A A A A
The Times Cycling Campaign
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 9th February 2012   #401
Analogue
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowy_again View Post
?
Fucking hipsters.
  quote   reply
Old 9th February 2012   #402
Velociodonor
 
Velocio's Avatar
Those dudes in red were useless.

I mean, what's the point in them? They're carrying swords in an age of blasters, and they're protecting a guy who can use the force.
  quote   reply
Old 9th February 2012   #403
French Touchdonor
 
French Touch's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocio View Post
Those dudes in red were useless.

I mean, what's the point in them? They're carrying swords in an age of blasters, and they're protecting a guy who can use the force.
The Imperial Forces' equivalent of this guy.
  quote   reply
Old 9th February 2012   #404
miro_odonor
 
miro_o's Avatar
I don't think so. I always assumed they were Darth's WAGs.
  quote   reply
Old 9th February 2012   #405
JimboJones
 
JimboJones's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by miro_o View Post
I don't think so. I always assumed they were Darth's WAGs.
Loving LFGSS styles. There aren't many places where you can go from the Times Cycling Campaign to Darth Vader's WAGs in a few short steps.
  quote   reply
Old 9th February 2012   #406
Emperor Palpatine
 
Emperor Palpatine's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocio View Post
Those dudes in red were useless.

I mean, what's the point in them? They're carrying swords in an age of blasters, and they're protecting a guy who can use the force.
Firstly, ok, I'll admit they were pretty useless. But it looked good to have a posse in those days, everyone had them, Biggie, Tupac, all my mates.
Secondly, they're not "swords" you impudent rebel, they are Force Pikes : http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Force_pike

One of those turned up to 11 and stuck up your junta would make you wish you'd never committed whatever extremely petty mistake I was punishing you for.
  quote   reply
Old 9th February 2012   #407
Velociodonor
 
Velocio's Avatar
Force pike vs blaster.

Seriously, you'd look more awesome walking around on your own. I mean... that's scary and intimidating right? A guy so powerful that he didn't need some dudes with puke sticks to protect him.
  quote   reply
Old 9th February 2012   #408
Emperor Palpatine
 
Emperor Palpatine's Avatar
But then who's going to do the medial tasks? You've got to have a bunch of people to go to the bar, queue up at McDonald's, get on the phone to call centres etc...

I'm a busy man, and I have a back problem. The answer is delegation and staff, lots of staff.
  quote   reply
Old 9th February 2012   #409
Emperor Palpatine
 
Emperor Palpatine's Avatar
In the middle of what?
  quote   reply
Old 9th February 2012   #410
Analogue
Middle England.
  quote   reply
Old 9th February 2012   #411
Emperor Palpatine
 
Emperor Palpatine's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Analogue View Post
Middle England.
I thought I'd wiped out all the fucking hobbits? Typical. It's so inconvenient when genocide goes bad.
  quote   reply
Old 9th February 2012   #412
edscobledonor
 
edscoble's Avatar
The Emperor may be powerful but he's still brittle.
  quote   reply
Old 9th February 2012   #413
Aroogahdonor
 
Aroogah's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emperor Palpatine View Post
I'm a busy man, and I have a back problem. The answer is delegation and staff, lots of staff.
^This.
  quote   reply
Old 9th February 2012   #414
rhb
 
rhb's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emperor Palpatine View Post
The answer is delegation and staff, lots of staff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aroogah View Post
^This.
Nah, that's where it all started going wrong. Growing the Empire too quickly, taking on too many new staff without proper induction training or procedures (e.g Overlooking the memo to destroy all escape pods, even if there are no life forms on board).

This all results in a loss of focus from the organisational vision and priorities, becoming a self serving business unit, and ultimately leading to the demise of the organisation as shareholder confidence explodes along with the value of prized assets.

[gets coat]
  quote   reply
Old 9th February 2012   #415
Multi Groovesdonor
 
Multi Grooves's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobbo View Post
I think that is some of the worst reasoning that I have ever heard.

No, it's you being soft if you think I'd blame the victims of bike theft for their loss.
  quote   reply
Old 9th February 2012   #416
Multi Groovesdonor
 
Multi Grooves's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Balki View Post
I wish I had an expensive camera and/or japanese girlfriend
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emperor Palpatine View Post
Blends in with? A bunch of fakengers wearing cycling caps and shoes with street wear ?
People can take their helmets and jackets off you know. And I think when they are off the bike, they do.

