A A A A
New Cycling forum
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 17th February 2009   #1
mikecdonor
 
mikec's Avatar
New Cycling forum

The evening standard have, today, launched a new cycling forum. I know the paper is right wing scum and most of its journalisits are wankers. But it is read by many people and it may do some good.

http://cycle.standard.co.uk/
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #2
provenraddonor
 
provenrad's Avatar
Their charter starts off on the wrong foot IMO:

Quote:
Originally Posted by evening std. safer cycling charter
  1. A real cycle network across London
  2. Better cycle lanes with proper segregation
  3. Enforcement of special advanced stop lines for cyclists
  4. HGVs to be fitted with special cyclist safety mirrors
  5. Compulsory cyclist awareness training for all bus drivers and new HGV drivers
  6. Cycle-friendly streets: fewer oneway systems that funnel cyclists into the middle of traffic
  7. More cycle parking across London
  8. Police crackdown on bike theft
  9. Make safe the Thames bridges: some of the most dangerous places for cyclists
  10. Campaign to alert self-employed that they can claim a 20p-a-mile cycling allowance against tax
  11. Better cycle-bus-rail co-ordination: adequate parking at stations
  12. Cycle training for all children and any adult who wants it
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #3
Aroogahdonor
 
Aroogah's Avatar
Anti-thieves article? Check
How to get fitter when cycling? Check
Helmet debate? Check
Why do people hate cyclists article? Check

They're going to run out of topics soon unless they start trawling our forum :)
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #4
50/14
 
50/14's Avatar
Aweuninspiring.
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #5
Skully
 
Skully's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by provenrad View Post
Their charter starts off on the wrong foot IMO:
Only the second point is truly worth dissenting from, surely?

Last edited by Skully; 17th February 2009 at 10:35.
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #6
mikecdonor
 
mikec's Avatar
I had a feeling it would not be well received.
I have noticed an increase in cyclists already this week, now the weather is clearly improving. I can't wait for the bright evenings ahead
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #7
TinyExplosions
They need a Lance Armstrong thread too :)
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #8
provenraddonor
 
provenrad's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skully View Post
Only the second point is truly worth dissenting-from, surely?
Yes, but the initial focus on a cycle network and cycle routes suggests (to me) that there is nowhere to cycle at the moment... as if the roads aren't suitable for cyclists as it is.
I think some of the other points could be placed first and perhaps emphasised.

I'm out of this thread before Oliver tears me apart.
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #9
hippy
 
hippy's Avatar
I don't like this bit: "segregation".

The roads are mine as much as any driver.
I probably pay more tax and I'm less of a burden on the planet.
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #10
Ant
 
Ant's Avatar
I responded to the why do people hate cyclists article.
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #11
lucas
 
lucas's Avatar
am I being a spaz, but I can't find the forum?
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #12
Skully
 
Skully's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikec View Post
I had a feeling it would not be well received.
I have noticed an increase in cyclists already this week, now the weather is clearly improving. I can't wait for the bright evenings ahead
Yep this morning was CLEARLY the earlybird nodder watershed, they were all out today. One decent warmer day (yesterday) and back out they come.

Quote:
Originally Posted by provenrad View Post
Yes, but the initial focus on a cycle network and cycle routes suggests (to me) that there is nowhere to cycle at the moment... as if the roads aren't suitable for cyclists as it is.
I think some of the other points could be placed first and perhaps emphasised.

I'm out of this thread before Oliver tears me apart.
Good point Prav. Yep. And watch out for Mr Logic. He'll get all statistical on yo ass. (This place would be poorer with him though. Love you Schickster.)
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #13
pajamas
Quote:
Originally Posted by provenrad View Post
... as if the roads aren't suitable for cyclists as it is.
a lot of the central roads aren't suitable for cyclists as they are. nothing to do with cycle paths though, more to do with massive chunks of road missing all over the place.
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #14
Smallfurrydonor
 
Smallfurry's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ant View Post
I responded to the why do people hate cyclists article.
"cant ride for toffees"
A classic expression, well used :)
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #15
BlueQuinndonor
 
BlueQuinn's Avatar
"will ride for toffees"
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #16
big daddy waynedonor
 
big daddy wayne's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by hippy View Post
I'm less of a burden on the planet.
there is always a big dent on it where you've been tho
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #17
cliveodonor
 
cliveo's Avatar
I thought that the Standard was written for and read by people who commuted by train to the outer suburbs. Certainly very difficult to read on a bike and, as riding a bike is not so boring to require one to delve into the neo nazi nonsense that is The Standard (sister paper to The Mail) not really something for cyclists to bother with. Noticeable that their first piece is about why "people" (for which presumably read "Standard readers") hate cyclists.
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #18
hippy
 
hippy's Avatar
Tapped that one up nice and high for the spike didn't I? :)
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #19
_Zed_donor
 
_Zed_'s Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by hippy View Post
I don't like this bit: "segregation".

