Flashride Wednesday 22nd

rick_chasey

notsoblue wrote:

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.

Is it a bad time to mention that bacon with syrup pancakes come from the Netherlands and not America?

W1

DonDaddyD wrote:

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.

It is not just about the message - it is also about how it is communicated. A "flashride" is - in my view - completely the wrong way and counter-productive.

Obviously that is clearly a contrary opinion and therefore must be "wrong" and should also be shouted down/ad-hom'd.

DonDaddyD

notsoblue wrote:

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.

The line has been drawn.

rick_chasey

W1 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

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.

It is not just about the message - it is also about how it is communicated. A "flashride" is - in my view - completely the wrong way and counter-productive.

Obviously that is clearly a contrary opinion and therefore must be "wrong" and should also be shouted down/ad-hom'd.

Aw c'mon, pot calling kettle black here.

I'm not a particularly noble debater /arguer for sure, and I won't let things lie, but this is a bit rich coming from you!

notsoblue

W1 wrote:

Obviously that is clearly a contrary opinion and therefore must be "wrong" and should also be shouted down/ad-hom'd.

First they came for the flashride counter-protesters, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a flashride counter-protester...



There was no ad-homming, W1, a line has been drawn! Do keep up

DonDaddyD

W1 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

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.

It is not just about the message - it is also about how it is communicated. A "flashride" is - in my view - completely the wrong way and counter-productive.

Obviously that is clearly a contrary opinion and therefore must be "wrong" and should also be shouted down/ad-hom'd.

For what it's worth I agree with you. It's all about perception. The average driving speed in London is 12mph or less. But if a cyclist is in front of you holding 20+mph the assumption is that they're holding you up. (not you personally).

Yes Parliament Square is usually traffic heavy but that isn't going to stop drivers perceiving todays cause as a bunch of 'bloody cyclist'. The message of the campaign isn't going to be conveyed to them through inconvenience.

Didn't we have a go a train drivers causing inconvenience to prove a point?
I also remember a motorcyclist coming on here to tell us about a similar style protest (his cause was that they were going to charge motorcycles and mopeds for parking) and people on here gave him sh*t.

Funny how stances change when the cause suits the individual.

W1

notsoblue wrote:

W1 wrote:

Obviously that is clearly a contrary opinion and therefore must be "wrong" and should also be shouted down/ad-hom'd.

First they came for the flashride counter-protesters, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a flashride counter-protester...



There was no ad-homming, W1, a line has been drawn! Do keep up

What is offensive is your implication that not wanting to be a part of a flashride means you don't care about cycling and conversely that only people who do go care. The fact is that there are people who care, but disagree with the message and the medium.

notsoblue wrote:

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

greg66_tri_v2.0

Rick Chasey wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

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.

Is it a bad time to mention that bacon with syrup pancakes come from the Netherlands and not America?

Whereas when it comes to industrious pornography industries, they can both claim pre-eminence.

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

Funny how stances change when the cause suits the individual.

Er, I don't think I've ever expressed the view that train drivers and motorcyclists shouldn't strike/protest. I think its mostly the same people that just generally don't like disruption on their commute. Stances don't really change, not sure why you think its worth trying to point out hypocrisy where there isn't any :?

And really, I've got no problem with you guys being against the flashride. Just interested in why, and you've already explained that.

W1

Rick Chasey wrote:

W1 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

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.

It is not just about the message - it is also about how it is communicated. A "flashride" is - in my view - completely the wrong way and counter-productive.

Obviously that is clearly a contrary opinion and therefore must be "wrong" and should also be shouted down/ad-hom'd.

Aw c'mon, pot calling kettle black here.

I'm not a particularly noble debater /arguer for sure, and I won't let things lie, but this is a bit rich coming from you!

It's hard for me to shout down or ad-hom the contrary opinion when I usually am the contrary opinion on here.

DonDaddyD

Ironically I've spoken about this so much today I feel alomst compelled to go and see what I'm arguing about. That would mean participating in the protest, which I really don't want to do.

notsoblue

W1 wrote:

What is offensive is your implication that not wanting to be a part of a flashride means you don't care about cycling and conversely that only people who do go care. The fact is that there are people who care, but disagree with the message and the medium.

notsoblue wrote:

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

Sorry, didn't mean to cause offence. But I think you're being pretty sensitive there.

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

Ironically I've spoken about this so much today I feel alomst compelled to go and see what I'm arguing about. That would mean participating in the protest, which I really don't want to do.

Maybe you could go and counter protest?

