Rockets

Clearly you no longer have any sensible contribution to make to this forum...we shall refer to this phase as Earl's Teenage Troll Phase...;-)

Earl, can you expand on your accusation on the Highway Code? Regardless of criminal activity on any mode of transport is it not the case that laws and regulations are set for the very worst behaviour of people - we have speed limit enforcement because some people speed - we police everything not because of the behaviour of the many but because of the behaviour of the few? Except seemingly cycling and that ultimately endangers other roads users and pedestrians, especially at a time where active travel planners seem to think it is a good idea to mix cyclists and pedestrians. It's a recipe for disaster and some that many in the pro-cycle lobby steadfastly refuse to acknowledge - as this thread highlights oh so powerfully.

Per Sue the sushi is good at Monkatsu on North Cross Road. A bit further afield Sushi Shimai on Milkwood Road is good too.

Can you explain how exactly? The new hierarchy of users within the Highway Code is very clear with pedestrians (rightly) afforded the most protection from everyone else on the road. They are at the top of the hierarchy and every other road user comes after them - including cyclists.

Signage had not changed as of this morning.

Here you go everyone...transport guru Malumbu has spoken and if you get hit by a bike put it in the "s### happens" category and it was probably your own fault anyway......serves you right for not being on a bike hey Malumbu! #culturewar!

Yes i get the point what you're trying to do but do you not think you should have selected an article that doesn't show how Soithwark Cyclists were trying to manipulate the Dulwich LTN consultation.....that looks like a massive own goal.....

Nah...i think you scored a massive own goal with that one...but thanks for reminding everyone the lengths Southwark Cyclists and the council went to to try and, desperately, garner support for their measures. Honestly, did you not bother checking the article before posting? I mean why choose to post that one.....

I won't answer because I can no longer decipher the riddles you set. I actually think you might need some time off from the forum. Honestly - your posts have become particularly strange the last few weeks and today with your repeated starting of new threads things are starting to get very odd.

Nah, just tired of your silly troll games.

You're not making any sense any more and rambling. Even I have lost the will to argue with you right now.

Earl, you're going round and round in ever decreasing circles. You're not making any sense anymore.

You're clearly abusing the forum and treating it, and the people who post here, with contempt.

Earl, thank you, thank you, thank you..... the funniest thing with that post is that it was actually a "campaign" post that Southwark Cyclists put out to try to encourage its members to respond to the Dulwich LTN consultation after Southwark extended the consultation response period (because they had way too many people saying no!!!). I mean the Southwark Cyclists post actually took people to a page to spoon feed them on how to respond... Of all your own goals this is by far the most impressive!!! The gift that just keeps on giving and a timely reminder of the lengths the cycle lobby went to manipulate the Dulwich consultation process.....DOH!!!! Where's that facepalm emoji.... https://southwarkcyclists.org.uk/new-data-reveals-huge-success-of-dulwich-traffic-measures/ Respond to the consultation here! The deadline has been extended until Sunday 18, July. Uncategorized No Comments This month, three schemes in the Dulwich area are being consulted on as part of a big review. At Southwark Cyclists, we think there is a lot to love about the schemes, with some of the measures leading to amazing increases in walking and cycling. But for the schemes to be considered really successful in achieving the council’s worthy aims, certain tweaks are needed, and more measures need to be introduced. If you’d like to read more about our thoughts on the scheme, read our blog post here. Respond to the consultation and prioritise answering question 2 under each measure. Our responses are as follows: Traffic filter in Dulwich Village Select “Option B: Retain it as it is” Timed closure at junction of Dulwich Village/Burbage Road with College Road/Gallery Road Select “Option 😧 Retain the measure, but modify/ reduce the hours of restrictions” Add: Make the camera on Dulwich Village operate 24/7 and in both directions, so it becomes what in other parts of London is called a “bus gate”. Replace the camera on Burbage Rd with a 24/7 modal filter so it becomes no through route for motor vehicles but full access for walking and cycling. Install additional planting and seating. Introduce additional modal filters in the area, in particular on Red Post Hill to create a longer, safer, north south cycle route Install cycle tracks on all main roads Timed closure at junction of Turney Road and Burbage Road Select “Option 😧 Retain the measure, but modify/ reduce the hours of restrictions” Add: Replace the camera with a 24/7 modal filter so it becomes no through route for motor vehicles but full access for walking and cycling. Install additional planting and seating. Introduce additional modal filters in the area, in particular on Red Post Hill to create a longer, safer, north south cycle route Install cycle tracks on all main roads Timed closure at junction of Townley Road with East Dulwich Grove Select “Option 😧 Retain the measure, but modify/ reduce the hours of restrictions” Add: Make the camera on Dulwich Village operate 24/7 and in both directions, so it becomes what in other parts of London is called a “bus gate” Introduce additional modal filters in the area, in particular on Red Post Hill to create a longer, safer, north south cycle route Install cycle tracks on all main roads Traffic filter on Melbourne Grove (South) Select “Option B: Retain it as it is” Traffic Filters on Melbourne Grove (North), Tintagel Crescent, Elsie Road and Derwent Grove Select “Option B: Retain it as it is” Northbound traffic filter on Champion Hill Select “Option D, Retain the measure, but modify/ enhance it with other features” Add: Make the filter operate in both directions so it becomes no through route for motor vehicles but full access for walking and cycling. Install additional planting and seating. Introduce additional modal filters in the area, in particular on Red Post Hill to create a longer, safer, north south cycle route Install cycle tracks on all main roads Respond to the consultation today!

