a fish

LadyDeliah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Still no biggie as far as I can see if you cycle > slowly, especially as per the guy in your pic when > there is no-one on foot in sight. OK, are you now being deliberately obtuse? a)he's not cycling slowly, as I pointed out, he was going pretty fast, b)not counting me, who had to step sideweays to get out of his way, there were plenty of people in sight, working away in their place of work, '...nipping back and forth across the road all day, on foot, with hand trucks and trolleys, and on forklifts...', and c) (pity there's no huge emboldening text function on here) CYCLING IS BANNED THROUGHOUT GRAND AVENUE. Why do you think the security guy shouted at him to dismount? Edit: Also, one of my colleagues has just 'anecdoted' me, one of the butchers got hit badly enough to break his wrist a few years ago by some tosser on a bike who wasn't on the road through the market, where it's banned, but on the pavement, where it's banned and fcuking stupid.

It's not an empty road with trucks going down. As I said in my post about it:- "...Grand Avenue, the semi-pedestrianised bit across the middle of Smithfield meat market. I say semi-pedestrianised, because while delivery vans and fork lifts are allowed in, bikes aren't, and the big signs at both ends with crossed out bicycles and the words 'cyclists dismount' should have been a clue to this guy... ...Grand Avenue is actually peoples' workplace, they are nipping back and forth across the road all day, on foot, with hand trucks and trolleys, and on forklifts. How would you like it if someone shot through your workplace like this, eh?" Here, this is it:- http://goo.gl/maps/043Yq

LadyDeliah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You haven't been on long enough to exhibit > evidence of a penchsnt for personal vendettas. You > got personal, but that only lasted for 2 or 3 > posts. > > The personal vendettas was relating to the > infamous DJKQ. I know. I'll forgive you this time ;-) Meanwhile, at the risk of getting repetitive, I showed you a picture of someone cycling at speed in a place where they are expressly forbidden. What was wrong with him getting off and pushing the bike, like most cyclists who go through there? What danger is he avoiding by staying on his bike? Why do the signs banning cycling in there not apply to him?

To this forum, yes. To forums in general, no. The persona I adopt, much like you, is one who sticks to the empirical truth, gets a bit sarky sometimes, and delights in the use of language. If that's what you class as a personal vendetta, well, whatevs girlfriend, whatevs.

OK, let me make myself clear. I am not now, and never have been an EDF user called DJKQ. I?m assuming from Breaks' and LadyDeliah?s posts that there has been a user of this name; presumably one who is clear thinking, erudite, interesting and tenacious in his or her pursuit of the truth, one who has very little time for straw men and evasive posting. Probably a pretty snappy dresser too. If you guys want to persist in thinking I am he or she, well, that?s your problem, not mine

Well that's as clear as mud! ;-)

Why yes, yes indeed, I had forgotten that reply. I?ll see what I can do tomorrow morning; one of my colleagues has just arrived shaken somewhat by being very nearly hit by a fast moving courier on the pavement outside Abigail?s Cafe by Farringdon station, so it shouldn?t be too difficult. Meanwhile, without wishing to come over all Jeremy Paxman to your Michael Howard, any chance of an answer to some very simple questions? 1) I showed someone cycling at speed in a place where they are expressly forbidden. What was wrong with him getting off and pushing the bike, like most cyclists who go through there? What danger is he avoiding by staying on his bike? 2) How would you like it if someone shot through your workplace like this? 3) And who - or indeed what - is DJKQ

LadyDeliah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You said you see Lycra louts ploughing through > pedestrians whilst verbally abiding them on a > daily basis. I asked you to show us. You showed > us a guy cycling in a suit (?) on an empty street > past a parked van. Impressive. Sorry, I seem to have mislaid the post where I said that. Please provide a link. Also, I showed someone cycling at speed in a place where they are expressly forbidden. What was wrong with him getting off and pushing the bike, like most cyclists who go through there? What danger is he avoiding by staying on his bike? And more questions you still haven't answered, how would you like it if someone shot through your workplace like this? And who - or indeed what - is DJKQ?

I never promised 'a Lycra lout ploughing through pedestrians on the pavement whilst verbally abusing them', but I have given you a perfect example of someone cycling at speed in a place where they are expressly forbidden. What was wrong with him getting off and pushing the bike, like most cyclists who go through there? What danger is he avoiding by staying on his bike? And you didn't answer the question, how would you like it if someone shot through your workplace like this? Oh and, who - or indeed what - is DJKQ?