The roads are mine as much as any driver.
I probably pay more tax and I'm less of a burden on the planet.
+ 1. That stuck out like a sore thumb. My council fucken tax bill is huge...and I do not drive.

Just had a look at the site. It is utter wank. Avoid.

Last edited by _Zed_; 17th February 2009 at 12:13. Reason: god damn ES
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #20
cliveodonor
 
cliveo's Avatar
I pay vehicle excise duty ("road tax") on two cars but when cycling drive neither. Does this mean that I am able to occupy two lanes of the road with my bicycle?
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #21
heyholetsgo
 
heyholetsgo's Avatar
" fewer oneway systems that funnel cyclists into the middle of traffic "

This would be a good thing surely??
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #22
TheBrick(Tommy)
 
TheBrick(Tommy)'s Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by cliveo View Post
I pay vehicle excise duty ("road tax") on two cars but when cycling drive neither. Does this mean that I am able to occupy two lanes of the road with my bicycle?


yes
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #23
tricitybendix
I had an article on cycling published in the Standard once. My name was on it and everything. I should probably be culled immediately
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #24
mikecdonor
 
mikec's Avatar
God. You are all so cynical!

The daily mail have their own agenda, there can be no doubt about that. Perhaps one of their journalists is about to open their own bike shop or something. Who knows.

But anything that promotes cycling has to be good surely. Although, this may mean there are more fuckers getting in my way on my morning commute/race that I have to take down grrrrrr ;)
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #25
tricitybendix
Cynical for a reason, the Standard have a godawful history of publishing complete nonsense about cycling. Where is Oliver? Oliver, sort the thread out.
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #26
BoardChrisman
and nothing on there about how expensive Rapha is - wankers
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #27
The Seldom Killer
 
The Seldom Killer's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skully View Post
Only the second point is truly worth dissenting from, surely?
That's a little subjective really and depends on where the segregation is planned and if the cycle lane is a comparable alternative in terms of freedom of movement and quality of journey with sutiable maintenance schemes.

For instance, the sections around Bloomsbury are horrible pieces of crap that are often filled with debris and pedestrians and don't let you move around as freely as you might wish.

On the other hand the A40 cycle lane between Witney and Wheatley is an excellent cycle lane that means that you don't have to choose between cycling next to high volumes of fast, commercial traffic with very limited space or a diversion along quieter roads that can be many miles longer.

This can be considered in conjunction with the part about a proper cycle network. A lot of the routes seem to follow the Sustrans principle of distance is no object if it avoids as much traffic as possible. However, this doesn't suit a lot of riders, such as commuters and shoppers, who want to travel by the shortest distance. A partially segregated infrastructure can balance the needs of both motorised traffic and less confident cyclists without rendering a cycle journey unfeasible.

I should probably take this filth over to C+.
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #28
Ant
 
Ant's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikec View Post
But anything that promotes cycling has to be good surely.
No
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #29
cliveodonor
 
cliveo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikec View Post
But anything that promotes cycling has to be good surely. Although, this may mean there are more fuckers getting in my way on my morning commute/race that I have to take down grrrrrr ;)
Sadly, The Standard is all too capable of twisting what would seem to be supportive stuff into a forum of anti-cycling hatred. I don't trust them. They are evil.

As and when they deliver their rags by cargo bike I will review my position.
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #30
Smudgley
stuck a post on about the theft.

Bike from skip - not exactly theif material...

Stinks a bit of bandwagon jumping - we have this sort of thing at work all the time...

