- This topic has 77 replies, 29 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 2 months ago by
Anonymous.
-
CreatorTopic
-
April 3, 2018 at 4:56 pm #28323
davidw07
…Because I cant. Please read my blog … http://bike-write.co.uk/im-speechless/
What chance do we have to convince the non-cycling public that we are reasonable, responsible and public spirited people when one of our number does this !
-
CreatorTopic
-
AuthorReplies
-
ClubSmed
oldstrath wrote:ClubSmed wrote:oldstrath wrote:Perhaps all the drivers on here would like to apologise for the mess some driver or other left by Loch Eil. God knows how drivers can expect to be taken seriously when they do this sort of thing?The difference here is that this is more likely to be fly tipping as I do not recall ever seeing a motorist change the tyre (wheel maybe, but not just the tyre) at the side of the road.
Drivers do need to be targeted with what litter they leave behind, but the picture you posted is not realisticly the type of litter they leave behind. I believe that litter is a massive problem and needs to be dealt with and the best way to do this is to engage with individual demographics as trying to tackle society as a whole is clearly not effective.
So somebody drops a dead inner tube and all cyclists need to be targetted to stop us being evil litter louts. Somebody else drops a bunch of car tyres and it’s fine, it’s nothing to do with drivers. Actually it’s exactly the kind of litter driving leaves behind. Just because you never see one person do it, doesn’t mean it’s not a consequence of driving.
Never said that it was fine.
I was simply suggesting that the right demographic need to be targeted with the right messages.
The fly tipping you pictured is most likely a result of the fly-by-night dodgy companies that offer to remove commercial waste for very little money rather than your average driver. Therefor targeting the average driver with this will not reap any benefits.
oldstrath wrote:So somebody drops a dead inner tube and all cyclists need to be targettedI don’t think that there is a question that the “somebody” was a road cyclist. This thread is on a website for road cyclists, I think that is pretty good targeting rather than a sweeping generalisation to “all cyclists”.
oldstrath
ClubSmed wrote:oldstrath wrote:Perhaps all the drivers on here would like to apologise for the mess some driver or other left by Loch Eil. God knows how drivers can expect to be taken seriously when they do this sort of thing?The difference here is that this is more likely to be fly tipping as I do not recall ever seeing a motorist change the tyre (wheel maybe, but not just the tyre) at the side of the road.
Drivers do need to be targeted with what litter they leave behind, but the picture you posted is not realisticly the type of litter they leave behind. I believe that litter is a massive problem and needs to be dealt with and the best way to do this is to engage with individual demographics as trying to tackle society as a whole is clearly not effective.
So somebody drops a dead inner tube and all cyclists need to be targetted to stop us being evil litter louts. Somebody else drops a bunch of car tyres and it’s fine, it’s nothing to do with drivers. Actually it’s exactly the kind of litter driving leaves behind. Just because you never see one person do it, doesn’t mean it’s not a consequence of driving.
ClubSmed
hawkinspeter wrote:
hawkinspeter wrote:ClubSmed wrote:oldstrath wrote:Perhaps all the drivers on here would like to apologise for the mess some driver or other left by Loch Eil. God knows how drivers can expect to be taken seriously when they do this sort of thing?The difference here is that this is more likely to be fly tipping as I do not recall ever seeing a motorist change the tyre (wheel maybe, but not just the tyre) at the side of the road.
Drivers do need to be targeted with what litter they leave behind, but the picture you posted is not realisticly the type of litter they leave behind. I believe that litter is a massive problem and needs to be dealt with and the best way to do this is to engage with individual demographics as trying to tackle society as a whole is clearly not effective.
I don’t think that targetting demographics is going to do much for our litter problem – we need to be targetting the individuals.
There’s a quite successful scheme in Bristol to issue on the spot fines to litterers and it’s really funny to hear about the smokers complaining that they are being bullied – https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/bristols-new-litter-police-police-796092
That looks like great work! I would argue that this initiative is targeting the demographic of pedestrians, though it is only fining the individuals responsible.
