- This topic has 46 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 7 months ago by
StuInNorway.
-
CreatorTopic
-
November 26, 2016 at 7:28 pm #26530
CygnusX1
Some scumbag is threatening to smash windows and poison pets of neighbours of Dave Brennan campaigning for Bears Way cycle route in East Dunbartonshire. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/cycle-lane-campaigner-targeted-road-9338552
Edit: Fixed reference to county (no idea where I got Ayrshire from).
-
CreatorTopic
-
AuthorReplies
-
madcarew
Quite simply, if this guy
Quite simply, if this guy hurls invective at passing cars or any other road users, he does deserve largely what comes his way. His family doesn’t, and he should reflect very carefully on that
Videos are not an objective view of the situation, they are, as always, context driven, and what happens before and after the clip (see any number of ‘senseless beating by police’ videos) is as important as what happens during.
Terrorism? Get a fucking grip. This is what terrorism looks like https://d.ibtimes.co.uk/en/full/1447287/7-7-london-bombings-anniversary.jpg
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/8c/3d/6e/8c3d6e98c30821890a360e5bd90d1b8a.jpg
To continue the rape analogy (though the high heels – hijab wearing glaswegian bloke image has me more than a little nervous) if your lovely maiden wears her short dress, fish nets and stands in a market place at lunchtime and acts in a manner likely to annoy people, and then yells abuse at the people who yell abuse at her; well then, yes, she does deserve a high level of abuse. Rape? No. But a lack of welcome and physical efforts to keep her out of the market place next time she visits? Yeah. Sure.
Does this guy or his family deserve bricks through his window? Not really. But just as in a video of a car doing a close pass and yelling abuse out the window, if said cyclist had spent 3 miles prior to the video weaving slowly in the middle of the lane, shouting at the queue of traffic behind him that it’s his right and they’re all wankers to think otherwise, well yeah, his behaviour has definitely added to the problem, and he is deserving of approbrium and abuse from those affected.
I ride on club rides with young guys who seem fond occasionally of giving the fingers or abuse to passing cars. If they do I take them aside and tell them it’s unacceptable. It doesn’t do them or, more importantly, me, any favours in the long run, and only inflames the situation.
Do nothing? No. Take number plates, proselytise, act with consideration, engage in good natured conversation (remember, just as most cyclists are motorists, most motorists are also the guy down the pub, at work, at the football etc). There’s little you can do at the time when being buzzed by a car, brake tested, forced off the road etc etc which will make things better for you or for cyclists. Certainly swearing, shouting, gesturing isn’t going to help in either the short or long run.
beezus fufoon
brooksby wrote:unconstituted wrote:Whole lot of thinly veiled ‘he was asking for it’ up in here.That’s a bit unfair. It’s not that thinly veiled.
no, not “was” – he IS asking for it – as for what he’s asking for…
his behaviour does generally invite someone to simply beat the living crap out of him.
Writing threatening letters and dropping tacks all seems a bit bourgeouis.
brooksby
unconstituted wrote:Whole lot of thinly veiled ‘he was asking for it’ up in here.That’s a bit unfair. It’s not that thinly veiled.
tritecommentbot
Whole lot of thinly veiled
Whole lot of thinly veiled ‘he was asking for it’ up in here.
Bizarrely trying to mask itself as common sense. Feels a bit 80s.
davel
ClubSmed wrote:
ClubSmed wrote:davel wrote:Yorkshire wallet wrote:Once you add Youtube money into the equation the waters begin to cloud. How many dramatic incidents can you have in a year to keep people watching?Really good point. Does anyone know how youtube/ad revenue works? I have no idea.
I’ve just watched a few of magnatom’s vids at random. 2 ads in 5 videos, I think – I don’t know where that money goes. *If* money comes into it, you naturally question the incentive.
Apparently you get paid between 0.33-1 cents per view depending on your popularity through the YouTube partner agreement
If that’s the case, then the ‘clown takes a pratfall’ video could have made $20K-$60K.
