Given a chance will cyclists do the right thing?

johnboy said :

What about the huge numbers of people who ride bicycles without lycra?

Naked?

Dork said :

Typical post where the cyclists confirm that they believe their behavior is fine so long as no one gets hurt. It’s not speeding, so long as you don’t crash.
The logic just isn’t there.
One last thing, you’d be surprised how much damage a cyclist can do to someone, especially if they knock them down.

This might be a fair point if not coming from the source that it did. Assuming that you’re the same “Dork” who made comment# 215 here: http://the-riotact.com/jims-mowing-takes-a-red-hot-shot-at-taking-down-a-cyclist/76186/comment-page-8#comments, then I think that you should have a good, hard look at yourself.

In that post you admitted to an incident where you were riding a bike and ignoring the road rules by riding on a shared path at night without lights. You were offended by another cyclist giving you an earful for riding like a complete d***head and your justification (in your mangled English) was, …”even though I was going to hit them, nor were they going to hit me.”

To me that sounded like someone who believes that, “…their behaviour is fine so long as no one gets hurt…”, and who has no understanding of “…how much damage a cyclist can do to someone, especially if they knock them down”.

Dilandach said :

Are you new to this site?
http://the-riotact.com/the-mully-cup-for-february-2013-goes-to-the-baffling-bumblebee/96419#comments

And from JB himself: “It’s true, the mully judging panel prizes novelty, and takes a dim view of efforts to inflate the comment total to sway it.”

First thing, obviously the comment about turning up in a horsehead mask wearing a full suit and on a bike was far too subtle for you. Here’s something for you to hopefully get “Not serious. Not even close to the spirit of the Mully.” but let me know if it was still too subtle.

Secondly, you’d use a post from a lot further back than two weeks ago when trying to trot out that line. Another couple of fails for you to add to your pile I guess.

You must be very lonely. Hope things pick up for you.

This thread reminds me of Homer’s Odyssey.

Dilandach said :

Are you new to this site?
http://the-riotact.com/the-mully-cup-for-february-2013-goes-to-the-baffling-bumblebee/96419#comments

And from JB himself: “It’s true, the mully judging panel prizes novelty, and takes a dim view of efforts to inflate the comment total to sway it.”

First thing, obviously the comment about turning up in a horsehead mask wearing a full suit and on a bike was far too subtle for you. Here’s something for you to hopefully get “Not serious. Not even close to the spirit of the Mully.” but let me know if it was still too subtle.

Secondly, you’d use a post from a lot further back than two weeks ago when trying to trot out that line. Another couple of fails for you to add to your pile I guess.

The other issue for mully status is you yourself have contributed ~25% of the comments. There’s 2-post nutters, but you’re in a different league! Hahahaha!
I mean, with this last post of yours (#156) you’ve even moved on to arguing with yourself!! Hahahaha! Go you good thing!

Are you new to this site?
http://the-riotact.com/the-mully-cup-for-february-2013-goes-to-the-baffling-bumblebee/96419#comments

And from JB himself: “It’s true, the mully judging panel prizes novelty, and takes a dim view of efforts to inflate the comment total to sway it.”

First thing, obviously the comment about turning up in a horsehead mask wearing a full suit and on a bike was far too subtle for you. Here’s something for you to hopefully get “Not serious. Not even close to the spirit of the Mully.” but let me know if it was still too subtle.

Secondly, you’d use a post from a lot further back than two weeks ago when trying to trot out that line. Another couple of fails for you to add to your pile I guess.

Dilandach said :

Dilandach said :

Canberroid said :

Dilandach said :

Canberroid said :

Dilandach said :

G-Fresh said :

In summary, Dilandech, nobody agrees with you. You are dismissed.

Saying it doesn’t make it so 🙂

But it’s a rule! You have to follow it.

Waaa I don’t have any point to make so I’ll just insert this one here because I’ve run out of things to rage about waaa.

Actually my point was highly relevant. I accept your admission of defeat and congratulate you on your mully campaign success – combining ridiculous signage and cyclist bashing with some trolltastic selective replies and logic was a top notch effort.

Actually quite irrelevant. Defeat? Wishful thinking on your part.

Ask for the mully? Well I don’t want to count my mully before they’ve crashed.

Stupid auto correct. “as for the mully, I don’t want to count my mullys before they’ve crashed..”

Are you new to this site?
http://the-riotact.com/the-mully-cup-for-february-2013-goes-to-the-baffling-bumblebee/96419#comments

And from JB himself: “It’s true, the mully judging panel prizes novelty, and takes a dim view of efforts to inflate the comment total to sway it.”

chewy14 said :

This thread is straight to a mully with a bullet.

We can simply cut and paste the responses for the next car vs cyclist or speeding thread, they’ll pretty much be the same.

JB indicated very firmly, I recall, that anti-cyclist threads won’t qualify for the mully.

ooh, look, motorists also do the wrong thing

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/canberra-a-city-of-rat-runners-20130313-2fzsa.html

Lets face it, a large proportion of everyone thinks some rules dont apply to them/they can bend the rules/they are too skilled to follow the rules

johnboy said :

What about the huge numbers of people who ride bicycles without lycra?

Not committed enough.

Dilandach
How dare you question Canberra’s lycra clad community, they are all beyond reproach as can be seen by the comments. They can do no wrong- in fact most should be in Rome at present vying for the top job.

Dilandach said :

Canberroid said :

Dilandach said :

Canberroid said :

Dilandach said :

G-Fresh said :

In summary, Dilandech, nobody agrees with you. You are dismissed.

Saying it doesn’t make it so 🙂

But it’s a rule! You have to follow it.

Waaa I don’t have any point to make so I’ll just insert this one here because I’ve run out of things to rage about waaa.

Actually my point was highly relevant. I accept your admission of defeat and congratulate you on your mully campaign success – combining ridiculous signage and cyclist bashing with some trolltastic selective replies and logic was a top notch effort.

Actually quite irrelevant. Defeat? Wishful thinking on your part.

Ask for the mully? Well I don’t want to count my mully before they’ve crashed.

Stupid auto correct. “as for the mully, I don’t want to count my mullys before they’ve crashed..”

Canberroid said :

Dilandach said :

Canberroid said :

Dilandach said :

G-Fresh said :

In summary, Dilandech, nobody agrees with you. You are dismissed.

Saying it doesn’t make it so 🙂

But it’s a rule! You have to follow it.

Waaa I don’t have any point to make so I’ll just insert this one here because I’ve run out of things to rage about waaa.

Actually my point was highly relevant. I accept your admission of defeat and congratulate you on your mully campaign success – combining ridiculous signage and cyclist bashing with some trolltastic selective replies and logic was a top notch effort.

Actually quite irrelevant. Defeat? Wishful thinking on your part.

Ask for the mully? Well I don’t want to count my mully before they’ve crashed.

This thing has gone on for so long that i’ve actually run out of hate for the lycra brigade.

For the next half hour anyway, then i’ll be back on my bike so I assume it’ll be about 15.5 seconds before I see one of them and shout abuse at them due to their arrogance or negligence.

Dilandach said :

Canberroid said :

Dilandach said :

G-Fresh said :

In summary, Dilandech, nobody agrees with you. You are dismissed.

Saying it doesn’t make it so 🙂

But it’s a rule! You have to follow it.

Waaa I don’t have any point to make so I’ll just insert this one here because I’ve run out of things to rage about waaa.

Actually my point was highly relevant. I accept your admission of defeat and congratulate you on your mully campaign success – combining ridiculous signage and cyclist bashing with some trolltastic selective replies and logic was a top notch effort.

Dilandach said :

Jim Jones said :

No. I’m pretty happy with myself by and large.

How you going there?

Oh not too bad, bit hungry still after eating my apple. Hoping my bus turns up today unlike yesterday and ended up having to take the magical mystery bus tour with an alternative bus to get home. Looking forward to my walk home… but overall, not bad not bad.

You should have ridden a bike. You’d be home by now.

😉

Jim Jones said :

No. I’m pretty happy with myself by and large.

How you going there?

Oh not too bad, bit hungry still after eating my apple. Hoping my bus turns up today unlike yesterday and ended up having to take the magical mystery bus tour with an alternative bus to get home. Looking forward to my walk home… but overall, not bad not bad.

Dilandach said :

Jim Jones said :

Dilandach said :

Follow the rules! Nag nag nag.

Anyone who’s ever ridden a bike: “No … get f&^ked.”

All the angry fat people: “Cyclists are terrible people. Lycra-clad brigade … blah blah anecdote blah blah.”

You must have some pretty low self image if you need to try and paint others as sub human 😉

No. I’m pretty happy with myself by and large.

How you going there?

Canberroid said :

Dilandach said :

G-Fresh said :

In summary, Dilandech, nobody agrees with you. You are dismissed.

Saying it doesn’t make it so 🙂

But it’s a rule! You have to follow it.

Waaa I don’t have any point to make so I’ll just insert this one here because I’ve run out of things to rage about waaa.

DrKoresh said :

This whole thread is ludicrous and Dilandach has exposed himself as a total bore, but at least he’s succeeded in drawing a few knobs like you out of the wood-work.

Maybe I was just going to turn up to a Mully signing wearing a full suit, a horse mask and sitting on a bike? 😉

Jim Jones said :

Dilandach said :

Follow the rules! Nag nag nag.

Anyone who’s ever ridden a bike: “No … get f&^ked.”

All the angry fat people: “Cyclists are terrible people. Lycra-clad brigade … blah blah anecdote blah blah.”

You must have some pretty low self image if you need to try and paint others as sub human 😉

Dilandach said :

G-Fresh said :

In summary, Dilandech, nobody agrees with you. You are dismissed.

Saying it doesn’t make it so 🙂

But it’s a rule! You have to follow it.

What is the fascination with cyclists on RA that invokes a gazillion responses? FFS just get off ya bike!

tim_c said :

The other side of the “dismount” sign? No, but not being your typical Canberra motorist, I don’t have a rubberneck to look back and read the signs facing traffic going the other direction to see if I’m leaving the “dismount” zone yet. And I shouldn’t have to if the event organisers who arranged the signs actually thought about what they were doing (the same goes for roadworkers failing to post “End Roadworks” signage).

If you were riding too hard and fast to stop and turn your head then I think it’s an extremely good indication you probably .should have got off your bike and walked through the area. As for your scenario of:

tim_c said :

Oops, I just walked my bike into a small child because I was looking over my shoulder to read the back of a sign which I thought might have been the other end of the “dismount” zone

If your life is so busy that you can’t spare 3 seconds to stop moving and read a sign and you walk your bike into a child then maybe you shouldn’t be wasting time at social events, and maybe you should drive car to save time. This whole thread is ludicrous and Dilandach has exposed himself as a total bore, but at least he’s succeeded in drawing a few knobs like you out of the wood-work.

Dilandach said :

Follow the rules! Nag nag nag.

Anyone who’s ever ridden a bike: “No … get f&^ked.”

