Search results for:

The word 'vegan' isn't even in the Bill - it's just the guidance prepared by the Equal Opportunity & Human Rights Commission.

This is about as far from an informed debate as it's possible to have.

Shut up you communist bastard.

For what (very little) it's worth, I'm not a communist, or even a vegan. I just like the idea of protecting people's negative liberty against stupid employers, state organs, etc.

Yes, only religious convictions are worthy of such protection, it's a practicable matter, there is (and always has been) religious discrimination. But I don't need my theological non-conitivism protected in law, that would be ridiculous, nor do I need my belief that there are no such things as giant orange ponies living under Paris protected in law.

I don't think you understand the law. It doesn't seek to specifically do anything special for vegans or for people who believe in giant orange ponies. It is set out in broad terms. And it kicks in only once a problem arises (e.g., once someone is discriminated against or unable to access a particular service on the basis of their beliefs or personal characteristics).

Accordingly, if there is no problem, there is no protection.

Does that satisfy you?

I get the impression you think there are some kind of subsidies or rewards going around for vegans under the Bill. Have you had a look at it?

One thing this thread has achieved is that whether I choose OTP or customised, I've already started lusting over the idea of getting something fully custom in the future.

Over time I plan to act like a complete bastard as well. I just thought I'd better be a little self-effacing while I'm looking for help.

Erm, this is remarkably helpful and much more than I expected to receive in total, let alone in half an hour or so.

Thanks for the clarification in terminology between "custom" and "building from the frame, wheels, etc" (needs a snappier word, that concept). The latter is more what I had in mind.

I tried the Langster and didn't like it, but that might have been the bars.

I agree with those who say that once I've ridden a bike for a while, I will develop ideas about what I do and don't like, etc. But I am the sort of person who gets fussy about things.

I guess the question is whether it's better to get a Charge or a Surly, change the handles and add mudguards, but knowing that I will probably want to change half the bike over time to better components. Or just to plump for better components now (in which case there would be a further choice between Condor and a Tokyo Fixed Gear Surly).

Tough one.

Cheers guys. I fear I've undone any good work by (a) pissing off people on the vegan thread and (b) asking for purchasing advice. But I'll always treasure my worry-free first 5 minutes on this forum.

Hi, I know I'm asking for trouble asking for newbie purchasing advice but I promise you, I've read the entire OTP thread and clicked on every link. I've searched the forum for every bike I've heard of and read everything I can.

I've gone to several shops (Evans, Cycle Surgery, Condor, Cavendish) and tried out a few bikes. But there are limits (bikes not in stock in that shop, not available in right sizes etc). It's also not possible to try out a custom bike.

Basically, I want a nice looking bike that I can ride 10 miles a day without any particular intention of doing tricks or anything. I would prioritise tight handling above other factors. I will be getting mudguards and either a straight bar or risers (no drops, anyway).

At the OTP level, I could get a Charge Plug Grinder, but consistent reviews that it is a bit dead to ride, too heavy and made of cheapish parts is deterring me. I don't love the colour schemes either but could get past that.

Next up I could wait a while and order one of those Creme bikes from CRC. No idea whether they'd be any good and I'd ideally like a bike before May as the old one seems to be lost for good.

For a bit more I could get a Surly Steamroller and add some mudguards and different handlebars to the OTP version. But I've received some advice (namely from Tokyo Fixed Gear, who admittedly have a conflict of interest) that I'd be better off starting with a frame and customising things.

At the prices we'd then be looking at (£800 +) there are other custom options as well. Notably, I could get a Condor Tempo.

Now, these are things that I simply can't go and test drive. So I need advice. I've read several threads where people say "above £800, go custom". There's also a fair few criticising the ignorant (or their salespersons) who buy a Charge or a Langster, saying that these people deserve better advice.

Well think of me as such a person. Any advice at all would be appreciated.

I know posts like this aren't popular (hence my avatar) but I really have done everything that is typically suggested in response to a post like this.

I think people are missing the point. The Equality Bill is not some major piece of legislation targeted at introducing privileges for vegans and atheists.

It covers a wide range of personal characteristics, including personally held moral and ethical beliefs, and states that these should not (with exceptions) form the basis of discrimination, nor should they affect a person's ability to access services.

Are people who don't like this against the idea of equality generally (i.e. do they think having legislation to protect people against discrimination on such bases is a waste of time and that people should be able to discriminate against who they want on whatever basis they want)?

Or do they think that including secular ethical beliefs such as veganism or atheism should not have been included because only religious convictions are worthy of such protection?

I don't understand the anger here. The Equality Bill just sets out the terms on which people are to be treated equally despite differences (e.g. gender, disability, personal beliefs).

The prison food example is a particularly good one. Do those who think this is a nonsensical step really believe that a vegan prisoner should be forced to eat animal products or starve?

I am baffled at the anger here.

That respray looks amazing.

As for the comments above along the lines of:

"Basically I don't believe that the public, that commuters, people that don't know about bikes in depth or whatever else you should want to call them should be exploited (over-statement I know) and that manufacturers should build good bikes at all price points, and sale assistants should give better advise. I want a better world, where bicycle owners don't pay unnecessarily down the line."

... are helpful, there's quite a closed attitude to giving this advice to the people who need it. I've been reading through this site for days trying to get some insights like in this thread but it's not always easy to find.

You'd need protection if someone decided to discriminate you against you on the basis of being an atheist.

You'd need protection if you were sacked for refusing to go to a steakhouse for a client dinner because it was inconsistent with your beliefs.

I don't get why this is controversial. The protections aren't radical. It's juts about saying that people's freedom of thought and the right to determine the ethical basis on which they live their lives is not something that should itself form a basis for discriminating against them.

Hi, I'm in London. Basically I'm too lazy to use gears or maintain them but I'm pleased to be jumping on a bandwagon all the same.

I've been reading my way through the site and thought it was time to post something.