Very few videos will get close to 6M views, but that’s only one video. A few thousand hits per week could still be beer money. I don’t think it’s overly cynical to smell an incentive.
FluffyKittenofTindalos
HalfWheeler wrote:
HalfWheeler wrote:@ Fifth Gear
It’s counterproductive because the public shaming (crucial distinction) does nothing to alter the sheer volume of bad driving behaviour (surely his main aim?), further enrages those who have an axe to grind against cyclists and makes neutrals or courteous drivers more antagonistic towards cyclists. His videos also get picked up by the Daily Mail. The btl comments just engender more cycling hate and reinforce the attitiudes and behaviour of bad drivers.
I don’t entirely buy this argument. The BTL comments on the DM are generally by people who are absolutely entrenched in tribal car-fixated attitudes (along with the whole nexus of DM prejudices), and you just know they will react the same way to pretty much anything. These bad-driving videos aren’t going to make them any worse.
What kind of videos do you think would make them be pro-cycling? I don’t think there is anything that would have that effect, because their attitudes are too deeply ingrained, nothing is going to make any difference to them, they will react in the same irrational way to everything. Other than, perhaps, several decades of better infrastructure persuading a few of them to try two-wheels themselves.
The only thing that really changes most people are changes to their objective experiences over an extended period of time. And some people are never going to change, you just have to hope that’s a minority.
I agree that it sometimes seems as if some of the helmet-cam guys have an unusually high number of bad incidents, but I don’t know how much they cycle or where, and it would take a methodical analysis of statistics to be sure if that is the case.
And I just find it very hard to believe they can really make any money of significance out of youtube revenues, relative to effort and time. It doesn’t strike me as a way to get rich quick.
I don’t think the videos have a big effect either way, they are just noise. But I don’t object to the helmet-cam crowd making them. And they do document the reality of how many drivers behave on the roads as they are – though it shouldn’t be about identifiable individuals unless you are reporting them to the police.
ClubSmed
davel wrote:Yorkshire wallet wrote:Once you add Youtube money into the equation the waters begin to cloud. How many dramatic incidents can you have in a year to keep people watching?Really good point. Does anyone know how youtube/ad revenue works? I have no idea.
I’ve just watched a few of magnatom’s vids at random. 2 ads in 5 videos, I think – I don’t know where that money goes. *If* money comes into it, you naturally question the incentive.
Apparently you get paid between 0.33-1 cents per view depending on your popularity through the YouTube partner agreement
Yorkshire wallet wrote:Once you add Youtube money into the equation the waters begin to cloud. How many dramatic incidents can you have in a year to keep people watching?Really good point. Does anyone know how youtube/ad revenue works? I have no idea.
I’ve just watched a few of magnatom’s vids at random. 2 ads in 5 videos, I think – I don’t know where that money goes. *If* money comes into it, you naturally question the incentive.
700c
There’s never any excuse for
There’s never any excuse for this behaviour, but this kind of response from certain members of the public was entirely predictable (in fact I gather this has happened to him before). He is acting a bit like a vigilate with his youtube videos, and does seem rather prone to overreaction and seeking out conflict, for the benefit of the video drama I suppose, therefore must accept an increased liklihood that this could happen.
He *might* be doing us all a favour by highlighting poor driving – but his approach, which seems to relish conflict, is likely to just antagonise, as it seems to have done here with these latest incidents.
Anonymous
The problem is IMO that some
The problem is IMO that some of these ‘Youtube cyclists’ seem to have vastly more problems than your everyday cyclist.
We all have the occassional close pass/incident and there’s times when I wish I did have a camera but some of these guys seem to live for confrontation or playing the victim. Once you add Youtube money into the equation the waters begin to cloud. How many dramatic incidents can you have in a year to keep people watching? This year I’ve maybe wanted to punch people about 4 times and I’ve probably got a mild temper. I’m riding at least half the week so interesting footage per mile is pretty much nil. Then again, I’m on a rural route so the chance of me catching offenders up again is nil.