All the angry fat people: “Cyclists are terrible people. Lycra-clad brigade … blah blah anecdote blah blah.”

Barcham said :

Grimm said :

I would absolutely love to have seen pedestrians 6 abreast, blocking the cyclists and just dawdling along, refusing to move. Now that would have been priceless.

To be fair, that happens nearly constantly everywhere that cyclists go.

To be fair, “constantly everywhere” generally means pedestrian dominated places like Civic and Braddon, doesn’t it? I don’t really give a stuff if people want to cycle through town or the interchange but when they do they give up any right to bitch about people being in their way.

Dilandach said :

Girt_Hindrance said :

Dilandach said :

Canberroid said :

that decision was wrong. The fact that the signs are directed at cyclists is irrelevant really.

So I’m curious, why do you think it was wrong to place the signs there? Regardless of your opinion they were placed there and it was entirely relevant that they were directed at cyclists… they were the only target of the sign.

Do you think the same logic being applied should be extended to drivers / cars? Rules that they don’t necessarily agree with should be ignored and not followed? Doesn’t it annoy you when drivers do it when dealing with cyclists on the road?

Hey, hey- I’ll quote you- ” But again, this thread was about cyclists not following directions not drivers / cars.”
How come you can bring that stuff in if it suits you, yet you disregard it if others do?

Because the difference is in the logic that is being applied to ‘following rules/guidelines/laws’ rather than taking specific examples regarding “that one time someone honked at me” / “cyclist punched my window for no reason” which then inevitably goes completely off the rails on what the thread was regarding.

Haha, that was as funny and one-sided an answer as I expected.
Anyway, I’ve got to go now, I’ve got friends to meet.

G-Fresh said :

In summary, Dilandech, nobody agrees with you. You are dismissed.

Saying it doesn’t make it so 🙂

tim_c said :

Dilandach said :

tim_c said :

Thirdly, the signage is inadequate – where was the sign saying that cyclists could remount? Without such signage, it is up to the cyclists discretion.

Is it really such a mind bender that if there are signs on two ends that you’d be able to re-mount once getting to the other side?

The other side of the “dismount” sign? No, but not being your typical Canberra motorist, I don’t have a rubberneck to look back and read the signs facing traffic going the other direction to see if I’m leaving the “dismount” zone yet. And I shouldn’t have to if the event organisers who arranged the signs actually thought about what they were doing (the same goes for roadworkers failing to post “End Roadworks” signage). Oops, I just walked my bike into a small child because I was looking over my shoulder to read the back of a sign which I thought might have been the other end of the “dismount” zone, but then again, it could have just been a repeater sign reminding people coming the other way that they’re still in the “dismount” zone.

As I said – you’re very selective about what you respond to. Should I assume you just dismiss (or fail to understand) the rest?

Unless you wear a full batman outfit (Michael Keaton or Christian Bale), you don’t need much more than a casual look down as you walk your bike past. If you’re that situationally unaware that a casual glance to the side causes you to walk your bike into people, then for the love of deities everywhere, dont ride a bike.

Even if you had the physical restrictions of Christopher Reeve, commonsense-man would alert you to the fact that at a point where the fences and people end there is road where no one is walking and no signs/directives/traffic control signs are present.

Alderney said :

More may have been achieved if it read ‘event in progress cyclists please dismount’.

So you’re saying that if a sign/rule/law doesn’t have ‘please’ in it then its fair game to be disregarded or put down to discretion on being followed or not?

Dilandach said :

tim_c said :

Thirdly, the signage is inadequate – where was the sign saying that cyclists could remount? Without such signage, it is up to the cyclists discretion.

Is it really such a mind bender that if there are signs on two ends that you’d be able to re-mount once getting to the other side?

The other side of the “dismount” sign? No, but not being your typical Canberra motorist, I don’t have a rubberneck to look back and read the signs facing traffic going the other direction to see if I’m leaving the “dismount” zone yet. And I shouldn’t have to if the event organisers who arranged the signs actually thought about what they were doing (the same goes for roadworkers failing to post “End Roadworks” signage). Oops, I just walked my bike into a small child because I was looking over my shoulder to read the back of a sign which I thought might have been the other end of the “dismount” zone, but then again, it could have just been a repeater sign reminding people coming the other way that they’re still in the “dismount” zone.

As I said – you’re very selective about what you respond to. Should I assume you just dismiss (or fail to understand) the rest?

Girt_Hindrance said :

Dilandach said :

Canberroid said :

that decision was wrong. The fact that the signs are directed at cyclists is irrelevant really.

So I’m curious, why do you think it was wrong to place the signs there? Regardless of your opinion they were placed there and it was entirely relevant that they were directed at cyclists… they were the only target of the sign.

Do you think the same logic being applied should be extended to drivers / cars? Rules that they don’t necessarily agree with should be ignored and not followed? Doesn’t it annoy you when drivers do it when dealing with cyclists on the road?

Hey, hey- I’ll quote you- ” But again, this thread was about cyclists not following directions not drivers / cars.”
How come you can bring that stuff in if it suits you, yet you disregard it if others do?

Because the difference is in the logic that is being applied to ‘following rules/guidelines/laws’ rather than taking specific examples regarding “that one time someone honked at me” / “cyclist punched my window for no reason” which then inevitably goes completely off the rails on what the thread was regarding.

Girt_Hindrance said :

Dilandach said :

Canberroid said :

that decision was wrong. The fact that the signs are directed at cyclists is irrelevant really.

So I’m curious, why do you think it was wrong to place the signs there? Regardless of your opinion they were placed there and it was entirely relevant that they were directed at cyclists… they were the only target of the sign.

Do you think the same logic being applied should be extended to drivers / cars? Rules that they don’t necessarily agree with should be ignored and not followed? Doesn’t it annoy you when drivers do it when dealing with cyclists on the road?

Hey, hey- I’ll quote you- ” But again, this thread was about cyclists not following directions not drivers / cars.”
How come you can bring that stuff in if it suits you, yet you disregard it if others do?

In summary, Dilandech, nobody agrees with you. You are dismissed.

Dilandach said :

Canberroid said :

that decision was wrong. The fact that the signs are directed at cyclists is irrelevant really.

So I’m curious, why do you think it was wrong to place the signs there? Regardless of your opinion they were placed there and it was entirely relevant that they were directed at cyclists… they were the only target of the sign.

Do you think the same logic being applied should be extended to drivers / cars? Rules that they don’t necessarily agree with should be ignored and not followed? Doesn’t it annoy you when drivers do it when dealing with cyclists on the road?

Hey, hey- I’ll quote you- ” But again, this thread was about cyclists not following directions not drivers / cars.”
How come you can bring that stuff in if it suits you, yet you disregard it if others do?

Canberroid said :

that decision was wrong. The fact that the signs are directed at cyclists is irrelevant really.

So I’m curious, why do you think it was wrong to place the signs there? Regardless of your opinion they were placed there and it was entirely relevant that they were directed at cyclists… they were the only target of the sign.

Do you think the same logic being applied should be extended to drivers / cars? Rules that they don’t necessarily agree with should be ignored and not followed? Doesn’t it annoy you when drivers do it when dealing with cyclists on the road?

So, when you say ‘given a chance will cyclists do the right thing’. Are you using ‘right’ as an adjective or a noun? Believe it or not it does makes a difference to the way you are putting the question and to the way oterhs view it.

Suffice to say, I am on the side of the argument which accepts the sign is advisory only and has no basis in law, therefore it is up to the discretion of each individual cyclist to make a judgement as to comply or not.

More may have been achieved if it read ‘event in progress cyclists please dismount’.

Dilandach said :

Canberroid said :

You still haven’t grasped the fact that some “rules” deserve to be ignored.

An interesting statement. The sign absolutely passed the commonsense test. There was a conscious decision somewhere within the planning of the event that there would have to be signs placed, how many signs, where to place them and what time they should be placed and taken away again.

They weren’t put up just for the hell of it.

Urg- not sure why I’m bothering but I’m bored so…
The signs were put up to point liability elsewhere from the organisers of the event, if something were to happen. That’s it.
No one was hurt, you witnessed the majority of cyclists acting in accordance with the sign, yet the majority of your sweeping statements are directed at the entire cycling community. You have noted that no one went blazing through on their bicycles, so we can assume that those that didn’t dismount rode through at a sedate pace.
In the eyes of the organisers, that’s a win.

Dilandach said :

Canberroid said :

You still haven’t grasped the fact that some “rules” deserve to be ignored.

An interesting statement. The sign absolutely passed the commonsense test. There was a conscious decision somewhere within the planning of the event that there would have to be signs placed, how many signs, where to place them and what time they should be placed and taken away again.

They weren’t put up just for the hell of it.

I think this partly explains why this thread has hit page five already, and the best option is to agree to disagree and move on.

I’m sure there was a conscious decision made somewhere within the planning of the event for these signs, but plenty of people here including myself think that decision was wrong. The fact that the signs are directed at cyclists is irrelevant really.

Canberroid said :

You still haven’t grasped the fact that some “rules” deserve to be ignored.

An interesting statement. The sign absolutely passed the commonsense test. There was a conscious decision somewhere within the planning of the event that there would have to be signs placed, how many signs, where to place them and what time they should be placed and taken away again.

They weren’t put up just for the hell of it.

Dilandach said :

Jim Jones said :

And now it deteriorates into handbags at 10 paces … love it!

Very disappointing really. At the same time not surprising. A simple premise and pointing out those that just plain refuse to follow the rules or push their interpretation of those rules despite the majority doing the right thing contains endless strings of insults and general immaturity.

Not to mention a distinct lack of understanding of the term ‘troll’. It isn’t a catchall for things you don’t like / agree with. Its like when your parents use the cool kid terms, it just ends up with cringing.

Now you are in for a finger-wagging from the Grammar Naz ….oh, hang on. Nope, scratch that.

Dilandach said :

Jim Jones said :

And now it deteriorates into handbags at 10 paces … love it!

Very disappointing really. At the same time not surprising. A simple premise and pointing out those that just plain refuse to follow the rules or push their interpretation of those rules despite the majority doing the right thing contains endless strings of insults and general immaturity.

You still haven’t grasped the fact that some “rules” deserve to be ignored. I’m all for mandatory helmets and taking the bike away from any cyclist that runs a red light. This sign doesn’t pass the commonsense test, particularly to anyone that can competently ride a bike at low speed and who rides with cleats.

Aeek said :

Dilandach said :

or push their interpretation of those rules

Every time a motorist has totally lost it verbally re my cycling, I have been doing the right thing, just it didn’t fit their misunderstanding of the road rules.

That may or may not have been the case. Without knowing or witnessing the exact situation, who knows? But again, this thread was about cyclists not following directions not drivers / cars.

Grimm said :

I would absolutely love to have seen pedestrians 6 abreast, blocking the cyclists and just dawdling along, refusing to move. Now that would have been priceless.

