Deals for the Dirt from Mondraker, FiveTen, Troy Lee Designs, 100%, Muc Off and Pro Bike Kit

@mdavidford "laxtivist" Hmm... slacktivist? "I disapprove of what you say but I will sometimes defend 'till the next coffee and cake opportunity your right to say it"?

@IanGlasgow They can make a pass look faster, but they never make things look closer than they are If it was as simple as that, some would say you could be right, but it isn't and you're not. I have the advantage that I noticed the effect that 'wide angle makes passes look closer' and performed the experiments. It does. The fallacy in your argument arises from equating 'closeness of a pass' to 'making things look closer', when they are clearly not the same thing. The relevant thought experiment is to imagine a balloon inflated between the cyclist and the vehicle of the close passing b*****d at the moment of peak closeness. To a first approximation, the whole of that balloon is at the same distance from the lens. Then ask yourself 'does the reduced field of view image make the balloon look bigger than on the increased field of view image (which we're calling 'wide-angle')?' The answer is yes. Bigger balloon = less-close pass. QED. Conclusion: Wide-angle makes passes look closer!

There are reply chains on the main road.cc site - they haven't worked on the offroad.cc and ebiketips subsites or the forum since the same ill-fated migration that killed the edit functionality.

https://upride.cc/incident/4148vz_travellerschoicecoach_closepass/ As a special bonus, to compensate for the mistake I made with the Sainsbury's 44-tonner above, here is the Travellers Choice attack on a pedestrian crossing. This is relevant because I am part way through the FoI process, asking LancsFilth what they actually did about the offence - this was before they invented the Lancashire Dodge, which is to ignore all reports about offences against cyclists. They actually agreed at the time to take action on this one, but at the Internal Review stage of the FoI process last week they refused to say what the action was, just as they did 3 years ago. The story continues...

I see the comment section has gotten worse again, first no editing, now no reply chains. What's next, pay by the word? @Rendel Harris "allow all demonstrations and counter demonstrations to take place without any policing?" All? No. But most could get away fine with a dozen or so shaperones, the fact the Met deploy vast swarms in riot gear and call in extra support from across the country(and if you ever want to maintain your illusions about the police, stay out of any forums or groupchats involving said bussed-in coppers, the level of gleeful anticipation they display at the prospect of being able to engage in violent thuggery against "crusties" and "stop oil nonces" is legitimately depressing even to someone who already has a low opinion of the profession) so they can have 10 officers to arrest every sign-holding pensioner has nothing to do with necessity or public order and everything to do with the fact the modern British police are an entire workforce of little Cartmans demanding you Respect Their Authoritah. It's a show of force intended to discourage protest in the first place. At least, protest of certain kinds - funnily enough they never seem to need half the coppers in the country to police farmers or cabbies blocking up the roads, and their response to fascist marches and rallies seems to be downright proportional unless there's a leftwing counter-protest planned...

https://upride.cc/incident/yn67mvj_sainsburys44tonner_closepass/ I mistakenly copied in the date from the file. I keep them in a text file with the date at the end of the line, but I should have excluded it

@wtjs link not found 😢

@wtjs wide angle lenses make things looks further away. That's why estate agents use them when taking interior photos - it makes the rooms look bigger because everything looks further away. They can make a pass look faster, but they never make things look closer than they are.

“The BBC’s Editorial Guidelines are clear that significant errors should be corrected transparently”, said Hamilton." Good luck with that one, Fabian. Having spent thirty years trying to get the BBC to correct the significant errors in their reporting of cycle helmets and failing completely, you'll need a hell of a lot of luck.

Can't have been completely inactivist if you were attending some - laxtivist, perhaps?