Not saying that I think this is a bad thing, as I have started earlier, I don’t think it is possible to target the whole of society at the same time on this subject and be effective.
hawkinspeter
ClubSmed wrote:oldstrath wrote:Perhaps all the drivers on here would like to apologise for the mess some driver or other left by Loch Eil. God knows how drivers can expect to be taken seriously when they do this sort of thing?The difference here is that this is more likely to be fly tipping as I do not recall ever seeing a motorist change the tyre (wheel maybe, but not just the tyre) at the side of the road.
Drivers do need to be targeted with what litter they leave behind, but the picture you posted is not realisticly the type of litter they leave behind. I believe that litter is a massive problem and needs to be dealt with and the best way to do this is to engage with individual demographics as trying to tackle society as a whole is clearly not effective.
I don’t think that targetting demographics is going to do much for our litter problem – we need to be targetting the individuals.
There’s a quite successful scheme in Bristol to issue on the spot fines to litterers and it’s really funny to hear about the smokers complaining that they are being bullied – https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/bristols-new-litter-police-police-796092
ClubSmed
oldstrath wrote:Perhaps all the drivers on here would like to apologise for the mess some driver or other left by Loch Eil. God knows how drivers can expect to be taken seriously when they do this sort of thing?The difference here is that this is more likely to be fly tipping as I do not recall ever seeing a motorist change the tyre (wheel maybe, but not just the tyre) at the side of the road.
Drivers do need to be targeted with what litter they leave behind, but the picture you posted is not realisticly the type of litter they leave behind. I believe that litter is a massive problem and needs to be dealt with and the best way to do this is to engage with individual demographics as trying to tackle society as a whole is clearly not effective.
ClubSmed
DaSy wrote:ClubSmed wrote:just because I think that another group is a higher priority for targeting does not mean that I can’t accept that other groups also should be targeted.The problem with this is assuming that cyclists are a group.
They are as much of a group as smokers, drivers or dog walkers are and that is all that they need to be for this discussion. Maybe I should have used the term targeted market or demographic instead?
pockstone
Oldstrath…those are bike
Oldstrath…those are bike tyres! Have you not been paying attention to the ‘fat is the new skinny’ debate?
Back in the real world… I had the pleasure of riding over Cragg Vale to Ripponden yesterday and thought of stopping to take a snap of the bags of catering waste at the roadside (with this thread in mind). I’m glad I didn’t bother or I would have been stopping every 30 yards.
And I’m pretty sure none of it was delivered by bicycle.
ClubSmed wrote:just because I think that another group is a higher priority for targeting does not mean that I can’t accept that other groups also should be targeted.The problem with this is assuming that cyclists are a group.
Perhaps all the drivers on
Perhaps all the drivers on here would like to apologise for the mess some driver or other left by Loch Eil. God knows how drivers can expect to be taken seriously when they do this sort of thing?
ClubSmed
FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
And ‘littering with discarded inner tubes’ is fundamentally different to all other forms of litering in what way, exactly? Sorry, but it _still_ doesn’t work as an argument. Littering is littering, there aren’t special categories of littering depending on the nature of the litter (assuming we aren’t talking barrels of lethal toxic waste that turns people into zombies or something). Drink driving is not an arbitrarily defined special case of a more general problem, its a particular problem of its own, very different from drink-walking, say. So, nah, you are still failing at logic. (But I am being argumentative about something that isn’t very important, I acknowledge that much.)ClubSmed wrote:Drinking and driving is an issue specific to motorists, but not all motorists were drunk drivers.
Littering the countryside with discarded inner tubes and inflation canisters is an issue specific to cyclists, but not all cyclists have littered in this way.
Drink driving could be considered a “defined special case of a more general problem” of being Drunk. Section 12 of the Licensing Act 1872 outlaws “every person found drunk in any highway or other public place, whether a building or not, or on any licensed premises”.
Other defined special cases of this more general problem include Drunk in charge of a child and Drunk and DisorderlyThis is all beside the point though.
Littering is a massive problem but tackling it as a whole doesn’t seem to have a big enough impact because the problem is enormous. So we need to eat the elephant slice by slice by targeting specific groups one at a time to get the overall problem down. I think one grouping that should be targeted for this is smokers (who seem to believe that cigarette butts are not classed as litter), but just because I think that another group is a higher priority for targeting does not mean that I can’t accept that other groups also should be targeted.
It’s a problem, not dealing with it and using the retort of “others do worse” is not fixing the problem. If anything this actually makes it worse.