To be fair, that happens nearly constantly everywhere that cyclists go.

Aeek said :

Every time a motorist has totally lost it verbally re my cycling, I have been doing the right thing, just it didn’t fit their misunderstanding of the road rules.

Try not being an inconsiderate tool then. Just because it’s not illegal doesn’t mean you aren’t being a nuisance, and a complete dick.

Dilandach said :

or push their interpretation of those rules

Every time a motorist has totally lost it verbally re my cycling, I have been doing the right thing, just it didn’t fit their misunderstanding of the road rules.

troll-sniffer said :

I wonder if I put a sign at this mob’s next event that said pompously “Event in Progress. Pedestrians Hop on One Leg”, how many of these apparently pliant bipedal folk would comply?

Idiots.

I wonder what cyclists will do next time they have one of their little races and I choose to ignore the road closures and safety cars. Surely if I don’t kill anybody, it shouldn’t be a problem, right?

I would absolutely love to have seen pedestrians 6 abreast, blocking the cyclists and just dawdling along, refusing to move. Now that would have been priceless.

Jim Jones said :

And now it deteriorates into handbags at 10 paces … love it!

Very disappointing really. At the same time not surprising. A simple premise and pointing out those that just plain refuse to follow the rules or push their interpretation of those rules despite the majority doing the right thing contains endless strings of insults and general immaturity.

Not to mention a distinct lack of understanding of the term ‘troll’. It isn’t a catchall for things you don’t like / agree with. Its like when your parents use the cool kid terms, it just ends up with cringing.

OpenYourMind said :

Here’s a photo of me at one of these community events after Dilandach wagged his finger at me for ignoring a yellow sign: http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://i56.tinypic.com/30ldvgn.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.onesixthwarriors.com/forum/sixth-scale-action-figure-news-reviews-discussion/536897-new-3r-adolf-hitler-1940-1945-a-6.html&h=600&w=800&sz=58&tbnid=7gjHCwffxSHq_M:&tbnh=90&tbnw=120&zoom=1&usg=__hQ09sbX3TdA8K7yl5pjoutWOiLU=&docid=DiA8wXfJzwqLIM&sa=X&ei=lc0_UZrBGMjmmAXzhICgDQ&ved=0CDkQ9QEwAg&dur=175

While I’m impressed you found a picture of Hitler on a bike, I guess that means we’re Hitler buddies then? Whilst I may be being personified as being Hitler within the thread I don’t think I’d be keen enough to goose step (or ride) my way around canberra 😉

ah, nothing gets a post going than a cyclist vs non-cyclist war…

And now it deteriorates into handbags at 10 paces … love it!

tim_c said :

Even then, it probably wouldn’t be enforceable in ACT as it would contradict existing road rules which allow cyclists to ride in pedestrian and shared areas (other than within 10m of a shop open for trading, and on a pedestrian crossing).

That road rule amendment has been dropped. Instead they have declared ALL footpaths to be shared paths. Same effect though, apart from no more open shop exclusion.

It’s ironic that responsible cyclists need to analyse the road rules much deeper than those who have allegdely been tested. As in “vehicle without indicators” includes bicycle.

109 points to Dilandach for an outstanding troll.

Here’s a photo of me at one of these community events after Dilandach wagged his finger at me for ignoring a yellow sign: http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://i56.tinypic.com/30ldvgn.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.onesixthwarriors.com/forum/sixth-scale-action-figure-news-reviews-discussion/536897-new-3r-adolf-hitler-1940-1945-a-6.html&h=600&w=800&sz=58&tbnid=7gjHCwffxSHq_M:&tbnh=90&tbnw=120&zoom=1&usg=__hQ09sbX3TdA8K7yl5pjoutWOiLU=&docid=DiA8wXfJzwqLIM&sa=X&ei=lc0_UZrBGMjmmAXzhICgDQ&ved=0CDkQ9QEwAg&dur=175

tonkatuff82 said :

Dilandach said :

tonkatuff82 said :

So what happens when cyclists do something wrong and they’re called on it? Apparently you literally become Hitler.

And that’s where you lost the internet

Not even close.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

I’m calling “Troll”. Well-played, you complete pecker

Oh my, Godwin’s law. How on earth did you find that? I’m sure you’re the first person to ever! Yep let’s wrap this up, the link is just irrefutable.

Swing and a miss… oh and name calling, you can do better.

This thread is straight to a mully with a bullet.

We can simply cut and paste the responses for the next car vs cyclist or speeding thread, they’ll pretty much be the same.

Dilandach said :

tonkatuff82 said :

So what happens when cyclists do something wrong and they’re called on it? Apparently you literally become Hitler.

And that’s where you lost the internet

Not even close.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

I’m calling “Troll”. Well-played, you complete pecker

tonkatuff82 said :

So what happens when cyclists do something wrong and they’re called on it? Apparently you literally become Hitler.

And that’s where you lost the internet

Not even close.

So what happens when cyclists do something wrong and they’re called on it? Apparently you literally become Hitler.

And that’s where you lost the internet

Dilandach said :

tonkatuff82 said :

Dilandach said :

KB1971 said :

But the riders were courteous. Just because they “disobeyed” and a sign that was not law doesn’t mean they were not courteous.

Wouldn’t follow a simple direction and there’s been nothing but excuses on why it shouldn’t be followed.

When did David Eastman get internet privileges?

Not that I know or even care to know who that is. I’m sure it was witty and perhaps ‘edgy’.

The reactions go part way to show that in any section there are a subsection of those that attempt to justify why rules don’t apply to them. Whether it is not wearing helmets, why its ‘safer’ for a cyclist to run a red light, not wearing hi-vis gear / lights on a the bike whilst riding at night or in this case a simple sign with a simple request. There are just excuses after excuses on why.

“cars were parked illegally!” (What that has to do with the subject at hand I’m not sure)
“can’t walk in the shoes”
“it was only a suggestion”
“no one got hurt”

A simple direction that was far too much for some to handle. There were others that were able to dismount and follow directions, others… well its a shame that they are only demand following the letter of the law when it comes to pedestrians or drivers and pull out Regulations in an attempt to strengthen and prove their point.

The only difference between this and other threads is that it was primarily cyclists doing the wrong thing, there were no drivers involved. There are already plenty of threads from cyclists doing the whole “oh won’t somebody think of the children! (on bikes)” when it comes to drivers and sometimes pedestrians.

So what happens when cyclists do something wrong and they’re called on it? Apparently you literally become Hitler.

“Mein Kampf mit Radfahrern” – Dilandach

tim_c said :

Thirdly, the signage is inadequate – where was the sign saying that cyclists could remount? Without such signage, it is up to the cyclists discretion.

Is it really such a mind bender that if there are signs on two ends that you’d be able to re-mount once getting to the other side?

G-Fresh said :

get a life

Glad you saw fit to give your mature contribution, don’t know if the discussion could have done with out it. Keep up the good work.

Dilandach said :

The reactions go part way to show that in any section there are a subsection of those that attempt to justify why rules don’t apply to them. Whether it is not wearing helmets, why its ‘safer’ for a cyclist to run a red light, not wearing hi-vis gear / lights on a the bike whilst riding at night or in this case a simple sign with a simple request. There are just excuses after excuses on why.

“cars were parked illegally!” (What that has to do with the subject at hand I’m not sure)
“can’t walk in the shoes”
“it was only a suggestion”
“no one got hurt”

A simple direction that was far too much for some to handle. There were others that were able to dismount and follow directions, others… well its a shame that they are only demand following the letter of the law when it comes to pedestrians or drivers and pull out Regulations in an attempt to strengthen and prove their point.

The only difference between this and other threads is that it was primarily cyclists doing the wrong thing, there were no drivers involved. There are already plenty of threads from cyclists doing the whole “oh won’t somebody think of the children! (on bikes)” when it comes to drivers and sometimes pedestrians.

So what happens when cyclists do something wrong and they’re called on it? Apparently you literally become Hitler.

First of all, your original post asked for reasons why some didn’t (or wouldn’t) dismount – what would you expect other than a bunch of reasons (or excuses as you call them)?

Secondly, you’ve been very selective in the ‘reasons’ you’ve remembered, and you seem to have ignored comments that indicate there was no legal requirement to dismount. Black text on a yellow background means advisory or cautionary signage. If it were black text on a white background, it would be mandatory. Even then, it probably wouldn’t be enforceable in ACT as it would contradict existing road rules which allow cyclists to ride in pedestrian and shared areas (other than within 10m of a shop open for trading, and on a pedestrian crossing).

Thirdly, the signage is inadequate – where was the sign saying that cyclists could remount? Without such signage, it is up to the cyclists discretion.

Fourth, opting not to follow the suggestions of a cautionary/advisory sign in no way implies that same person would disobey mandatory rules such as wearing helmets, stopping at red lights and/or using lights whilst riding at night. I wasn’t there, but I would probably not have dismounted because it was only an advisory/cautionary sign that has no legal basis, but I do always wear a helmet, stop at red lights (and not just to film all the people driving their cars through after the light has changed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ui65_higKk4), and I always use lights after sunset – because these things are mandatory.

Dilandach said :

tonkatuff82 said :

Dilandach said :

KB1971 said :

But the riders were courteous. Just because they “disobeyed” and a sign that was not law doesn’t mean they were not courteous.

Wouldn’t follow a simple direction and there’s been nothing but excuses on why it shouldn’t be followed.

When did David Eastman get internet privileges?

Not that I know or even care to know who that is. I’m sure it was witty and perhaps ‘edgy’.

The reactions go part way to show that in any section there are a subsection of those that attempt to justify why rules don’t apply to them. Whether it is not wearing helmets, why its ‘safer’ for a cyclist to run a red light, not wearing hi-vis gear / lights on a the bike whilst riding at night or in this case a simple sign with a simple request. There are just excuses after excuses on why.

“cars were parked illegally!” (What that has to do with the subject at hand I’m not sure)
“can’t walk in the shoes”
“it was only a suggestion”
“no one got hurt”

A simple direction that was far too much for some to handle. There were others that were able to dismount and follow directions, others… well its a shame that they are only demand following the letter of the law when it comes to pedestrians or drivers and pull out Regulations in an attempt to strengthen and prove their point.

The only difference between this and other threads is that it was primarily cyclists doing the wrong thing, there were no drivers involved. There are already plenty of threads from cyclists doing the whole “oh won’t somebody think of the children! (on bikes)” when it comes to drivers and sometimes pedestrians.

So what happens when cyclists do something wrong and they’re called on it? Apparently you literally become Hitler.

get a life

troll-sniffer said :

I wonder if I put a sign at this mob’s next event that said pompously “Event in Progress. Pedestrians Hop on One Leg”, how many of these apparently pliant bipedal folk would comply?

Idiots.

Except there is no purpose behind that. Attempting to create justification for not following what was a really simple request of people by using nonsensical examples just reflects poorly on your position.