DonDaddyD

notsoblue wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Ironically I've spoken about this so much today I feel alomst compelled to go and see what I'm arguing about. That would mean participating in the protest, which I really don't want to do.

Maybe you could go and counter protest?

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Ironically I've spoken about this so much today I feel alomst compelled to go and see what I'm arguing about. That would mean participating in the protest, which I really don't want to do.

Maybe you could go and counter protest?

See! I knew you weren't a prick!

rjsterry

So did we all kiss and make up?

EKE_38BPM

Right, since we're all friends (or at least frenemys) again, how about those who are going meeting up somewhere and then go to the Morpeth for a flash-pint?

I'll be on wearing black 3/4s, red windproof jacket and a green rucksack, riding a metalic light green Raleigh Record Ace fixie with either at least one hand on the handlebars or veering sharply to the left.

iPete

I would do but have to rush home and finish a task for work, meh.

spen666

EKE_38BPM wrote:

Right, since we're all friends (or at least frenemys) again, how about those who are going meeting up somewhere and then go to the Morpeth for a flash-pint?

.....

I will NOT be going to the Morpeth that night

And before NSB starts, I'm not organising a counter protest against going to the pub.

I'll be in a bar 200 miles away - nearer to Morpeth than to The Morpeth

Style over speed

awesome thread! hope theres a good turnout.

EKE_38BPM

spen666 wrote:

EKE_38BPM wrote:

Right, since we're all friends (or at least frenemys) again, how about those who are going meeting up somewhere and then go to the Morpeth for a flash-pint?

.....

I will NOT be going to the Morpeth that night

And before NSB starts, I'm not organising a counter protest against going to the pub.

I'll be in a bar 200 miles away - nearer to Morpeth than to The Morpeth

I figured that you would not be going for the reasons that you stated.

veronese68

I'm unable to go, although I'd like to. Unfortunately I've got a really busy week and I'd get there late and might get mixed up with the (possible) counter protestors when I only wanted to support a cause I mainly believe in and have a beer with some interesting, if slightly odd, other cyclists.
If I finish all the other stuff I have to do I might at least have a beer.

cyclingprop

Hmmm beer. I'll be on a large (62 or 64cm depending how I feel) trek. With the light of the world on my bonce.

jonny_trousers

What's a flashride?

W1

notsoblue wrote:

W1 wrote:

What is offensive is your implication that not wanting to be a part of a flashride means you don't care about cycling and conversely that only people who do go care. The fact is that there are people who care, but disagree with the message and the medium.

notsoblue wrote:

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

Sorry, didn't mean to cause offence. But I think you're being pretty sensitive there.

What a back-handed apology. Not that it matters though, because I'm not offened, but that is the "villification" (such as it was) in my view. The implication that you are against improving cycling in London if you don't attend this event, which is of course complete manure.

I presume you stand by that comment - you don't apologise for it, you apology for the offence (a politician's line if ever there was one).

W1

Jonny_Trousers wrote:

What's a flashride?

Like a flashdance. You have to wear leotards and neon ankle warmers.

notsoblue

EKE_38BPM wrote:

Right, since we're all friends (or at least frenemys) again, how about those who are going meeting up somewhere and then go to the Morpeth for a flash-pint?

I'll be on wearing black 3/4s, red windproof jacket and a green rucksack, riding a metalic light green Raleigh Record Ace fixie with either at least one hand on the handlebars or veering sharply to the left.

Can't stick around afterwards, but I'll keep an eye out for you. Will be wearing the same as in my avatar.

notsoblue

W1 wrote:

What a back-handed apology. Not that it matters though, because I'm not offened, but that is the "villification" (such as it was) in my view. The implication that you are against improving cycling in London if you don't attend this event, which is of course complete manure.

I presume you stand by that comment - you don't apologise for it, you apology for the offence (a politician's line if ever there was one).

Get over yourself, W1.

rjsterry

W1 wrote:

Jonny_Trousers wrote:

What's a flashride?

Like a flashdance. You have to wear leotards and neon ankle warmers.

Well there'll be lots of hi-viz if that counts.

W1

notsoblue wrote:

W1 wrote:

What a back-handed apology. Not that it matters though, because I'm not offened, but that is the "villification" (such as it was) in my view. The implication that you are against improving cycling in London if you don't attend this event, which is of course complete manure.

I presume you stand by that comment - you don't apologise for it, you apology for the offence (a politician's line if ever there was one).

Get over yourself, W1.

Dodged again, what a surprise.