FluffyKittenofTindalos
ClubSmed wrote:
ClubSmed wrote:Drinking and driving is an issue specific to motorists, but not all motorists were drunk drivers.
Littering the countryside with discarded inner tubes and inflation canisters is an issue specific to cyclists, but not all cyclists have littered in this way.
And ‘littering with discarded inner tubes’ is fundamentally different to all other forms of litering in what way, exactly? Sorry, but it _still_ doesn’t work as an argument. Littering is littering, there aren’t special categories of littering depending on the nature of the litter (assuming we aren’t talking barrels of lethal toxic waste that turns people into zombies or something).
Drink driving is not an arbitrarily defined special case of a more general problem, its a particular problem of its own, very different from drink-walking, say.
So, nah, you are still failing at logic.
(But I am being argumentative about something that isn’t very important, I acknowledge that much.)
alansmurphy
“You can only take my word
“You can only take my word that they were totally genuine and happened within 48 hours of each other – I thought they linked together to highlight issues that affect all us cyclists. “
I’m not sure how this affects me. I will ride my bike tonight and not drop litter, I don’t expect to be treated differently if someone else has, regardless of their mode of transport. If I meet a rude person, again I will take that at face value, regardless of whether I’m on my bike.
My main issues with cycling are that some people choose to put me in danger and somehow think this is justified (backed by law) based on my mode of travel and what I wear…
brooksby
ClubSmed wrote:What proceded was a tirade of abuse about cyclists not being one single community (clearly) and rants about our behaviour not warrenting close passes which was never even mentioned by the original poster …Erm – “There does, in my opinion, need to be honest recognition of where cyclists let themselves and society down. Until this happens we will continue to be considered as pig-headed pariahs by lots of people. It is somethhing that is worthy of sensible, intelligent debate.”
ClubSmed wrote:Well this thread certainly proved that there is no such thing as a cycling community!
A fellow cyclist came onto this forum and made a couple of posts linking to his blog (blatent blog self promotion) of posts about cycling related issues.
What proceded was a tirade of abuse about cyclists not being one single community (clearly) and rants about our behaviour not warrenting close passes which was never even mentioned by the original poster and some vary unconstructive comments about himself and his blog!
I for one am disapointed in my fellow human, that instead of being supportive and suggesting a few tweeks (less obvious blog promotion, no larger community etc) they decide to rip apart the cyclist/forum poster on their new adventure in blogging.Good luck Dave, I for one enjoyed your posts (though if posting on here in future I would post a better/fuller synopsis with a “full details here” link)
I’m very grateful for these comments.
The intended structure of the blog, meant I needed to open out the general cycling section to a wider audience. As I said I have a great respect for road cc and the few times I’ve previoulsy used the forum on technical issues, I’ve had helpful replies.
I’ve been accused of USING the forum for self-gain, the implication perhaps being that I fabricated or exaggerated the content of the posts. You can only take my word that they were totally genuine and happened within 48 hours of each other – I thought they linked together to highlight issues that affect all us cyclists.
I created the blog primarily to help and give advice to those those taking part in this year’s Ride Across Britain, it also provided a vehicle to maybe revive a somewhat flagging or totally expired dream of writing. It provides no income, quite the opposite. I just like writing and cycling.
You and others are right, it has proven that I was naive – it backfired effectively.
I’m grateful for your advice, I’m grateful for any constructive advice or criticism from anybody of this forum.
What I can’t accept is rudeness, or those who deliberately choose not to understand the points I’m trying to make in the blogs.
Deep breath …
davel
davidw07 wrote:There does, in my opinion, need to be honest recognition of where cyclists let themselves and society down. Until this happens we will continue to be considered as pig-headed pariahs by lots of people. It is somethhing that is worthy of sensible, intelligent debate.Really struggling with the logic here. Your other posts suggests AngryWindowMan took umbrage for no valid reason.
So which is likely to be closer to the truth?
Do you think he arrived at MAMIL-hating because he saw one-too-many discarded CO2 canisters, and the route to combating the likes of him is not to ditch bike litter and not jump red lights etc?
Or will there always be stupid and angry people who just want to hate things they don’t understand, and the state of cyclist litter will have no bearing on him?
-
AuthorReplies
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.