I wonder if I put a sign at this mob’s next event that said pompously “Event in Progress. Pedestrians Hop on One Leg”, how many of these apparently pliant bipedal folk would comply?

Idiots.

tonkatuff82 said :

Dilandach said :

KB1971 said :

But the riders were courteous. Just because they “disobeyed” and a sign that was not law doesn’t mean they were not courteous.

Wouldn’t follow a simple direction and there’s been nothing but excuses on why it shouldn’t be followed.

When did David Eastman get internet privileges?

Not that I know or even care to know who that is. I’m sure it was witty and perhaps ‘edgy’.

The reactions go part way to show that in any section there are a subsection of those that attempt to justify why rules don’t apply to them. Whether it is not wearing helmets, why its ‘safer’ for a cyclist to run a red light, not wearing hi-vis gear / lights on a the bike whilst riding at night or in this case a simple sign with a simple request. There are just excuses after excuses on why.

“cars were parked illegally!” (What that has to do with the subject at hand I’m not sure)
“can’t walk in the shoes”
“it was only a suggestion”
“no one got hurt”

A simple direction that was far too much for some to handle. There were others that were able to dismount and follow directions, others… well its a shame that they are only demand following the letter of the law when it comes to pedestrians or drivers and pull out Regulations in an attempt to strengthen and prove their point.

The only difference between this and other threads is that it was primarily cyclists doing the wrong thing, there were no drivers involved. There are already plenty of threads from cyclists doing the whole “oh won’t somebody think of the children! (on bikes)” when it comes to drivers and sometimes pedestrians.

So what happens when cyclists do something wrong and they’re called on it? Apparently you literally become Hitler.

OpenYourMind said :

We are lobbying to get the pedestrian crossing law changed too, because it is equally silly. A more appropriate law would be for cyclists to slow down to a set speed limit approaching crossings. Dismounting is counter-intuitive and the majority of riders (lycra clad and otherwise) simply disobey the rule because it makes no sense.

Surely it would make more sense to revert it back to what it used to say: a cyclist riding across a pedestrian crossing must give way to all traffic and pedestrians – surely this would be more workable and easier to administer than a set speed limit.

Dilandach said :

Wouldn’t follow a simple direction and there’s been nothing but excuses on why it shouldn’t be followed.

What else did you really expect when you ended your original post with A lot of people were dismounting, why weren’t you?

Dilandach said :

KB1971 said :

But the riders were courteous. Just because they “disobeyed” and a sign that was not law doesn’t mean they were not courteous.

Wouldn’t follow a simple direction and there’s been nothing but excuses on why it shouldn’t be followed.

When did David Eastman get internet privileges?

IrishPete said :

Jono said :

What you’ve shown is that a percentage of cyclists are inconsiderate. I think that we all knew that. It’s likely to be a similar number to the percentage of motorcyclists/pedestrians/motorists who are similarly inconsiderate. For evidence of the latter, just have a look at the thread about motorists getting booked for parking illegally at the cricket at Manuka recently, and the whining and arrogance of the complaints that went on there.

And I know that it’s been raised, but if I was approaching, on a bike or on foot, from the Commonwealth Avenue end, and I saw the sign as it was placed in the first and final photos, I would consider it quite a normal interpretation that bikes were not to be ridden in the normally shared pedestrian/cyclist area to the left, but riding them in the vehicular area to the right was OK (ie where the cyclists are in both of those photos).

Daft. Clearly a solid barrier of signs should have been put across the path, so cyclists had to dismount to get past them, or ride over them. No, that would just have been treated as a challenege to the guy riding in stillettos too tall to walk in…

IP

A real cyclist would bunny hop such signs. That’s the trouble with the lycra brigade, they’re such a bunch of pussies.

Jono said :

What you’ve shown is that a percentage of cyclists are inconsiderate. I think that we all knew that. It’s likely to be a similar number to the percentage of motorcyclists/pedestrians/motorists who are similarly inconsiderate. For evidence of the latter, just have a look at the thread about motorists getting booked for parking illegally at the cricket at Manuka recently, and the whining and arrogance of the complaints that went on there.

And I know that it’s been raised, but if I was approaching, on a bike or on foot, from the Commonwealth Avenue end, and I saw the sign as it was placed in the first and final photos, I would consider it quite a normal interpretation that bikes were not to be ridden in the normally shared pedestrian/cyclist area to the left, but riding them in the vehicular area to the right was OK (ie where the cyclists are in both of those photos).

Daft. Clearly a solid barrier of signs should have been put across the path, so cyclists had to dismount to get past them, or ride over them. No, that would just have been treated as a challenege to the guy riding in stillettos too tall to walk in…

IP

Aeek said :

Masquara said :

Aeek said :

Is the Cyclists Dismount sign still on the gravel section of the path to Weston?

You wear “road shoes that won’t let you walk” for a leisurely cycle at low speed through a park full of people, rather than “only in the velodrome or during a road race”? Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

Reading what someone writes is beyond you? The Weston path accesses Stromlo and the cycling roads out there.

Umm, Masqy (can I call you Masqy?) The pedals have little clips for shoes. For the bike shoes. Not all shoes have the corresponding clips. Hope that helps.

Typical post where the cyclists confirm that they believe their behavior is fine so long as no one gets hurt. It’s not speeding, so long as you don’t crash.
The logic just isn’t there.
One last thing, you’d be surprised how much damage a cyclist can do to someone, especially if they knock them down.

chewy14 said :

OpenYourMind said :

There is another strong possibility in all this nonsense. Perhaps Dilandach had realised just how incredibly sexy these lycra clad yellow sign ignoring outlaws are and he/she just wanted to cop a better perve.

Anyone that’s seen the majority of Canberra’s lycra brigade wouldn’t be asserting their ‘sexiness’. Well unless you were in to overweight 50 year olds squeezed into outfits two sizes too small that is.

It will only get worse over time … the procession of paunches down Northbourne very much belies any pretence that the wearers are committed cyclists.

OpenYourMind said :

There is another strong possibility in all this nonsense. Perhaps Dilandach had realised just how incredibly sexy these lycra clad yellow sign ignoring outlaws are and he/she just wanted to cop a better perve.

Anyone that’s seen the majority of Canberra’s lycra brigade wouldn’t be asserting their ‘sexiness’. Well unless you were in to overweight 50 year olds squeezed into outfits two sizes too small that is.

What you’ve shown is that a percentage of cyclists are inconsiderate. I think that we all knew that. It’s likely to be a similar number to the percentage of motorcyclists/pedestrians/motorists who are similarly inconsiderate. For evidence of the latter, just have a look at the thread about motorists getting booked for parking illegally at the cricket at Manuka recently, and the whining and arrogance of the complaints that went on there.

And I know that it’s been raised, but if I was approaching, on a bike or on foot, from the Commonwealth Avenue end, and I saw the sign as it was placed in the first and final photos, I would consider it quite a normal interpretation that bikes were not to be ridden in the normally shared pedestrian/cyclist area to the left, but riding them in the vehicular area to the right was OK (ie where the cyclists are in both of those photos).

Aeek said :

Walking I was likely to slip and hurt myself, my bike, or others. Then the liability would lay whoever was responsible with the sign, but I’d rather avoid the danger in the first place.

Surely it’s the fault of the cretin who wore shoes that can’t be walked in?

OpenYourMind said :

There is another strong possibility in all this nonsense. Perhaps Dilandach had realised just how incredibly sexy these lycra clad yellow sign ignoring outlaws are and he/she just wanted to cop a better perve.

They way you constantly assert the sexiness of the lycra brigade makes me start to think you are some kind of Elephant Man desperately trying to escape the prison of isolation your hideousness engenders.

There is another strong possibility in all this nonsense. Perhaps Dilandach had realised just how incredibly sexy these lycra clad yellow sign ignoring outlaws are and he/she just wanted to cop a better perve.

Cyclists have the right to enjoy carrot sticks, fireworks, orange juice, portable bicycle tyre inflation stands and gluten-free treats. Hooray!

IMO, from the first pic I would have thought they were talking about when riding to the left of the sign. However, the sign on the other side (second pic) is more clear cut.
But, if the road was closed to cars along its whole length (and potentially covered with pedestrians), should they have stopped cycling along the whole road anyway? Were they saying there was a bit more room to swerve pedestrians etc either side, so that was ok, but it was a bit too narrow along that stretch? If so, who decides what is the width limit?

IrishPete said :

It would be interesting to see the response if one of the dogs, also there against advice, had chased a cyclist, or wrapped its leash around the bike. I wonder what discussion would be being had here in that instance?

If the cyclists think that running into a child will only result in a fright or a few bruises, then they’re kidding themselves (no pun intended). If you can’t get your feet out of the clips to dismount, then you’re going to fall on the child at least. And why would you cycle to an event like this without shoes you can walk in – were the ice cream sellers doing Drive-Through (Ride-Through)? Did you not notice that it was Canberra’s 100th birthday?

Feel free to ignore advisory signs (which probably did have the force of law – the event organisers were probably the ACT Government and NCA, and you can’t just get those kind of signs in Go-Lo), but don’t whinge when someone else breaks a law (or an advisory sign) that puts cyclists at risk. No really, don’t, because I’ll just post a link back to this thread.

IP

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh2sWSVRrmo

Dilandach said :

KB1971 said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Wow L2INTERWEBS PEEPS

Grade z troll by dilandach. Ignore the trolls people.

Yeah, I was sucked right in…….that is the problem with having a passion in life, you love to defend it to the death.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Wow L2INTERWEBS PEEPS

Grade z troll by dilandach. Ignore the trolls people.

Its a shallow way out, “zomg something I don’t like, troll herp derp”.

Some people obeyed the sign and I applaud them for it. Now why do you think *they* did?

As I’ve said, it was a simple request of cyclists but there was that sub section that just thought “nah, not gonna.”

What exactly is your agenda? All I see is a horrid troll. How about you explain why you are acting like a baby? If you saw some idiot flying through the crowds at full speed you may have a case. Seeing as you never mentioned that then its clear either a troll or someone with some dumb agenda.

Also, those signs are nothing more than advisory. Just like some of the ridic road signs saying to go 15 kms around a easy corner. It’s not against the law to not do as they say.
Disclaimer: I have not ridden a bike since I was a teenager. I have no agenda in this. In fact me and my family offer walk around the lake with no issue from bike riders. I guess I just have some common sense and no sense of self entitled a-hole.

patrick_keogh said :

Aeek said :

Is the Cyclists Dismount sign still on the gravel section of the path to Weston?

Yes it as, and there is no corresponding “Cyclists may remount” sign so if we were not all scofflaws then it would be a twenty kilometre walk home from there for me.

Does that imply Dismount, Walk 1 step, Remount is the intended result ?

IrishPete said :

Feel free to ignore advisory signs (which probably did have the force of law – the event organisers were probably the ACT Government and NCA, and you can’t just get those kind of signs in Go-Lo), but don’t whinge when someone else breaks a law (or an advisory sign) that puts cyclists at risk. No really, don’t, because I’ll just post a link back to this thread.

