[The _Kaner]

Well,
I’ve just read this…how does this sit with everyone else…?

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/cycling-journalist-investigation-police-alleged-death-threat-139527

Topic

[jacknorell]

It’s very simple, if you
It’s very simple, if you wouldn’t say it with an audience and the target of a statement in the room: Don’t say it.

Humour/sarcasm does not travel well on the net, esp around emotional topics such as road /personal safety.

Critchlow is being a tw*t though. And Stevenson an ar*e for blurting this out.

[Tom Amos]

Critchlow has used his
Critchlow has used his Twitter feed to cite every single recent case of Twitter bullying and police involvement. He’s really going for the victim badge.

[arfa]

When is a metaphor not a
When is a metaphor not a metaphor ?
This has whole twitter thing has got out of hand really and is a waste of police time. Was this really a credible threat to life ? Critchlow appears to be arguing that the follow up threats validate the original metaphor which is a significant leap of faith.
I don’t think Critchlow can claim to be a saint with his patronising tone of exchange and circulation of US articles slagging off commuting cyclists – what on earth does that have to do with the original debate about UK cyclists wearing cameras ?
I would like to think that two grown men would be able to sort this out over a pint and an apology or two. Perhaps there is a serious journalistic article in it ? That might be a more constructive use of everyone’s time.

[captain_slog]

Crikey.
At first glance
Crikey.

At first glance John’s ‘threat’ seems even less credible than the now-infamous Robin Hood airport bomb tweet. It looks like Andrew has chosen to take it literally in order to claim the moral high ground. Does anyone seriously think John has a gang of thugs ready to ingratiate themselves by carrying out his every whim?

But … I dunno. How would I feel if it was aimed at me? Maybe someone who takes part in a lot of cycling debates, and knows how heated things can get between factions, might genuinely now feel a little less safe?

Hopefully both sides can step back and see this for the storm in a teacup it really is. The boundaries of what can acceptably be said on social media are still being set, but in the meantime it’s safest to assume that whatever you say, someone, somewhere, will interpret it literally if it suits them.

[crikey]

The first rule of… well,
The first rule of… well, just about every situation one finds oneself in, but particularly situations on the net, should be ‘Don’t be a dick.’

Looks like two people have ignored this.

[The _Kaner]

Does this constitute a real
Does this constitute a real threat?
“Can someone please just have Andrew Critchlow taken out and shot?”.
Is this just a petty squabble blown out of all proportion…? Or does the plaintiff have a real case?

[Author]

Replies