride, which frankly should have been the goal of the discussion.

It's a reoccuring problem I have with most cyclists when discussing subjects like this, they are so entrenched within their views they will actually vilify anyone who doesn't share the same views (I've probably done this myself, which is why I tend to keep myself to myself when cycling these days). Best example: Helmet debate.

rick_chasey

DonDaddyD wrote:

It's a reoccuring problem I have with most cyclists when discussing subjects like this, they are so entrenched within their views they will actually vilify anyone who doesn't share the same views (I've probably done this myself, which is why I tend to keep myself to myself when cycling these days). Best example: Helmet debate.

Don't think that's exclusive to just cyclists.

DonDaddyD

Rick Chasey wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

It's a reoccuring problem I have with most cyclists when discussing subjects like this, they are so entrenched within their views they will actually vilify anyone who doesn't share the same views (I've probably done this myself, which is why I tend to keep myself to myself when cycling these days). Best example: Helmet debate.

Don't think that's exclusive to just cyclists.

Oh for the love of... there must be some irony there. Anyway:

Yes Rick, you are undoubtably more right than me by proving a (any will do) point.

:roll:

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

Oh for f*ck sake. NSB was calling me a prick because I suggested that I would counter protest.

Oh come on, DDD. Have you ever seen a flashride? Its full of smiley happy people ringing their bells who all just want to make being a cyclist and a pedestrian in this city safer. Are you honestly saying that you would counter protest an event like this and not expect people to think you were being "a bit of a prick" (my exact words). Even if you think they're all deluded and are misrepresenting you, its hard to paint them as malicious or dangerous, or really in any way worthy of a counter protest.

Fact is, I don't even think you would *actually* counter protest something like that because I don't think you're a prick. I think you just like posturing against stuff like this.

rick_chasey

DonDaddyD wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

It's a reoccuring problem I have with most cyclists when discussing subjects like this, they are so entrenched within their views they will actually vilify anyone who doesn't share the same views (I've probably done this myself, which is why I tend to keep myself to myself when cycling these days). Best example: Helmet debate.

Don't think that's exclusive to just cyclists.

Oh for the love of... there must be some irony there. Anyway:

Yes Rick, you are undoubtably more right than me by proving a (any will do) point.

:roll:

Oh c'mon, that was an easy one.

We wouldn't be on here if we weren't opinionated.

The problem with opinions, especially people with too much time on their hands, is that they form them before they discuss them with others (especially on here).

DonDaddyD

notsoblue wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Oh for f*ck sake. NSB was calling me a prick because I suggested that I would counter protest.

Oh come on, DDD. Have you ever seen a flashride? Its full of smiley happy people ringing their bells who all just want to make being a cyclist and a pedestrian in this city safer. Are you honestly saying that you would counter protest an event like this and not expect people to think you were being "a bit of a prick" (my exact words). Even if you think they're all deluded and are misrepresenting you, its hard to paint them as malicious or dangerous, or really in any way worthy of a counter protest.

Fact is, I don't even think you would *actually* counter protest something like that because I don't think you're a prick. I think you just like posturing against stuff like this.

It's not about happy people ringing the bells. It's about the campaign, the proposals within and the potential implications on me as a cyclist.

I have never, will never and simply won't support something that I believe misrpresents me. I believe there are other ways to improve and promote safer cycling. If there was a campaign against this but also contained other viable options then yes I would support it and protest against these proposals.

Just because someone says "Cycling safety" doesn't mean because I ride a bike I must support it and if I don't then I rightly must be vilified.

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

Just because someone says "Cycling safety" doesn't mean because I ride a bike I must support it and if I don't then I rightly must be vilified.

Whats with the persecution complex? You haven't been vilified. I have no problem with you disagreeing with them. I don't even agree with them fully myself! Can we draw a line underneath this now?

DonDaddyD

notsoblue wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Oh for f*ck sake. NSB was calling me a prick because I suggested that I would counter protest.

Oh come on, DDD. Have you ever seen a flashride? Its full of smiley happy people ringing their bells who all just want to make being a cyclist and a pedestrian in this city safer. Are you honestly saying that you would counter protest an event like this and not expect people to think you were being "a bit of a prick" (my exact words). Even if you think they're all deluded and are misrepresenting you, its hard to paint them as malicious or dangerous, or really in any way worthy of a counter protest.

Fact is, I don't even think you would *actually* counter protest something like that because I don't think you're a prick. I think you just like posturing against stuff like this.

Honestly for days a number of us have been arguing with you and Rick about how the Dutch approach to cycling wouldn't work here. (Rick went on about how great Holland is compared to the UK so much that I feel like banning the use of the colour orange in my household).

So why would I then support a cycling campaign with a slogan that says "Love London, Go Dutch"?

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

Honestly for days a number of us have been arguing with you and Rick about how the Dutch approach to cycling wouldn't work here. (Rick went on about how great Holland is compared to the UK so much that I feel like banning the use of the colour orange in my household).

So why would I then support a cycling campaign with a slogan that says "Love London, Go Dutch"?

I'm glad we could draw a line underneath the issue of you being vilified, DDD.