IP

Touche *accent on the e*

KB1971 said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Wow L2INTERWEBS PEEPS

Grade z troll by dilandach. Ignore the trolls people.

Yeah, I was sucked right in…….that is the problem with having a passion in life, you love to defend it to the death.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Wow L2INTERWEBS PEEPS

Grade z troll by dilandach. Ignore the trolls people.

Its a shallow way out, “zomg something I don’t like, troll herp derp”.

Some people obeyed the sign and I applaud them for it. Now why do you think *they* did?

As I’ve said, it was a simple request of cyclists but there was that sub section that just thought “nah, not gonna.”

KB1971 said :

Dilandach said :

KB1971 said :

But the riders were courteous. Just because they “disobeyed” and a sign that was not law doesn’t mean they were not courteous.

Wouldn’t follow a simple direction and there’s been nothing but excuses on why it shouldn’t be followed.

Well, the proof is in the pudding.

You say its dangerous and uncourteous but experience of the day says different. In the whole 5km circuit of the lake there was not one reported incident.

Would have been any different without the sign? I doubt it (I didn’t see a similar sign on the north side of the lake).

No one has piped up on here and said that they were nearly run over, quite the opposite really from the few that have said they had no issues.

Others that are having a go at cyclists are just jumping on the anti cyclist bandwagon, not actually sharing their experiences on the day.

Anyway, I am out now, you have sucked me into the troll enough.

The sign was there and disregarded, simple as that. It didn’t say “Event in Progress Cyclists have an option to dismount or not”. No excuse for it.

It would be interesting to see the response if one of the dogs, also there against advice, had chased a cyclist, or wrapped its leash around the bike. I wonder what discussion would be being had here in that instance?

If the cyclists think that running into a child will only result in a fright or a few bruises, then they’re kidding themselves (no pun intended). If you can’t get your feet out of the clips to dismount, then you’re going to fall on the child at least. And why would you cycle to an event like this without shoes you can walk in – were the ice cream sellers doing Drive-Through (Ride-Through)? Did you not notice that it was Canberra’s 100th birthday?

Feel free to ignore advisory signs (which probably did have the force of law – the event organisers were probably the ACT Government and NCA, and you can’t just get those kind of signs in Go-Lo), but don’t whinge when someone else breaks a law (or an advisory sign) that puts cyclists at risk. No really, don’t, because I’ll just post a link back to this thread.

IP

I’m a cyclist – out of my way!

Masquara said :

Aeek said :

Is the Cyclists Dismount sign still on the gravel section of the path to Weston?

You wear “road shoes that won’t let you walk” for a leisurely cycle at low speed through a park full of people, rather than “only in the velodrome or during a road race”? Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

Reading what someone writes is beyond you? The Weston path accesses Stromlo and the cycling roads out there.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Wow L2INTERWEBS PEEPS

Grade z troll by dilandach. Ignore the trolls people.

Yeah, I was sucked right in…….that is the problem with having a passion in life, you love to defend it to the death.

Dilandach said :

KB1971 said :

But the riders were courteous. Just because they “disobeyed” and a sign that was not law doesn’t mean they were not courteous.

Wouldn’t follow a simple direction and there’s been nothing but excuses on why it shouldn’t be followed.

Well, the proof is in the pudding.

You say its dangerous and uncourteous but experience of the day says different. In the whole 5km circuit of the lake there was not one reported incident.

Would have been any different without the sign? I doubt it (I didn’t see a similar sign on the north side of the lake).

No one has piped up on here and said that they were nearly run over, quite the opposite really from the few that have said they had no issues.

Others that are having a go at cyclists are just jumping on the anti cyclist bandwagon, not actually sharing their experiences on the day.

Anyway, I am out now, you have sucked me into the troll enough.

Dilandach said :

So I can expect the same vigor the next time a cyclist vs car, car vs cyclist, pedestrian vs cyclist, cyclist vs pedestrian, car parking wrong, car speeding, car cutting off cyclist, story comes up?

“Everyone else is doing stuff” doesn’t seem to wash for drivers, why are cyclists in this situation much different?

Well, because the potential consequences of dangerous driving are infinitely worse that the potential consequences of ignoring this sign. Worst case scenario here is somebody getting a fright or maybe a bruise. And I’m pretty sure that didn’t happen even once in this situation. When a car drives dangerously, the consequences are deaths, lives ruined, families grieving.

Maybe we should discuss topics not with the “same vigor”, but with a vigour proportional to their effects of the community, more serious topics which can really destroy lives – cars speeding, drink driving, drug driving, road rage. Oddly this topic has generated more comments than most posts about speeding drivers or drink drivers.

It sounds like most cyclists obeyed the sign and were considerate. It sounds like some others ignored the sign but were still considerate. Its possible that some cyclists ignored the sign and were jerks. Even so, nobody got hurt.

I suspect the original poster simply wanted to stir up ill feeling towards a group of people he/she doesn’t like very much.

Dilandach said :

KB1971 said :

But the riders were courteous. Just because they “disobeyed” and a sign that was not law doesn’t mean they were not courteous.

Wouldn’t follow a simple direction and there’s been nothing but excuses on why it shouldn’t be followed.

+1

KB1971 said :

But the riders were courteous. Just because they “disobeyed” and a sign that was not law doesn’t mean they were not courteous.

Wouldn’t follow a simple direction and there’s been nothing but excuses on why it shouldn’t be followed.

Aeek said :

Is the Cyclists Dismount sign still on the gravel section of the path to Weston?
In full lycra mode I am wearing road shoes that are totally unsuitable for walking.
Riding slowly, I was safe for myself and others.
Walking I was likely to slip and hurt myself, my bike, or others. Then the liability would lay whoever was responsible with the sign, but I’d rather avoid the danger in the first place.

From the Photo, its not clear if cyclists are expected to dismount if they take the separated section and avoid the foreshore.

You wear “road shoes that won’t let you walk” for a leisurely cycle at low speed through a park full of people, rather than “only in the velodrome or during a road race”? Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

Wow L2INTERWEBS PEEPS

Grade z troll by dilandach. Ignore the trolls people.

Just skimming through the comments … you lycra lovers are certainly an arrogant self-righteous bunch.

Aeek said :

Is the Cyclists Dismount sign still on the gravel section of the path to Weston?

Yes it as, and there is no corresponding “Cyclists may remount” sign so if we were not all scofflaws then it would be a twenty kilometre walk home from there for me.

Is the Cyclists Dismount sign still on the gravel section of the path to Weston?
In full lycra mode I am wearing road shoes that are totally unsuitable for walking.
Riding slowly, I was safe for myself and others.
Walking I was likely to slip and hurt myself, my bike, or others. Then the liability would lay whoever was responsible with the sign, but I’d rather avoid the danger in the first place.

From the Photo, its not clear if cyclists are expected to dismount if they take the separated section and avoid the foreshore.

Dilandach said :

KB1971 said :

Yes, because while some riders ignored the sign you are talking about, every rider I encountered at the event was courteous and didnt run anybody over (well, that was reported anyway) so there is no issue with people ignoring the sign.

Whether anyone was hit or not, was it the right thing to do to just ride on through?

KB1971 said :

So you admit that there was no crime and no one was hurt, so what is the problem?

Why was it only ‘optional’?

KB1971 said :

There is risk of being hurt or killed every day, I would say the motivation factor for the sign is so the organisers can absolve themselved of the responsibility for if something did happen.

Perhaps but then there is still the question, if that was the case why did some not dismount and disregard despite the obvious crowds?

Again, it goes to common courtesy.

But the riders were courteous. Just because they “disobeyed” and a sign that was not law doesn’t mean they were not courteous.

Now had the sign said cyclists dismount or you will be placed in stocks and pelted with tomatoes,that would’ve livened up the event!

Call me a rebel, a free thinker, whatever you like, but if I came across a sign that carried no legal weight and was to all intents and purposes pointless, I would continue on my merry way, feet on the pedals and bum on the seat. I would slow down and pay attention to possible hazards such as kids a’wandering and adults just being sheep as they usually are at events.

Where do some members of the community get the idea that just because they put a sign up telling people to do something that they want people to do, others in the community have to blindly follow their prescriptive alert? Makes no sense to me.

Dilandach said :

KB1971 said :

Dilandach said :

KB1971 said :

I would love to see you report someone in a motor vehicle for say, running a red light see how much action you get from the police.

Like the Jim’s Mower guy?

KB1971 said :

I seriously doubt even with camera footage they would do anything about it.

My very valid point is, people carry on here like a cyclist is the antichrist when they break a rule but not other road users doing equally, if not more stupid things in vehicle that weigh up to 62.5 tonnes.

The lack of logic astounds me.

Yep, I am a cyclist, but I am also a motorcyclist, a car driver. Yep other cyclists give me the shits, but so do pedestrians, car drivers, motorcyclists, truck drivers and pretty well anyone who uses the roads without thought to anyone else.

I have to say, Dilandach has done an excellent trolling job.

So far the majority of the comments have just been “well, other people do worse!” or just plain giving “so what?”.

So I’ll ask what I’ve been asking repeatedly, was it really too much to ask to dismount?

Ahhh, but the Jims mowing guy actually had an accident with another road user and then left the scene of said accident.

As discussed in that thread, the result of the action directly leads to the severety of the crime. If he had killed the rider then he may have been done for vehiclular homicide.

In the case that most people here talk about with cyclists, they want them registered so they are accountable for their actions (which they are anyway) so they can report them running red lights & riding across pedestrian crossings. I have no real issue with this except that it wont really change a thing. As I said, try reporting a car running a red light with all the details to the police & see what would happen.

Sweet FA as they really do have better things to do.

As far as cyclist being held accountable? They are if you handle the situation right. I have had two accidents with cyclists, one while riding my Honda and the other in my car. Both times we exchanged details and I clamied once through my insurance for the repairs which the rider had to pay (I didnt worry about it the other time).

Has anyone been talking about rego for bikes in here?

There was no crime, I never indicated that there was a law broken or that any one was killed or injured however there was certainly potential and was most likely the motivating factor behind the signs being placed there. The main point was when it came to common courtesy, was it paid?

So, no law broken, you are simply bitching because you perceive that people weren’t courteous. Personally, I find the cyclists dismount signs to be discourteous. Dismounting goes fundamentally against the whole point of being on your bike in the first place and for some of us lycra clad enthusiasts not an easy thing to do in that our clip-in shoes are designed for riding, not walking. It’s a bit like telling a car driver to push their car at certain places. They simply won’t do it,because the instruction itself is silly.

The lycra clad brigade spend enormous sums of money on our delicate carbon fibre machines. The last thing we want to do is hit someone or something.

A simpler sign would be ‘slow down – pedestrian event ahead’.