And what happens if you have a scuffle outside a pub, someone falls awkwardly and they then die? The more you post the more blinkered it appears you are. Earl, I have completely lost track of the point you are trying to make and, I suspect, you have to now. You're tying yourself in knots in the vain hope of continuing an argument - it's all getting a little surreal now.

Clearly - time for an @administrator yellow card perhaps? Earl is clearly abusing the right to use the forum and is trying to ruin it for everyone else. All gone a bit too Mr Chicken for my liking.

Earl can't even get that fact right!!!!

But Malumbu - maybe you should open your mind a little. Consider this: do you need the mass or velocity of a car to knock someone over, or to make them stumble and fall? No. Of course not. With many of the deaths caused to pedestrians by cyclists it is not the collision but the fall that does the damage. You may have noticed that many of those who have been killed are elderly and as First Mate rightly points out you often don't know there is a bike approaching you at speed until it goes past you.

Did Calton finally go live today and has anyone seen any additional signage going up? Does anyone on the pro-side think that the signage on Calton is adequate and won't be entrapping unsuspecting motorists?

Ha ha...given you obsession with who is behind One Dulwich do you not think you should know who is on the transport sub-committee of an organisation you are a member of given they are setting transport policy for the Dulwich Society - something you clearly care a lot about....? BTW was it you who asked admin to redact <admin - removed> name from the thread when I told everyone about her active travel lobbying work for LCC etc? If not, any idea who it might have been and why they were so keen for it to be redacted......? On this were you aware of the presence of the local Village Labour councillors in the transport sub-committee meetings?

Well, given that is not an offence to cycle whilst using a phone it's probably a good idea....I see plenty, on Lime bikes in particular, doing so concentrating more on their phone than what is ahead of them.... On a serious note do you think that is something that doesn't need to be changed?

Sorry what a load of utter claptrap....you seem to be suggesting the moment someone gets on a bike they suddenly becoming impervious to causing accidents....and if every car journey was replaced by a journey on a bike then there would be zero accidents or injuries.....goodness me... Here we have Cycle Brain of the Year!!!

Surely stricter regulation of bicycles leads to safer roads?

Maybe take this chat to the thread in relation to this but it looks like members of Dulwich Society tried exactly that...that's when it all went a bit pear-shaped...

I am not. I am just wondering why an "independent" local campaign group, which seems to get funding/support from Southwark Council, has decided that increases in traffic congestion and pollution on Croxted Road is down to private schools in Dulwich....when we know that TFL said the increases were down to the LTNs - myabe the two are interlinked but no mention of that from the campaign group.....