Unlike your skixie fiddlers who prance about with courier bags and silly caps even when they haven't been near a bike in months. I've been to east London, I know what I saw.


Gooooood. The hate is strong within yooou.

Last edited by Multi Grooves; 9th February 2012 at 20:55.
  quote   reply
Old 9th February 2012   #417
Emperor Palpatine
 
Emperor Palpatine's Avatar
I think Balki could be easily turned to serve the dark side.
  quote   reply
Old 9th February 2012   #418
NurseHollidaydonor
 
NurseHolliday's Avatar
I think he already has been turned, if you know what I mean...

wink, wink.
  quote   reply
Old 9th February 2012   #419
Oliver Schick
 
Oliver Schick's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emperor Palpatine View Post
I think Balki could be easily turned to serve the dark side.
You are Rupert Murdoch, and I claim my five pounds.
  quote   reply
Old 9th February 2012   #420
Emperor Palpatine
 
Emperor Palpatine's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliver Schick View Post
You are Rupert Murdoch, and I claim my five pounds.
Who's he, the mad one out the A-Team?
  quote   reply
Old 9th February 2012   #421
Oliver Schick
 
Oliver Schick's Avatar
No, he's the one who had your Force hacked and leaked stuff to George Lucas.
  quote   reply
Old 10th February 2012   #422
edscobledonor
 
edscoble's Avatar
Evans got The Times campaign badge to wear as part of our uniform, huh...
  quote   reply
Old 10th February 2012   #423
skydancerdonor
 
skydancer's Avatar
Listen, dimwits: blaming cyclists doesnít help
Hugo Rifkind
.
.
Today's times 10 2012 12:01AM

The idea is to stop people being killed or injured. Weíre talking about compassion here
]What is it with people who prefer cars to bikes, and why are they so angry? Donít worry, this isnít a column about Jeremy Clarkson. I understand why heís angry. Itís because heís not allowed to joke about having people taken out and shot any more, even when he does genuinely think this is what should happen to them and thus isnít joking at all, and also because heís reached the age of 51 without anybody telling him about bootcut jeans. But what about everybody else?
What about, for example, Sir Simon Jenkins? A former editor of this newspaper, and one of the best columnists in the business, heís someone you only cautiously call wrong about things. He wrote a column about this newspaperís cycling campaign the other day, though, and it was as if he was referring to a different one altogether. The Times thinks ďthat cycling in London is dangerous and getting more soĒ, he began, which was at least half-right. ďAnd that the faultĒ, he continued, ďlies with vehicle drivers.Ē
We said that? Really? Are you sure? I donít think so. But Sir Simon was not alone in his interpretation. Support for The Timesís campaign has been overwhelming but not universal. Plenty of comments left by drivers have had the petulant, aggrieved tone of people being told off for something that they donít think is their fault. Which would have been fair enough if they had been. But they hadnít. Guys, chill. Itís not about you. There was even a piece in the paper last week about an HGV driver who killed a cyclist through no fault of his own, and didnít believe heíd ever get over it. Harrowing stuff. So where are you seeing this blame, exactly?
Thereís a strange, repressed fury here. ďThey jump red lights and donít obey the Highway Code!Ē some people seem incapable of not shouting, whenever the subject of cyclist safety is raised. Oh fine, so weíll just mow them down with trucks then, shall we? That seems a fair punishment. Isnít that what you mean? Then what do you mean? Look, itís not that I donít think cyclists sin on the road. Itís just that I donít see why itís relevant. Personally Iím in favour of people not dying horribly on the road even if Iím not that fond of them. Woolly liberal that I am.
As I never tire of telling people, you can loathe the whole concept of bicycles, you can think all cyclists are stupid, selfish, Day-Glo bastards who shouldnít be allowed on the road, and you still ought to be in favour of investment in cycle lanes. In fact, you ought to be more in favour than anybody else. You want them off the road? Well youíll need somewhere else to put them, then, wonít you, dimwit? Then you can drive while texting and open your doors madly into traffic to your flinty heartís content. Show me a motorist who is against dedicated cycling lanes and Iíll show you somebody so consumed by hate that their brain has stopped working.
But why? Why? I know some cyclists can be annoying in their own very special way. You could see that with the ludicrous response to Matthew Parrisís joke a few years ago that they should be decapitated with piano wire, as though inner-city yobs were going to find evil inspiration in the downpage musings of the op-ed page. I once wrote a column about cycling and other cyclists sent me actual hate mail after I admitted not cycling much in winter. Maybe itís the constant fear, maybe itís the erectile dysfunction; thereís a hardcore here who are no fun at all. Theyíre a tiny minority, though. They cannot be entirely responsible for the hate. Not all of it.
In general, cyclist behaviour simply isnít that bad. In a way, itís fascinating that so many feel the need to pretend it is. The cyclist qua cyclist, as a philosopher would say, represents something. In some minds they occupy a niche similar to vegetarians, or Liberal Democrats. Like people who donít wear shoes, or have made-up food allergies, or are in Coldplay. You know the sort. Itís not what they do. Itís what they are.
Of course, most cyclists arenít ďcyclistsĒ, just as most drivers arenít Jeremy Clarkson. Iím as fond of abusive pigeon-holing as the next big-haired posho who has never had a proper job, but it shouldnít get in the way of reason or compassion.
I donít know Mary Bowers well. Sheís the reporter who was knocked from her bike last year; you might have seen her on the front of the paper last week. We last spoke at Glastonbury, when she and her friend Kaya Burgess told me they didnít want to come with me to see Suzanne Vega and went off to see Beyoncť instead. So Iím obviously aware she was capable of making mistakes. But when I read comments that responded to Kayaís beautiful article about her accident by questioning whether sheíd put herself in danger, I was even more stunned than I was furious.
What does it matter? What sort of person gives a damn? Why does somebody have to be to blame? Iíve had two cycling accidents in my eight years on Londonís roads. Once I slammed stupidly into the back of a stationary taxi, once a taxi slammed stupidly into the back of a stationary me. Personally, I donít feel I deserved three months in a coma for either. Nobody does. Sign up.
  quote   reply
Old 10th February 2012   #424
CYOA
 