"Lets promote cycling - yeah - oh you really use your bike and want some facilities at work to keep it safe, get changed - what you travel more than a mile on it... Woooah hold on thats not what we were talking about.. We want to offer you a leaflet about safer cycling, and tick our box on corporate responsibility"

Got some showers now though people seem to use it as a dumping ground and at least i dont stink at my desk anymore.
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #31
Oliver Schick
 
Oliver Schick's Avatar
(Deep breath)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikec View Post
The evening standard have, today, launched a new cycling forum. I know the paper is right wing scum and most of its journalisits are wankers. But it is read by many people and it may do some good.

http://cycle.standard.co.uk/
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucas View Post
am I being a spaz, but I can't find the forum?
It's a collective blog by several journos. In that sense it's a forum, Jim, but not as we know it, i.e. not a user forum. The Independent have had their own version of this for a long time, and this new Standard effort takes quite a similar format.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aroogah View Post
Anti-thieves article? Check
How to get fitter when cycling? Check
Helmet debate? Check
Why do people hate cyclists article? Check

They're going to run out of topics soon unless they start trawling our forum :)
As this blog bundles links to opinion pieces and news items, it is extremely unlikely that they'll run out of topics anytime soon. There is so much happening in cycling (of which this forum only catches a few specialised (although very fun and worthwhile) side aspects) that cycling is going to keep increasing as a story for all newspapers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cliveo View Post
I thought that the Standard was written for and read by people who commuted by train to the outer suburbs. Certainly very difficult to read on a bike and, as riding a bike is not so boring to require one to delve into the neo nazi nonsense that is The Standard (sister paper to The Mail) not really something for cyclists to bother with. Noticeable that their first piece is about why "people" (for which presumably read "Standard readers") hate cyclists.
The Evening Standard began extensive coverage of cycling in early 2007, if memory serves correctly. Why this is we may speculate, but as it is a single issue that is also non-party political, there is less danger of the unpleasant associations that the paper has coming into play. My observation is that the cycling-related content is often aimed at the lunchtime edition, and on a heavy news day is usually not present in the late editions. This makes sense, as cyclists would be unlikely to read the paper on their evening commute, as Clive sagaciously observes. ;) I would imagine that the Standard would have done at least some market research in this area.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ved View Post
Just had a look at the site. It is utter wank. Avoid.
If we want to mainstream cycling, we had better engage the mainstream media. A lot of people will have their opinions formed by reading the Evening Standard. I wouldn't say the content is always good, but all three journalists in the 'Cycling Team' have written very good articles on cycling. It is certainly not the case that it is all 'utter wank'. Gilligan's piece on bike theft today is pretty accurate, for instance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by provenrad View Post
Their charter starts off on the wrong foot IMO:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skully View Post
Only the second point is truly worth dissenting from, surely?
Quote:
Originally Posted by provenrad View Post
Yes, but the initial focus on a cycle network and cycle routes suggests (to me) that there is nowhere to cycle at the moment... as if the roads aren't suitable for cyclists as it is.
I think some of the other points could be placed first and perhaps emphasised.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hippy View Post
I don't like this bit: "segregation".

The roads are mine as much as any driver.
I probably pay more tax and I'm less of a burden on the planet.
The Standard's 'charter' appears to have been put together in some haste when (from memory) the editor ordered a couple of journos to write stuff on cycling over an intense week-end. It certainly doesn't reflect the order of priority that we recognise, but as there is a broad consensus concerning segregation (low in the hierarchy of solutions, signalling a failure to address the speed and volume of motor traffic, Continental comparisons largely inapplicable, etc.--don't want to go into too much detail, if you're interested in this, join the LCC and its Cycle Planning and Engineering Committee) and it is largely unfeasible in London, anyway, it's not a major worry. There are places where a small amount of segregation makes sense, e.g. Eagle Wharf Road N1, where a stretch of segregation basically performs the function of stopping rat-running along this street, which we had returned to two-way operation recently, but segregation is not a panacea, and that is recognised by everyone.

On the networking point, you will always have people calling for specialised networks, and they help with putting funding programmes together, such as the LCN+ project, which has delivered very beneficial improvements but is not being supported by the current administration. Ultimately, they are about knitting things together, improving permeability, as well as improving wayfinding (one major, major reason why people don't cycle in London is because they're simply intimidated by the size of the place and they can't find their way; a lot of people find it really hard to read normal maps of London, which is why the London Cycle Guides, which reduce possible route choice to a smaller selection by using colours, have been so successful--they make map-reading easier).