We are lobbying to get the pedestrian crossing law changed too, because it is equally silly. A more appropriate law would be for cyclists to slow down to a set speed limit approaching crossings. Dismounting is counter-intuitive and the majority of riders (lycra clad and otherwise) simply disobey the rule because it makes no sense.

As a cycling enthusiast I dont think you can justify ignoring a sign to dismount.

Well done OP, your vocal concern about public safety is to be commended. Sadly I suspect that your concerns will be let down by an apparent lack of consistency and will come across as prejudice against bicycles, i.e. I suspect you are not prepared to dedicate proportionally more time to policing and reporting the irresponsible actions of motorists who kill and maim thousands of times more people than cyclists. It would be a shame if your public safety reports failed to reflect the Big Picture.

I can only hope I am proven wrong and I see a report of you pointing to a Pedestrian Crossing sign and calling out ‘oi’ to motorists who fail to stop in the near future. If so, two thumbs up.

pink little birdie said :

Do drivers still get cranky at cyclists who stop and wait for the pedestrian crossing lights and then ride over the pedestrian crossing?
As a driver I have no issue with the above situation, or cyclists who cycle at pedestrian crossings while the little green man is red when the traffic from that direction is stopped with a red light. Times when pedestrians would cross the road anyway.

The law used to be that cyclists choosing to ride on a pedestrian crossing had to give way to all vehicles and pedestrians on the crossing. It has been changed in the last few years to say that cyclists must dismount.

Do drivers still get cranky at cyclists who stop and wait for the pedestrian crossing lights and then ride over the pedestrian crossing?
As a driver I have no issue with the above situation, or cyclists who cycle at pedestrian crossings while the little green man is red when the traffic from that direction is stopped with a red light. Times when pedestrians would cross the road anyway.

KB1971 said :

Yes, because while some riders ignored the sign you are talking about, every rider I encountered at the event was courteous and didnt run anybody over (well, that was reported anyway) so there is no issue with people ignoring the sign.

Whether anyone was hit or not, was it the right thing to do to just ride on through?

KB1971 said :

So you admit that there was no crime and no one was hurt, so what is the problem?

Why was it only ‘optional’?

KB1971 said :

There is risk of being hurt or killed every day, I would say the motivation factor for the sign is so the organisers can absolve themselved of the responsibility for if something did happen.

Perhaps but then there is still the question, if that was the case why did some not dismount and disregard despite the obvious crowds?

Again, it goes to common courtesy.

Dilandach said :

There was no crime, I never indicated that there was a law broken or that any one was killed or injured however there was certainly potential and was most likely the motivating factor behind the signs being placed there. The main point was when it came to common courtesy, was it paid?

Yes, because while some riders ignored the sign you are talking about, every rider I encountered at the event was courteous and didnt run anybody over (well, that was reported anyway) so there is no issue with people ignoring the sign.

So you admit that there was no crime and no one was hurt, so what is the problem?

There is risk of being hurt or killed every day, I would say the motivation factor for the sign is so the organisers can absolve themselved of the responsibility for if something did happen.

nsn said :

Jim Jones said :

Some people disobeyed a sign, therefore cyclists are jerks.

I’m sure you can milk a mully out of this.

I don’t know about the Mully, but if there were a prize for “percentage of comments in response to story that are by original poster of story” then Dilandach would win that one hands down.

Instead of a car rim just a twig with an empty can of jim beam? 😉

Dilandach said :

So I’ll ask what I’ve been asking repeatedly, was it really too much to ask to dismount?

I think it’s an entirely reasonable question. Is the law wrong here?

Jim Jones said :

Some people disobeyed a sign, therefore cyclists are jerks.

I’m sure you can milk a mully out of this.

I don’t know about the Mully, but if there were a prize for “percentage of comments in response to story that are by original poster of story” then Dilandach would win that one hands down.

Dilandach said :

Jim Jones said :

Some people disobeyed a sign, therefore cyclists are jerks.

I’m sure you can milk a mully out of this.

Whilst there are some hysterical over cyclists doing the wrong thing and basically acting like i’ve been stomping on bags of kittens, it won’t be. Although I’ll be happy to jump into the next thread of some cyclist complaining about car or pedestrian. I won’t have to wait long for that, perhaps I I’ll be able to flip out in there like some have here? 🙂

Sorry, who has flipped out?

KB1971 said :

Dilandach said :

KB1971 said :

I would love to see you report someone in a motor vehicle for say, running a red light see how much action you get from the police.

Like the Jim’s Mower guy?

KB1971 said :

I seriously doubt even with camera footage they would do anything about it.

My very valid point is, people carry on here like a cyclist is the antichrist when they break a rule but not other road users doing equally, if not more stupid things in vehicle that weigh up to 62.5 tonnes.

The lack of logic astounds me.

Yep, I am a cyclist, but I am also a motorcyclist, a car driver. Yep other cyclists give me the shits, but so do pedestrians, car drivers, motorcyclists, truck drivers and pretty well anyone who uses the roads without thought to anyone else.

I have to say, Dilandach has done an excellent trolling job.

So far the majority of the comments have just been “well, other people do worse!” or just plain giving “so what?”.

So I’ll ask what I’ve been asking repeatedly, was it really too much to ask to dismount?

Ahhh, but the Jims mowing guy actually had an accident with another road user and then left the scene of said accident.

As discussed in that thread, the result of the action directly leads to the severety of the crime. If he had killed the rider then he may have been done for vehiclular homicide.

In the case that most people here talk about with cyclists, they want them registered so they are accountable for their actions (which they are anyway) so they can report them running red lights & riding across pedestrian crossings. I have no real issue with this except that it wont really change a thing. As I said, try reporting a car running a red light with all the details to the police & see what would happen.

Sweet FA as they really do have better things to do.

As far as cyclist being held accountable? They are if you handle the situation right. I have had two accidents with cyclists, one while riding my Honda and the other in my car. Both times we exchanged details and I clamied once through my insurance for the repairs which the rider had to pay (I didnt worry about it the other time).

Has anyone been talking about rego for bikes in here?

There was no crime, I never indicated that there was a law broken or that any one was killed or injured however there was certainly potential and was most likely the motivating factor behind the signs being placed there. The main point was when it came to common courtesy, was it paid?

Jim Jones said :

Some people disobeyed a sign, therefore cyclists are jerks.

I’m sure you can milk a mully out of this.

Whilst there are some hysterical over cyclists doing the wrong thing and basically acting like i’ve been stomping on bags of kittens, it won’t be. Although I’ll be happy to jump into the next thread of some cyclist complaining about car or pedestrian. I won’t have to wait long for that, perhaps I I’ll be able to flip out in there like some have here? 🙂

Dilandach said :

KB1971 said :

I would love to see you report someone in a motor vehicle for say, running a red light see how much action you get from the police.

Like the Jim’s Mower guy?

KB1971 said :

I seriously doubt even with camera footage they would do anything about it.

My very valid point is, people carry on here like a cyclist is the antichrist when they break a rule but not other road users doing equally, if not more stupid things in vehicle that weigh up to 62.5 tonnes.

The lack of logic astounds me.

Yep, I am a cyclist, but I am also a motorcyclist, a car driver. Yep other cyclists give me the shits, but so do pedestrians, car drivers, motorcyclists, truck drivers and pretty well anyone who uses the roads without thought to anyone else.

I have to say, Dilandach has done an excellent trolling job.

So far the majority of the comments have just been “well, other people do worse!” or just plain giving “so what?”.

So I’ll ask what I’ve been asking repeatedly, was it really too much to ask to dismount?

Ahhh, but the Jims mowing guy actually had an accident with another road user and then left the scene of said accident.

As discussed in that thread, the result of the action directly leads to the severety of the crime. If he had killed the rider then he may have been done for vehiclular homicide.

In the case that most people here talk about with cyclists, they want them registered so they are accountable for their actions (which they are anyway) so they can report them running red lights & riding across pedestrian crossings. I have no real issue with this except that it wont really change a thing. As I said, try reporting a car running a red light with all the details to the police & see what would happen.

Sweet FA as they really do have better things to do.

As far as cyclist being held accountable? They are if you handle the situation right. I have had two accidents with cyclists, one while riding my Honda and the other in my car. Both times we exchanged details and I clamied once through my insurance for the repairs which the rider had to pay (I didnt worry about it the other time).

I’m pretty sure the only problem here is stupid signs. If the sign said “Event in progress – High vis safety vests required” would you berate those that shockingly go about their business without their vests?

Maybe a “Slow” sign for cyclists was warranted, but I don’t blame anyone for ignoring this ridiculous demand.

I think it’s more because cyclists are the first to get up and dance and sing when someone else breaks a law.

Time for more timed cotter runs I think!

On a motorbike of course. Push bikes are for suckers.

Dilandach said :

Oh the horror of having dismount and walk the bike through the crowd, doing the right thing is just too much effort.

What crowd?

Yes – and I’ve been trying to photograph people taking 10 grocery items through the 8 or less checkouts. It’s a major issue! There is a sign! But since they weren’t in cars or on bikes at the time I couldn’t lump them into one group or the other… my whole rant would have been invalid.

Some people disobeyed a sign, therefore cyclists are jerks.

I’m sure you can milk a mully out of this.

Dilandach said :

fromthecapital said :

Alert the authorities immediately, WONT ANYBODY THINK OF THR CHILDREN?

Obviously dismounting is far too much to ask. Oh the horror of having dismount and walk the bike through the crowd, doing the right thing is just too much effort.

…but please, continue on with proving my point 😉

It sure wasnt, I agree with all your points. These cyclists should dismount forever. 2 wheel vehicles should be banned.

They are willfully and deliberately putting all our safety at risk

KB1971 said :

I would love to see you report someone in a motor vehicle for say, running a red light see how much action you get from the police.

Like the Jim’s Mower guy?

KB1971 said :

I seriously doubt even with camera footage they would do anything about it.

My very valid point is, people carry on here like a cyclist is the antichrist when they break a rule but not other road users doing equally, if not more stupid things in vehicle that weigh up to 62.5 tonnes.

The lack of logic astounds me.

Yep, I am a cyclist, but I am also a motorcyclist, a car driver. Yep other cyclists give me the shits, but so do pedestrians, car drivers, motorcyclists, truck drivers and pretty well anyone who uses the roads without thought to anyone else.

I have to say, Dilandach has done an excellent trolling job.

So far the majority of the comments have just been “well, other people do worse!” or just plain giving “so what?”.

So I’ll ask what I’ve been asking repeatedly, was it really too much to ask to dismount?

fromthecapital said :

Alert the authorities immediately, WONT ANYBODY THINK OF THR CHILDREN?

Obviously dismounting is far too much to ask. Oh the horror of having dismount and walk the bike through the crowd, doing the right thing is just too much effort.

…but please, continue on with proving my point 😉

ABC129 said :

I’m one of the Spandex Brigade (Lycra is the correct term by the way)…

Lycra, while the commonly used term in this country, is actually a brand-name (made by Koch subsidiary Invista, previously a part of DuPont) for the polyurethane-polyurea copolymer fibre commonly called spandex in the US.