CYOA's Avatar
http://twitpic.com/8hz9uk
  quote   reply
Old 10th February 2012   #425
JimboJones
 
JimboJones's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by CYOA View Post
whilst I know nothing about the guy who wrote that letter I would like to be like him if ever I get to that age!
  quote   reply
Old 10th February 2012   #426
neudonor
 
neu's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparky View Post
Maybe they could stop idiots from littering, spitting in the street, intimidating people on buses, etc, etc as well.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...pitting-public
  quote   reply
Old 10th February 2012   #427
spindrift
That's a marvellous article Skydancer, thanks.

Quote:
I don’t know Mary Bowers well. She’s the reporter who was knocked from her bike last year; you might have seen her on the front of the paper last week. We last spoke at Glastonbury, when she and her friend Kaya Burgess told me they didn’t want to come with me to see Suzanne Vega and went off to see Beyoncť instead. So I’m obviously aware she was capable of making mistakes.
  quote   reply
Old 10th February 2012   #428
Sparky
 
Sparky's Avatar
Want to tweet that, but it seems to be behind paywall. Am I wrong?
  quote   reply
Old 10th February 2012   #429
rhb
 
rhb's Avatar
interesting

http://hembrow.blogspot.com/2012/02/...manifesto.html

"I was included in a mailshot and asked to pledge
support for The Times' campaign two days
before it started. I was not told what I would be
supporting, and a flurry of emails revealed
anomalies about what might be part of their
campaign, so I decided to wish them luck, hope
for the best, but not to pledge support to
something which I could not be sure about."
  quote   reply
Old 11th February 2012   #430
skydancerdonor
 
skydancer's Avatar
Here are a couple more interesting takes on the times campaign
1. From Bob Davis Chair of the road danger reduction forum
http://rdrf.org.uk/2012/02/campaigns...good-part-one/
http://rdrf.org.uk/2012/02/campaign-...two-the-times/
and 2, the blogger own the road
http://owntheroad.cc/
  quote   reply
Old 11th February 2012   #431
Sparky
 