Quote:
I'm out of this thread before Oliver tears me apart.
TOO LATE. I've already MULTI-QUOTED you. :)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skully View Post
Good point Prav. Yep. And watch out for Mr Logic. He'll get all statistical on yo ass. (This place would be poorer with him though. Love you Schickster.)
Surely you must mean 'poorer without him'. Freudian slip time? ;)

Quote:
Originally Posted by pajamas View Post
a lot of the central roads aren't suitable for cyclists as they are. nothing to do with cycle paths though, more to do with massive chunks of road missing all over the place.
True. Carriageway surfacing is extremely poor. Happy to report that LB Hackney are investing 20m in improving footways and carriageways, though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cliveo View Post
I pay vehicle excise duty ("road tax") on two cars but when cycling drive neither. Does this mean that I am able to occupy two lanes of the road with my bicycle?
Don't you, anyway? ;)

Quote:
Originally Posted by tricitybendix View Post
I had an article on cycling published in the Standard once. My name was on it and everything. I should probably be culled immediately
Liar. I've never seen an article by tricitybendix in the Evening Standard. Oh wait, I've seen plenty of stuff by TB in it. Hmmm ... :)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikec View Post
The daily mail have their own agenda, there can be no doubt about that. Perhaps one of their journalists is about to open their own bike shop or something. Who knows.

But anything that promotes cycling has to be good surely. Although, this may mean there are more fuckers getting in my way on my morning commute/race that I have to take down grrrrrr ;)
... and fewer cars, Mike. If cycling increases, there is most likely going to be some modal shift taking place, too. It's all good.

I never understand why people object to having more people on bikes. I love it when I come up to the Angel junction to join twenty other cyclists waiting there in the morning peak. Or this nasty word 'nodder'. That should be banned with immediate effect. Why discriminate?

Quote:
Originally Posted by tricitybendix View Post
Cynical for a reason, the Standard have a godawful history of publishing complete nonsense about cycling. Where is Oliver? Oliver, sort the thread out.
It is true that before the Standard took the turn in its new direction of being pro-cycling, its coverage of cycling was often hostile and inaccurate. Even now, it can be hard work sometimes and we have certainly taken issue with some of their reporting, but as with other papers you've had journalists who first had to acquaint themselves with the subject matter. A while ago, pretty much the only person writing knowledgeably was Matt Seaton, but that's definitely changed. The history to which you refer is certainly still detectable in the work of some of their, let's say, long-standing correspondents on certain issues, but I do get a feeling that there's less of it now.

Years ago, you used to get 'bloody cyclists' rants (columns etc.) with depressing regularity, even in the Guardian, but it doesn't happen so often now. We've done an enormous amount of press work that's been very effective in turning opinions.

Cycling will keep getting bigger, and as it's in London it will keep being a major story, so brace yourselves for more coverage right across the spectrum of the press.

LIVE TOPICS certainly make multi-quoting even more fun than before, he, he.
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #32
Oliver Schick
 
Oliver Schick's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by cliveo View Post
Sadly, The Standard is all too capable of twisting what would seem to be supportive stuff into a forum of anti-cycling hatred. I don't trust them. They are evil.
That would now require a very major shift on their part, which I don't think they'll be able to execute.

Quote:
As and when they deliver their rags by cargo bike I will review my position.
That would be lovely, but would require lots of smaller, localised printing presses (which would be great). Last year, the ES tried to switch to one single printing press (from two), which I think didn't work, but I'm not sure what became of it.
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #33
Aroogahdonor
 
Aroogah's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliver Schick View Post
As this blog bundles links to opinion pieces and news items, it is extremely unlikely that they'll run out of topics anytime soon. There is so much happening in cycling (of which this forum only catches a few specialised (although very fun and worthwhile) side aspects) that cycling is going to keep increasing as a story for all newspapers.
Aaaaaanddd...breathe

My comment was more about the predictability of the topics. If they want to do something different then don't start off like A.N. Otherforum.

It would be nice for them to focus on the political and policing issues that affect the approach to cycling around London rather than aiming for the "I might be thinking about cycling" crowd. There's enough of that out there.