There’s been plenty of good done by cameras, don’t get me wrong but they do seem to bring out the worst in certain people.
Fifth Gear
nowasps wrote:Yes, we should also be criticising the WMP for their prosecute-first attitude to really bad driving. All they’re really doing is enraging the hard-pressed motorist trying to get to work.Yes and WMP were almost certainly inspired by cycle camera videos. They are using cycle cameras themselves and have already prosecuted 135 motorists using cycle camera evidence from third parties. Other forces are now starting to follow the lead of WMP so progress is being made for the benefit of everyone.
HalfWheeler
Fifth Gear wrote:You are using the exact arguments that the anti-cyclist motor trolls use all the time.I’m pretty sure anti-cycling trolls aren’t using the argument; public shaming hasn’t made the roads any safer for us cyclists.
You might care to reflect on that.
As for “I’m not sure if you think there is a problem at all but if you do, you have failed to explain how you think it could be addressed better other than by doing nothing and appeasing the motor lobby”. Second attempt at a strawman argument, dismal failure like the first.
No, I didn’t offer an alternative in those specific comments. Was I under an obligation to do so? For the record I think video evidence (hah!) has a definite, almost invaluable, place (sans public shaming) plus education at the earliest stage of peoples driving, ie during driving lessons. I had a driving instrutor who was thoroughly anti cyclist, I can’t imagine he wasn’t the only one. Repeatedly banging on about vulnerable road users during lessons is a must, above and beyond what they’re doing now (which is frankly just lip service).
beezus fufoon wrote:brooksby wrote:beezus fufoon wrote:Fifth Gear wrote:Your ad hominem attacks are extremely distasteful.criticising someone’s behaviour as self-righteous does not constitute an ad hominem attack
Willo – is that you??
No, just someone who knows what ad-hom means :p
OK, I stand corrected đŸ™‚
nowasps
Yes, we should also be
Yes, we should also be criticising the WMP for their prosecute-first attitude to really bad driving. All they’re really doing is enraging the hard-pressed motorist trying to get to work.
HalfWheeler wrote:Fifth Gear wrote:You seem to think that doing nothing is the best option…Strawman argument. And not a particularly good attempt at one. I’ll copy and paste my main point that qualified my argument (italics were included in the original post for emphasis):
“It’s counterproductive because the public shaming (crucial distinction)…”
Using video evidence is such a boon, if you’ve got a camera and use it in evidence after a confrontation/incident by sending it to the police then all well and good. But posting this up on the web isn’t making things better. And not just posting someting up once, magnatom does this weekly, daily even.
We’ve had go-pro footage of bad driving for 5-10 years now. It’s well known to anyone with a broadband connection (ie 90% of the population). In that time the driving has not improved, if anything it’s got worse. Surely we should be reaping the benefits of go-pro shaming by now? Or is this a long game? All drivers to be angels by….2030? Fingers crossed, eh?
I think magnatom has a messiah complex and I think that by the route he takes (down the busiest non-motorway roads in the Glasgow area) he’s looking for trouble . And by god he finds it.
You are using the exact arguments that the anti-cyclist motor trolls use all the time. Attack the cyclist personally (messiah complex) and using the phrase ‘looking for trouble’ for simply cycling legally on the public highway. That is victim-blaming.
Obviously this is a long game because we have a very motor-centric society of which you are a good example and it will take a long time to expose just how irrational the treatment of cyclists is.
The fact that he posts footage ‘weekly, daily even’ is evidence of the scale of the problem not the fault of the victim.
Most police forces refuse to take any action on cycle camera evidence. The more the problem is highlighted the more pressure on the government finally to address the problem appropriately.
I’m not sure if you think there is a problem at all but if you do, you have failed to explain how you think it could be addressed better other than by doing nothing and appeasing the motor lobby.
In any struggle for justice there are always plenty of people in the victimised group who will side with their aggressors. You might care to reflect on that.
-
AuthorReplies
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.