Sparky's Avatar
I really, really hate people spitting on pavements. It's disgusting and there's no reason/excuse for it. But if I saw a runner in a park do it, it wouldn't bother me too much. There's a difference between someone spitting inches from your feet at a bus stop for no reason and someone doing it because they're running their guts out.
  quote   reply
Old 11th February 2012   #432
samueldavidkeyes
The thing that gets me about spitting is that it's so often some kind of contemptuous urban statement. I've lost count of the amount of times I've been walking down a pavement and the guy approaching with an affected swagger from the opposite direction hocks up some great phlegm-ball into your path just before you pass. If you're harbouring contempt of a total stranger based on some sort of twisted class-consciousness, at least say it to my (blatantly middle-class, suburban) face.
  quote   reply
Old 11th February 2012   #433
miro_odonor
 
miro_o's Avatar
Perhaps you could punch some spitters?

F*ckin' club cyclists honking nose spray out of their face and into mine. Go to (or wait until you're at) the back of the pack plz.
  quote   reply
Old 13th February 2012   #434
skydancerdonor
 
skydancer's Avatar
Why not start a spitting thread for this random chat.
Any new developments regarding the Times campaign?
Or have they gone quiet, the way of the independent and standards campaigns only quicker?
  quote   reply
Old 13th February 2012   #435
MrDremdonor
 
MrDrem's Avatar
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public...cle3317831.ece is from todays paper I believe.

"The head of Scotland Yard’s Road Death Investigation Unit has called for the merging of road traffic and homicide laws to impose stronger penalties on those found guilty of killing cyclists or pedestrians."
  quote   reply
Old 13th February 2012   #436
BlueQuinndonor
 
BlueQuinn's Avatar
I have been saying this for years. Manslaughter should be the automatic charge. Killing someone is not a traffic offence.
  quote   reply
Old 13th February 2012   #437
skydancerdonor
 
skydancer's Avatar
This is good. A real road danger reduction point is encouraging drivers to drive well because if they dont and they kill someone it's ...

'Murder Where there is evidence the motorist killed another person intending to kill them. Must impose a life sentence

Manslaughter Gross negligence applicable where there is no intent to use the vehicle as a weapon of assault, but driving falls far below the required standard. Up to life imprisonment

Causing death by dangerous driving Maximum jail term 14 years, usually with an eight-year starting point, increased for aggravating factors, which are aggressive driving, driving while using a mobile phone, failing to regard cyclists, driving too close to them and driving into a cycle lane

Causing death by careless driving while under the influence of drink or drugs Maximum 14 yearsí imprisonment

Causing death by careless or inconsiderate driving Maximum sentence five years'

Good to see this in the Times
  quote   reply
Old 13th February 2012   #438
cliveodonor
 
cliveo's Avatar
Good piece in The Times by the barrister Clom Nugent. Good that is until he starts to talk about cyclists sharing the pavement where roads are narrow. In my view that fails for two reasons, first it creates tension between cyclists and pedestrians and secondly it encourages motorists to believe that they and they alone own the road.
  quote   reply
Old 13th February 2012   #439
adroitdonor
 
adroit's Avatar
On the face of it that is one of the most powerful calls for reform of the current system I have heard in a while, coming from the police it is amazing.

I wonder how much momentum that idea will take, and if there is any backlash where it will come from.
  quote   reply
Old 13th February 2012   #440
cliveodonor
 
cliveo's Avatar
Historically, attempts to impose stiff penalties on drivers have been frustrated by "jury equity" where juries will not convict if they think that, in their subjective view, that the potential punishment is draconian.
  quote   reply
Old 13th February 2012   #441
Velociodonor
 
Velocio's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by cliveo View Post
Good piece in The Times by the barrister Clom Nugent. Good that is until he starts to talk about cyclists sharing the pavement where roads are narrow. In my view that fails for two reasons, first it creates tension between cyclists and pedestrians and secondly it encourages motorists to believe that they and they alone own the road.
Kew Bridge has a proposed path sharing scheme coming in.

It appears to mean that cyclists will be on the road in the narrow bottlenecks both sides of the bridge, but then be expected to get off the road and put themselves onto the pavement once the road has become wide (on the bridge itself).

It's bizarre... amounts to "Go on the pavement when there is enough space on the road, but stay on the road when there isn't space".