If you are referring to your cycle clothing as Lycra, I hope the manufacturer sourced the raw material from Invista, other wise you are risking trademark infringement.

Grimm said :

Dilandach said :

Let’s just stick with what was done here, the signs were there and said ‘dismount’. What was hard about it?

Not being a self centered bell end is apparently too much to ask.
And they wonder why people dislike them. This really is another reason they should be forced to be registered and identifiable.

Yeah, maybe the guy should find something better to do with his time, but he does illustrate a very valid point. On the other hand, all I see here so far is cyclists trying to blame shift and carry on like big babies with “But they break the law too!”. Nobody cares. I bitch about other drivers constantly, but when they do illegal and stupid things, they can easily be held accountable. It’s about time you are put in the same boat, because it is blindingly obvious you aren’t interested in lifting your game without being forced to.

I would love to see you report someone in a motor vehicle for say, running a red light see how much action you get from the police.

I seriously doubt even with camera footage they would do anything about it.

My very valid point is, people carry on here like a cyclist is the antichrist when they break a rule but not other road users doing equally, if not more stupid things in vehicle that weigh up to 62.5 tonnes.

The lack of logic astounds me.

Yep, I am a cyclist, but I am also a motorcyclist, a car driver. Yep other cyclists give me the shits, but so do pedestrians, car drivers, motorcyclists, truck drivers and pretty well anyone who uses the roads without thought to anyone else.

I have to say, Dilandach has done an excellent trolling job.

Depends on the conditions but those pictured above don’t indicate any need to dismount … other than a stupidly inflexible sign (how about riding or not to the conditions?).

Note that unless there is a similar sign on the canyon (?) leading through Reconciliation Place (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconciliation_Place) from the direction of Old Parliament House, then these signs are kind of incomplete.

Any moderately competent cyclist knows when one really should dismount or slow down or stop – natural selection tends to weed out the few who haven’t learnt the lessons. By the way, (bad) laws (or rules) are made to be broken (and annoy those who have nothing better to do!). 😎

Dilandach said :

So I can expect the same vigor the next time a cyclist vs car, car vs cyclist, pedestrian vs cyclist, cyclist vs pedestrian, car parking wrong, car speeding, car cutting off cyclist,

story comes up?

“Everyone else is doing stuff” doesn’t seem to wash for drivers, why are cyclists in this situation much different?

You havnt been here long have you?

Grimm said :

Dilandach said :

Let’s just stick with what was done here, the signs were there and said ‘dismount’. What was hard about it?

Not being a self centered bell end is apparently too much to ask.
And they wonder why people dislike them. This really is another reason they should be forced to be registered and identifiable.

Yeah, maybe the guy should find something better to do with his time, but he does illustrate a very valid point. On the other hand, all I see here so far is cyclists trying to blame shift and carry on like big babies with “But they break the law too!”. Nobody cares. I bitch about other drivers constantly, but when they do illegal and stupid things, they can easily be held accountable. It’s about time you are put in the same boat, because it is blindingly obvious you aren’t interested in lifting your game without being forced to.

True, everyone hates ‘those’ people. Why can’t anyone do anything? The government should really be implementing ‘1984’ style technology. Then we’d all be safe from them.

Dilandach said :

fromthecapital said :

Dilandach said :

fromthecapital said :

Dilandach said :

fromthecapital said :

The horror! Im surprised hundreds were not killed!

There were plenty of kids around and the crowds were reasonably large, its a simple request. Dismount. What honestly is so hard about it? Obviously there are people that are too selfish to think of others but only their own perceived inconvenience.

I totally concur.

Wont people please think of the children!?

The chidren in your photos seem to be paralysed by terror!

I would be if I was a small child hit by a Armstrong wannabe trying to get a new PB weaving through the crowd. Their fault still right? Sign should have said “Give way to all cyclists” must have had a dyslexic guy pick the signs that day.

…or they just put up the sign for fun. Oh Canberra, you’re so kooky like that.

Too true.. I see you despise this cult almost as much as me.

I hear the tactic to knock down small children is used to abduct them and then indoctrinate them. I havent completed my investigation yet however I have found they then gather in large numbers to watch a broadcast of their idols, the ‘cardinals in lycra’ the broadcast comes from France and they all give up sleep to watch said broadcast. Apparently their new leader isnt Lance Armstrong but someone named Cadel Evans. Who could trust someone with a name like that?

Would you like to join my taskforce to expose and eradicate this cult? We could use someone with your passion…

I do hear they have some good drugs…

Alert the authorities immediately, WONT ANYBODY THINK OF THR CHILDREN?

Dilandach said :

Let’s just stick with what was done here, the signs were there and said ‘dismount’. What was hard about it?

Not being a self centered bell end is apparently too much to ask.
And they wonder why people dislike them. This really is another reason they should be forced to be registered and identifiable.

Yeah, maybe the guy should find something better to do with his time, but he does illustrate a very valid point. On the other hand, all I see here so far is cyclists trying to blame shift and carry on like big babies with “But they break the law too!”. Nobody cares. I bitch about other drivers constantly, but when they do illegal and stupid things, they can easily be held accountable. It’s about time you are put in the same boat, because it is blindingly obvious you aren’t interested in lifting your game without being forced to.

fromthecapital said :

Dilandach said :

fromthecapital said :

Dilandach said :

fromthecapital said :

The horror! Im surprised hundreds were not killed!

There were plenty of kids around and the crowds were reasonably large, its a simple request. Dismount. What honestly is so hard about it? Obviously there are people that are too selfish to think of others but only their own perceived inconvenience.

I totally concur.

Wont people please think of the children!?

The chidren in your photos seem to be paralysed by terror!

I would be if I was a small child hit by a Armstrong wannabe trying to get a new PB weaving through the crowd. Their fault still right? Sign should have said “Give way to all cyclists” must have had a dyslexic guy pick the signs that day.

…or they just put up the sign for fun. Oh Canberra, you’re so kooky like that.

Too true.. I see you despise this cult almost as much as me.

I hear the tactic to knock down small children is used to abduct them and then indoctrinate them. I havent completed my investigation yet however I have found they then gather in large numbers to watch a broadcast of their idols, the ‘cardinals in lycra’ the broadcast comes from France and they all give up sleep to watch said broadcast. Apparently their new leader isnt Lance Armstrong but someone named Cadel Evans. Who could trust someone with a name like that?

Would you like to join my taskforce to expose and eradicate this cult? We could use someone with your passion…

I do hear they have some good drugs…

Dilandach said :

fromthecapital said :

Dilandach said :

fromthecapital said :

The horror! Im surprised hundreds were not killed!

There were plenty of kids around and the crowds were reasonably large, its a simple request. Dismount. What honestly is so hard about it? Obviously there are people that are too selfish to think of others but only their own perceived inconvenience.

I totally concur.

Wont people please think of the children!?

The chidren in your photos seem to be paralysed by terror!

I would be if I was a small child hit by a Armstrong wannabe trying to get a new PB weaving through the crowd. Their fault still right? Sign should have said “Give way to all cyclists” must have had a dyslexic guy pick the signs that day.

…or they just put up the sign for fun. Oh Canberra, you’re so kooky like that.

Too true.. I see you despise this cult almost as much as me.

I hear the tactic to knock down small children is used to abduct them and then indoctrinate them. I havent completed my investigation yet however I have found they then gather in large numbers to watch a broadcast of their idols, the ‘cardinals in lycra’ the broadcast comes from France and they all give up sleep to watch said broadcast. Apparently their new leader isnt Lance Armstrong but someone named Cadel Evans. Who could trust someone with a name like that?

Would you like to join my taskforce to expose and eradicate this cult? We could use someone with your passion…

tuco said :

I just got here. What did I miss?

Nothing

KB1971 said :

Dilandach said :

KB1971 said :

Kewl, tomorrow I am going to sit out on Norhtbourne Ave and photograph a community demographic doing the “wrong” thing.

Like the parking photos? Or the many stories on drivers doing the “wrong” thing when it comes to cyclists?

…somehow bringing attention to cyclists doing the wrong thing when it comes to pedestrians is just awful! Those poor illiterate cyclists.

It was a direction, one that a lot simply ignored. Now why was that? It was clear why they were there.

‘kewl’? I thought that went out in the 90s zerocool.

You know why its attracts this sort of attention?

Beacues they are not alone. When it comes to stuff like this there is always a part of the COMMUNITY that ignores a direction.

As Helium said, there were people illegally parking all over the place and had dogs (one came up to my 2 year old and scared him as he didnt expect it). Are you taking photos of them & posting them all ove the net on your sopbox? No.

There are no police reports of any incidents, my experience with all the riders were positive (I was on the north side of the lake), there was no issue.

Kewl.

KB1971 said :

Dilandach said :

KB1971 said :

Kewl, tomorrow I am going to sit out on Norhtbourne Ave and photograph a community demographic doing the “wrong” thing.

Like the parking photos? Or the many stories on drivers doing the “wrong” thing when it comes to cyclists?

…somehow bringing attention to cyclists doing the wrong thing when it comes to pedestrians is just awful! Those poor illiterate cyclists.

It was a direction, one that a lot simply ignored. Now why was that? It was clear why they were there.

‘kewl’? I thought that went out in the 90s zerocool.

You know why its attracts this sort of attention?

Beacues they are not alone. When it comes to stuff like this there is always a part of the COMMUNITY that ignores a direction.

As Helium said, there were people illegally parking all over the place and had dogs (one came up to my 2 year old and scared him as he didnt expect it). Are you taking photos of them & posting them all ove the net on your sopbox? No.

There are no police reports of any incidents, my experience with all the riders were positive (I was on the north side of the lake), there was no issue.

Kewl.

So I can expect the same vigor the next time a cyclist vs car, car vs cyclist, pedestrian vs cyclist, cyclist vs pedestrian, car parking wrong, car speeding, car cutting off cyclist, story comes up?

“Everyone else is doing stuff” doesn’t seem to wash for drivers, why are cyclists in this situation much different?

I just got here. What did I miss?

Is a sign like that even legal in the ACT?

It is quite legal for a cyclist to ride on a footpath in the ACT (though not in NSW where such a sign would not contradict any existing legislation).

This is a good discussion, because it opens the door to questioning our laws. Some other discussions here descend to “but that’s the law”.

Dilandach said :

KB1971 said :

Kewl, tomorrow I am going to sit out on Norhtbourne Ave and photograph a community demographic doing the “wrong” thing.

Like the parking photos? Or the many stories on drivers doing the “wrong” thing when it comes to cyclists?

…somehow bringing attention to cyclists doing the wrong thing when it comes to pedestrians is just awful! Those poor illiterate cyclists.

It was a direction, one that a lot simply ignored. Now why was that? It was clear why they were there.

‘kewl’? I thought that went out in the 90s zerocool.

You know why its attracts this sort of attention?