Last edited by Aroogah; 17th February 2009 at 15:04.
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #34
mikecdonor
 
mikec's Avatar
[Quote]Mike. If cycling increases, there is most likely going to be some modal shift taking place, too. It's all good. I never understand why people object to having more people on bikes.[Quote]

My tongue was firmly in my cheek when I said this. It will just be more people to overtake. Its these brakeless maniacs who don't have a clue what they are doing that bother me, not the first time commuters
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #35
stir
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smudgley View Post
Got some showers now though people seem to use it as a dumping ground.
day one. make sure anything 'abandoned' get soaked and piled in the corner.
day two. remove the soggy pile of shite from the corner and throw it out into the road/office.


not sure what im gonna do about the fuck off motorbike parked across the bike racks by the changing rooms yet

(wouldnt mind if it was getting used, but it appears 'stored')
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #36
Greasy Slag
 
Greasy Slag's Avatar
^ lets face it that cycle forum aint shit without Mr Schick and ononelangster. for two complete polar reasons
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #37
Greasy Slag
 
Greasy Slag's Avatar
I don't know mike. these flouro startled nodders are a risk to themselves, road users, other cyclists and global warming.
A lot of basic bike skills are needed, simple stuff like looking before you change position, knowing your speed and being able to ride into/out of gaps. the increase in cyclists and cycle lanes just leaves bunches of swaying, stuttering and swearving nodders at each of the lights. its fun to watch but i am amazed there are not more pile ups.
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #38
cliveodonor
 
cliveo's Avatar
Oliver Schick.

A legend.
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #39
cliveodonor
 
cliveo's Avatar
Greasy Slag. Just wait until VeloLibre comes in. If they don't remove HGVs by then, there will be carnage.
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #40
arvydonor
 
arvy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliver Schick View Post
(Deep breath)
..The Independent have had their own version of this for a long time, and this new Standard effort takes quite a similar format.

... I would imagine that the Standard would have done at least some market research in this area.
The ES borrowed this from the Independent which Daily Mail Group (DMG) acquired. Now that DMG has sold ...I look forward to seeing what the new owners of the standard do on this particular topic and whether there is money for this under the new editor...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/london-evening-standard
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #41
antman
 
antman's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliver Schick View Post
Or this nasty word 'nodder'. That should be banned with immediate effect. Why discriminate?
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #42
dogsballs
 
dogsballs's Avatar
how moderated is the forum?
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #43
Ant
 
Ant's Avatar
The two things I've written got posted up straight away.
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #44
wiganwill
42 posts before someone points out that the Standard is no longer owned by the Mail group; ever wish you were better informed?
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #45
Oliver Schick
 
Oliver Schick's Avatar
It Says Here

It says here that the unions will never learn.
It says here that the economy is on the upturn.
And it says here we should be proud
That we are free,
And our free press reflects our democracy.

Those braying voices on the right of the house
Are echoed down the street of shame,
Where politics mix with bingo and tits
In a money and numbers game.

Where they offer you a feature
On stockings and suspenders
Next to a call for stiffer penalties for sex offenders ...

It says here that this year's prince is born.
It says here: 'Do you ever wish
That you were better informed?'
And it says here that we can only stop the rot
With a large dose of law and order
And a touch of the short sharp shock.

If this does not reflect your view you should understand
That those who own the papers also own this land,
And they'd rather you believe
In Coronation Street capers--
In the war of circulation, it sells newspapers.
Could it be an infringement
Of the freedom of the press
To print pictures of women in states of undress?

When you wake up to the fact
That your paper is Tory,
Just remember, there are two sides to every story.

Billy Bragg
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #46
pajamas
Jebus Hubert Christo, Oliver...... I thought I got post fever in the summer...
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #47
Oliver Schick
 
Oliver Schick's Avatar
Will just reminded me of that line.
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #48
jonnydonor
 
jonny's Avatar
the standards forum has already gone down hill cos of numpty newbies ;)
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #49
pajamas
Quote:
Will just reminded me of that line.
I was thinking more of the three-and-a-bit screen post somewhere up there! Epic doesn't even begin to describe it..
  quote   reply
Old 17th February 2009   #50
pajamas
I guess what's most interesting to me is that with our numbers we could actually overrun it and dominate its boards entirely with our own agendas. Then again I struggle to think what those agendas are.
  quote   reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
BMXers of the forum! PinkGottiMobbs Rides & Races 106 1st June 2009 10:21
I miss the old forum! Roberto General 101 27th February 2009 10:41
I Like This Forum bosshogg General 8 7th August 2008 19:53
Our own little forum Kelvin Brighton 11 16th June 2008 12:10

All times are GMT. The time now is 18:26.
Creative Commons License, BY-SA v2.0
no new posts