And because it's such a short distance (100m tops), it's just going to be a pain in the arse for the cyclist.
  quote   reply
Old 13th February 2012   #442
MrDremdonor
 
MrDrem's Avatar
Is there anywhere that we can put comments about it to the council? If cyclists write in, and propose changes, things might get changed.
  quote   reply
Old 13th February 2012   #443
bothwelldonor
 
bothwell's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by cliveo View Post
Historically, attempts to impose stiff penalties on drivers have been frustrated by "jury equity" where juries will not convict if they think that, in their subjective view, that the potential punishment is draconian.
As early as the 1990s some drivers were still resisting drink driving laws. It took a lot of campaigning to change that, but it worked - if you get behind the wheel drunk and cause an accident now, you'll find little sympathy from a jury. It might take time, but the perceived social acceptability of killing a cyclist with a car can be changed. It's not going to happen overnight, though.
  quote   reply
Old 13th February 2012   #444
skydancerdonor
 
skydancer's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocio View Post
It's bizarre... amounts to "Go on the pavement when there is enough space on the road, but stay on the road when there isn't space".

And because it's such a short distance (100m tops), it's just going to be a pain in the arse for the cyclist.
And an extra pain in the arse when the drivers decide to punish those of us who don't conform to this silly plan and stay on the road. This is going to more and more of an issue if LCC gets any of their go- dutch plan turned into loads more silly fasillities
  quote   reply
Old 13th February 2012   #445
j.m.f
Enjoy reading tiswas posts.they're what I'd write when energised.
Reading the 7ish letters featured in yesterdays paper the overall tone was one of 'their own worst enemies'
Fairly true on plenty of accounts.
The gap between general opinion and changes in law is interesting.its a slow business this culture change.
More than ever though how you act whilst road riding affects culture-you make it.just watch when riding real perfect like, how behaviour breeds behaviour.
Anyway they're on about lorries and cycling and the law on radio bore at 12
  quote   reply
Old 13th February 2012   #446
Velociodonor
 
Velocio's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDrem View Post
Is there anywhere that we can put comments about it to the council? If cyclists write in, and propose changes, things might get changed.
I think it's a done deal... it was a notice of "It's happening" rather than consultation or planning permission.

I suspect it was decided a long time ago and is part of the redevelopment of the buildings on the corner. Councils always try to get developers to pay for things (that the council should cover) as part of the planning permission process.

I'm fairly sure that when these things are written in, they're just being forced through without any real thought attached to it.
  quote   reply
Old 13th February 2012   #447
j.m.f
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocio View Post
I think it's a done deal... it was a notice of "It's happening" rather than consultation or planning permission.

I suspect it was decided a long time ago and is part of the redevelopment of the buildings on the corner. Councils always try to get developers to pay for things (that the council should cover) as part of the planning permission process.

I'm fairly sure that when these things are written in, they're just being forced through without any real thought attached to it.
Sorry.you're right on development per se. But road schemes are hellishly complex.
  quote   reply
Old 13th February 2012   #448
adroitdonor
 
adroit's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocio View Post
Councils always try to get developers to pay for things (that the council should cover) as part of the planning permission process.
Actually councils negotiate a contribution from a developer to fund improvements to the local infrastructure (schools, open spaces, highways, playgrounds and so on) to offset the pressure brought on the existing infrastructure brought about by the increased number of users. They are required to do so and enabled by section 106 of the Town and Country planning act, these are known as s106 funds.
  quote   reply
Old 13th February 2012   #449
mr_tom
 
mr_tom's Avatar
... in related news, there are some encouraging noises from Cemex on Radio 4's You & Yours at the moment.
  quote   reply
Old 13th February 2012   #450
j.m.f
Is there someting missing in what chief exec of hauliers is saying about on going training of lorry drivers...
Until all firms are even near cemex approach its a long way to go
  quote   reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

LinkBacks (?)
LinkBack to this Thread: http://www.lfgss.com/thread79432.html


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New Campaign: Summer of Cycling 2012 rhb General 12 20th April 2012 00:04
London Cycling Campaign Awards 2009 Winners marcomarcos General 1 20th November 2009 13:42
Cycling article in the times (best one i've ever read) magpie General 21 28th September 2009 08:15
Cycling article in today's Times Huxley General 26 10th July 2008 22:33
TFLs Safer Cycling Campaign mikec General 19 12th March 2008 02:39

All times are GMT. The time now is 20:50.
Creative Commons License, BY-SA v2.0
no new posts