Beacues they are not alone. When it comes to stuff like this there is always a part of the COMMUNITY that ignores a direction.

As Helium said, there were people illegally parking all over the place and had dogs (one came up to my 2 year old and scared him as he didnt expect it). Are you taking photos of them & posting them all ove the net on your sopbox? No.

There are no police reports of any incidents, my experience with all the riders were positive (I was on the north side of the lake), there was no issue.

Kewl.

Walked the full circuit over the day & saw hundreds of cyclists, none of them were “being selfish and ploughing through the crowd in a “me first” attitude” – they were just making thier own lives difficult trying to weave through the crowds….

Jim Jones said :

They should be registered so that we know who these people are and take action against them.

Such an epic strawman that was constructed there.

Let’s just stick with what was done here, the signs were there and said ‘dismount’. What was hard about it?

KB1971 said :

Kewl, tomorrow I am going to sit out on Norhtbourne Ave and photograph a community demographic doing the “wrong” thing.

Like the parking photos? Or the many stories on drivers doing the “wrong” thing when it comes to cyclists?

…somehow bringing attention to cyclists doing the wrong thing when it comes to pedestrians is just awful! Those poor illiterate cyclists.

It was a direction, one that a lot simply ignored. Now why was that? It was clear why they were there.

‘kewl’? I thought that went out in the 90s zerocool.

Dilandach said :

Jim Jones said :

Once I saw someone crossing the road when THERE WAS A RED MAN ON THE SIGN SAYING DON’T CROSS!

I tried to make a citizens arrest, but the man ran away. I think he must have been on drugs to be taking crazy risks like that.

Society is going to the dogs … it’s like we’re all just barbarians now.

Except that is only down to his actions only affecting him personally.

I ask again, the sign said ‘dismount’ it was there for a reason. What was so hard about it?

Or are there more attempted insults in the works?

I think you’re being far too mild on the filthy criminal jaywalkers and their animal ilk. The red man is there for a reason. Imagine the psychological terror for any poor motorist who may inadvertently hit him. Sometimes there are children watching, and they will learn this disgusting criminal behaviour.

I’ve watched them, and most blatantly ignore the rules. Pedestrians are all lawless bounders, with no consideration for anyone but themselves.

They should be registered so that we know who these people are and take action against them.

fromthecapital said :

Dilandach said :

fromthecapital said :

The horror! Im surprised hundreds were not killed!

There were plenty of kids around and the crowds were reasonably large, its a simple request. Dismount. What honestly is so hard about it? Obviously there are people that are too selfish to think of others but only their own perceived inconvenience.

I totally concur.

Wont people please think of the children!?

The chidren in your photos seem to be paralysed by terror!

I would be if I was a small child hit by a Armstrong wannabe trying to get a new PB weaving through the crowd. Their fault still right? Sign should have said “Give way to all cyclists” must have had a dyslexic guy pick the signs that day.

…or they just put up the sign for fun. Oh Canberra, you’re so kooky like that.

Going through that area yesterday the majority of cyclists either left their bikes outside the area or progressed on foot, a few did ride when they should have dismounted.

So to answer the question, YES, most cyclist will “do the right thing” and be courteous and safe with consideration to other path users.

They also said not to park illegally and not take dogs, but I didn’t think it worthy of taking photos…

One of the big problems with these signs is that there is never another sign at the end of the area telling cyclists when they can remount – are they supposed to just walk their bicycle for the rest of the day, or can they just remount when they feel like it?

And surely the requirement to dismount wouldn’t apply to the road – see the 4th pic above (unless of course it was closed to traffic at the time) – otherwise everyone in driving a car there should have to dismount as well!

Good to see the “I was ignoring the sign but it’s safe ‘cos I’m competent and attentive” line getting dusted off. Haven’t heard that one since the last speeding thread.

Dilandach said :

fromthecapital said :

The horror! Im surprised hundreds were not killed!

There were plenty of kids around and the crowds were reasonably large, its a simple request. Dismount. What honestly is so hard about it? Obviously there are people that are too selfish to think of others but only their own perceived inconvenience.

I totally concur.

Wont people please think of the children!?

The chidren in your photos seem to be paralysed by terror!

Jim Jones said :

Once I saw someone crossing the road when THERE WAS A RED MAN ON THE SIGN SAYING DON’T CROSS!

I tried to make a citizens arrest, but the man ran away. I think he must have been on drugs to be taking crazy risks like that.

Society is going to the dogs … it’s like we’re all just barbarians now.

Except that is only down to his actions only affecting him personally.

I ask again, the sign said ‘dismount’ it was there for a reason. What was so hard about it?

Or are there more attempted insults in the works?

Kewl, tomorrow I am going to sit out on Norhtbourne Ave and photograph a community demographic doing the “wrong” thing.

But I will actually use a law, not an advisory.

I reckon watching the cars run the red light at London Cct will do, or will it be the Asian students who run across in front of the cars in Alinga Street?

No, no even better, I will get the people who drive through the bus interchange blindly following their GPS and ignoring the signs. Yep that will be the one………

But then again, maybe not, I have better things to do with my time.

Grow up Dilandach.

Once I saw someone crossing the road when THERE WAS A RED MAN ON THE SIGN SAYING DON’T CROSS!

I tried to make a citizens arrest, but the man ran away. I think he must have been on drugs to be taking crazy risks like that.

Society is going to the dogs … it’s like we’re all just barbarians now.

So far the answer from cyclist seem to be “The rules don’t apply to us so [insert insult of your choice here]. Your just oppressing our rights and being mean to us.” and other general lame whinges that they come up with.

And then they wonder why it is that cyclist get flak from the general public.

The sign is there for the saftey of the general public. It isn’t an attack on cyclist. There was a kids activity underway near these signs with little kids running around.

But from previous comments on other threads, it seems that the idea is kids should be tied upso they don’t get in the way of the holey cyclists of Canberra.

Maybe if you actually obeyed the rules once and a while others would understand the occasional slip up.

fromthecapital said :

The horror! Im surprised hundreds were not killed!

There were plenty of kids around and the crowds were reasonably large, its a simple request. Dismount. What honestly is so hard about it? Obviously there are people that are too selfish to think of others but only their own perceived inconvenience.

The horror! Im surprised hundreds were not killed!

Dilandach said :

ABC129 said :

I’m one of the Spandex Brigade (Lycra is the correct term by the way) and after walking around all day yesterday with my wife, two kids and a stroller I had no issue with the many cyclists that were at the event. The pictures you posted show no unsafe conduct and as long as they were travelling at, or near, pedestrian speed then why the issue? I witnessed plenty of cycling cops ride through the exact same area – did you have a quiet word to them?

So if the cops do it, everyone else can? Doesn’t work like that. The signs were up for a reason but there were those that clearly thought it didn’t apply to them.

Far more disturbing than the deliberately heinous acts committed by these cyclists and the first thing that came to mind was:

Didn’t you have anything better to do?

I had a spare bit of time during a lunch break, always amusing to see the justification for not doing the right thing. So why did they have “Event in Progress Cyclists Dismount” signs up? Were they just novel artworks? Did the words ‘except if you’re a cyclist’ fall off the signs? no? Didn’t think so.

I dare say the cops not dismoutning would reach a similar arguement to that of which police may park their cars wherever the hell they want. Do you expect the bike mounted police to run after a crook whilst pushing their bike. And if a sign asks that cyclists dismount, then thats what it means, not ‘dismount only if you intend on speeding’…

Typical one eyed lycra wearing comment.

ABC129 said :

I’m one of the Spandex Brigade (Lycra is the correct term by the way) and after walking around all day yesterday with my wife, two kids and a stroller I had no issue with the many cyclists that were at the event. The pictures you posted show no unsafe conduct and as long as they were travelling at, or near, pedestrian speed then why the issue? I witnessed plenty of cycling cops ride through the exact same area – did you have a quiet word to them?

So if the cops do it, everyone else can? Doesn’t work like that. The signs were up for a reason but there were those that clearly thought it didn’t apply to them.

Far more disturbing than the deliberately heinous acts committed by these cyclists and the first thing that came to mind was:

Didn’t you have anything better to do?

I had a spare bit of time during a lunch break, always amusing to see the justification for not doing the right thing. So why did they have “Event in Progress Cyclists Dismount” signs up? Were they just novel artworks? Did the words ‘except if you’re a cyclist’ fall off the signs? no? Didn’t think so.

Was anyone hurt you f***ing idiot?!

The obvious reason for cars not showing disrespect is that the road was closed.

What I see in these pictures is a clear lane that is safe for cyclists to ride down, with the pedestrians keeping to the other side of the bollards.

The only thing more annoying that pointless requests to dismount is people who insist that the rules are to be obeyed as if they were the word of God. In this instance the sign is clearly reminding cyclists that there are many pedestrians around. When the path is full of people, it makes sense to dismount since riding at a slow strolling pace is a little awkward. When the path is not full of people, why dismount?

Cyclists share the usual paths quite happily when pedestrian are around (well, with the usual argy-bargy about whether pedestrians or cyclists are supposed to give way to the other, since the appropriate legislation seems self-contradictory), the example here is just the usual case of sharing with the usual case of nit-picker gone wild.

In the end, it comes down to what authority you place in a sign erected by event organisers. Is it the word of God, or simply a poorly presented request for civil behaviour and cooperation in sharing the path between wheel and foot powered pedestrians?

A clue on where I stand in that argument: the sign is missing the word “please”.

ABC129 said :

I’m one of the Spandex Brigade (Lycra is the correct term by the way) and after walking around all day yesterday with my wife, two kids and a stroller I had no issue with the many cyclists that were at the event. The pictures you posted show no unsafe conduct and as long as they were travelling at, or near, pedestrian speed then why the issue? I witnessed plenty of cycling cops ride through the exact same area – did you have a quiet word to them?

Far more disturbing than the deliberately heinous acts committed by these cyclists and the first thing that came to mind was:

Didn’t you have anything better to do?

Jerk detected.

I’m one of the Spandex Brigade (Lycra is the correct term by the way) and after walking around all day yesterday with my wife, two kids and a stroller I had no issue with the many cyclists that were at the event. The pictures you posted show no unsafe conduct and as long as they were travelling at, or near, pedestrian speed then why the issue? I witnessed plenty of cycling cops ride through the exact same area – did you have a quiet word to them?

Far more disturbing than the deliberately heinous acts committed by these cyclists and the first thing that came to mind was:

Didn’t you have anything better to do?

So, from your own writeup with the question “Given a chance will cyclists do the right thing?”, and then “Most of the casual rider groups upon seeing the sign would dismount and do the right thing.” and then “The majority of those wearing the spandex getups… just continue(d) riding through the crowd.” which I assume means that at least a minority also dismounted, we can say that in fact …the answer is an unsurprising ‘yes’, but there are dickheads among them. Colour me surprised.

Thank goodness, Dilandach, that you were there to enforce the rules and to keep a record of this.