LadyDeliah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Take a picture on your phone for us a fish OK, here you go, knock yourself out with this muppet. (Pic now deleted, as it wasn't supposed to be a way into my entire photobucket account, just one pic!) This was taken - by me! - above 8 minutes ago in Grand Avenue, the semi-pedestrianised bit across the middle of Smithfield meat market. I say semi-pedestrianised, because while delivery vans and fork lifts are allowed in, bikes aren't, and the big signs at both ends with crossed out bicycles and the words 'cyclists dismount' should have been a clue to this guy, like they were to the woman clearly wheeling her bike the 50 metres or so from one gate to the other. Seconds later, a guard roared 'Oi! get off your fcuking bike!" to which the cyclist meekly complied. Now, bear in mind that Grand Avenue is actually peoples' workplace, they are nipping back and forth across the road all day, on foot, with hand trucks and trolleys, and on forklifts. How would you like it if someone shot through your workplace like this, eh?

LadyDeliah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This is the real menace on our roads and > pavements. Something really needs be done about > it. > > http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/file.php?5 > ,file=108658 > > > http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/file.php?5 > ,file=108659 Christ yes!

henryb Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Him, and his mate round the > > corner:- http://goo.gl/maps/wGUdg > > I think that actually might be the same guy - same > suit, same brief case. Probably a lawyer. :o) He's obviously rich enough to own two different bikes ;-) Edit: Nup, you're right, it is the same guy...

rodneybewes Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Into the incident referred to? Or cycling on the > pavement generally? I think not. You're pulling my > leg I think. Hahahahahahahaaaaaa! No, but do have a look on Hansard, there are loads of links about cycling laws, and lots of facts and figures about road safety, whether it's bikes, cars or pedestrians.

rodneybewes Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You're right - the cops are bound to cover this > up. We need an parliamentary enquiry. Put 'cycling' in as a search term to Hansard, and you'll see there has already been quite a few...

henryb Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > OMG - call the cops! The Cycling Embassy website (it's a very good site, by the way) says that 'Cycling on pavements is a response to badly designed streets and hostile road conditions. Where roads are quiet and safe, or where high-quality cycling facilities have been provided, pavement cycling ceases'. So what's this guy's excuse? Oh hang on, that's right, it's a one way street, and he wants to go the wrong way. Him, and his mate round the corner:- http://goo.gl/maps/wGUdg

I was going to post a map showing where the Cyclists Behaving Like Dicks blackspot I work in is, and hey, look what I found:- http://goo.gl/maps/LCgou

D'you know LadyDeliah, if I'd had my mobile in my hand, rather than my pocket, I could have got two shots of pavement cycling, one quite dangerous (West Smithfield), the other not too bad, (St John St). Better luck next time, eh?

henryb Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > however in 20 years in London I never > seen a "Lycra Lout" bombing down the pavement > barging people out the way spitting and swearing > at pedestrians. If someone would tell me where to > see one that would be great because I am starting > to feel I am missing out. As I've said before, try Farringdon/Clerkenwell.

LadyDeliah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So DJKQ, sorry, I mean A Fish, are you going to > make every thread I post on a chance to launch > personal attacks on me, of the sort you were > previously famed for? Or do you think it worth > changing your MO now you have a new username? Who?

Just been into town. I'm not going to risk LadyDeliah's (self)righteous wrath by telling you what I saw - it is, after all, anecdotal, and therefore not acceptable as fact - but suffice to say someone's clearly told the cyclists of London it's National Cycle Like a Fcukwit Day, and they're all taking part.

alldownhillfromhere Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Oh come on people, get a grip, stop being so > bloody reasonable. Pavement cyclists need to be > stopped, and stopped NOW. Aren't you supposed to be under a curfew?

LadyDeliah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A fish, I know you're trying to defend your rant > against me, but no-where did I refer to the woman > who you said was injured. Your post was one in a > long line of unproven anecdotes from cyclists, > pedestrians and motorists alike. > > My joke was against the tendency to pile one set > of anecdotes against another set of anecdotes, > because we can all recite horror stories and sad > incidents against cyclists, pedestrians and > motorists. This thread is littered with them. But > anecdotes don't convey the full picture, which is > why a number of us have continuously attempted to > get this thread back to fact based arguments. But > it seems many people on here prefer anecdotes to > fact and take arguments against the use of > anecdotes as a personal affront. > > Do you understand the problem with anecdote versus > fact yet, or would you like me to continue trying > to explain it to you? *sigh* OK, so let?s get pedantic about it:- you made a joke about a post in which I referred to a woman being injured by a pavement cyclist to the extent that she had to be taken by ambulance hospital for x-rays and dressings etc etc. That is why you appeared not to care about her, there was no ?Sorry to hear your colleague was hurt, I hope she?s ok. However, here?s my point about anecdotes about people cycling on the pavement etc etc?. But if I understand you correctly, if someone should stand up in court and tell the judge and jury what they saw and/or heard, that doesn?t count because it?s anecdotal? You?ve done nothing to get this argument back to fact based argument, because we have very few of the facts about dangerous cycling at our fingertips, so we are forced to retort to our own personal experience, and that of our friends and/or relatives and/or colleagues. The simple fact of the matter is, whether motorists drive like idiots or not, cyclists are also a considerable danger in London, and most of that danger seems to come from them cycling on the pavement. I have personally been hit twice, and have had, oh about 15 near misses. The best way for the authorities, or indeed us lot, to find out about it is by report ? anecdote by another name. Yes, I could reel off a list of anecdotes about the people I?ve seen driving their cars like idiots too, especially on Sundays (though never, fortunately, on the pavement), but that would have to go in a People Driving Their Cars Like Idiots thread. Why don?t you start one? I could post an anecdote or two every weekend if it?d make you feel better.

LadyDeliah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Damn, you guys got a bit carried away! > > A Fish, after you posted your anecdotal evidence, > I was about to list the numerous motorists' > violations I'd witnessed on my ride to work. But > the list would have been long and I didn't have > time to faff about so made a joke to show that > anecdotal evdence is pretty rubbish and lets get > back to real numbers and statistics. > > If anyone gets hurt by a car, a pedestrian or a > cyclist, why would you expect me to not care? You > don't know me and if you read any of my earlier > posts, you may have noticed that I am all for > increased safety through better design for all > road users, including pedestrians. > You made a joke about a woman being injured badly enough to need an ambulance. That's a pretty good reason for me to assume either you didn't believe me, or you just didn't care. Edit: You'll love this, LadyDeliah, I just popped up the road to buy some lunch, and on the 3 minute walk there, I saw a cyclist shoot through the red lights, making a black cab slam on its anchors, and on the way back, a cyclist jumping onto the pavement in front of Belgo and across the corner, making two people coming out of the shop jump sharply backwards so they didn't get hit by him. They shouted at him, he shouted back that they should look where they're fcuking going. Your consolation prize is that some knob in a truck nearly hit a motorcycle as he shot through the junction as the lights turned red. Sorry, I forgot, anecdotal doesn't count, does it?

a fish Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > LadyDeliah Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > My friend just called me to say that a car > driver > > levitated 6 ft off the ground and swooped down > on > > cyclists and pedestrians alike in his flying > car. > > I'm assuming from your pointlessly sarcastic > response that you don't believe me. OK, when my > colleague comes in tomorrow, I'll get her to come > on here and tell you exactly what happened to her > herself - she can quote directly from the police > report. She's gone home today, bruised, aching all > over, and very very angry. > > Oh and you saying 'oh that'll just be you taking > the lie further so it won't count', as I feel > you're about to, will just be an indication that > whatever those who are angry at dangerous cyclists > say is automatically discounted by you, so that > won't count either. Chances are, LadyDeliah, you don't care about my colleague, as it was a cyclist who allegedly hit her, and we all know they're God's own innocent angels, and any claim made that they behave anything less than perfectly is a vicious smear by satanic Nazi motorists, but this just came in from her:- "Not going to be in today, still aching all over and have a doozy of a headache. And [a fish], tell the person on the net to try walking around Clerkenwell/Farringdon and see how often she sees moronic cycling!!!"

Thanks Tomskip, I'll pass on your regards if she's in tomorrow. And Zebedee Tring, don't worry, I deal with far more up-themselves people than Lady Deliah at the film studios every day...