[Misc] "Single file you lycra clad twats"

[Billy in Bristol]

I had a taster session on the track as a birthday present - it was absolutely brilliant and totally knackering. Much better than Preston Park!

Get involved then...as you are clearly a pro.

The rock up and ride sessions see us charged a corporate rate, hence why maybe a bit expensive, but again, keep saying, all successful fundraisers get to ride for free.

 

[Billy the Fish]

I didn't watch this at first because I assumed it would be the usual car hate/bike hate nonsense......

It's actually bloody brilliant! Such a good example of how to not get stressed behind the wheel.

It also shows why I tried to avoid London jobs when I was on the road, you're only ever a few seconds away from an accident and it's exhausting.

 

[Billy the Fish]

The whole tweet

[tweet]1517874195388116994[/tweet]

Looking at the pictures it's a 1930's ex-council estate.

These estates have parking issues because there's no off street parking and the roads are narrow. In mid-sussex Hurstpierpoint around willow way springs to mind, it's exactly the same. Also for a modern example see Bolnore estate in Haywards Heath.

It's not the fault of drivers if bad planning or restrictive building regs (modern estates have limited parking) mean there's not sufficient parking space for the number of cars on the road. It would be better to address the issue rather than demonize residents who don't have allocated parking.

*EDIT* Just had a look at the comments and there's definitely an element of middle class snobbery to this - "if you can't store a car don't buy one" ""these oiks and their vans should get a better job and buy a house with a drive" "park further away"

 

[Bold Seagull]

Looking at the pictures it's a 1930's ex-council estate.

They're all the same because there's no off street parking and the roads are narrow. In mid-sussex Hurstpierpoint around willow way springs to mind, it's exactly the same. Also for a modern example see Bolnore estate in Haywards Heath.

It's not the fault of drivers if bad planning or restrictive building regs mean there's not sufficient parking space for the number of cars on the road.

*EDIT* Just had a llok at the comments and there's definitely an element of middle class snobbery to this - "if you can't store a car don't buy one" ""these oiks and their vans should get a better job and buy a house with a drive" "park further away"

Bad planning - were 1930s planners supposed to know that by 2022 families might have 2, 3 or even 4 cars to one household?
Building regulations - where do building regs cover parking other than access for disabled people?

What exactly are you proposing here, knock down 1930s housing because they didn't allow for enough parking spaces!?

 

[wuntbedruv]

Lazy PUFFIN'S

I regard myself as a considerate driver, I give way at junctions and try to give lycra louts and walking dung depositors plenty of time and room , I'm generally in no real rush though I do like a bit of high speed driving when the road suits. I try never to get too frustrated by people who forget to signal or pull out in front of me, people with no idea of priorities on Roundabouts. I have all the time I'm the world for Learner drivers, we started there once.

But what really gets my goat is cyclist who put no effort in, if you have pedals and are holding up traffic- use them and go faster.

Yesterday I was behind some PUFFIN freewheeling for about half a mile down a 1 in 20 winding incline.

I get it that he was out for some exercise.. Bloody well do some then!!

 

[Billy the Fish]

Bad planning - were 1930s planners supposed to know that by 2022 families might have 2, 3 or even 4 cars to one household?
Building regulations - where do building regs cover parking other than access for disabled people?

What exactly are you proposing here, knock down 1930s housing because they didn't allow for enough parking spaces!?

That was a perfectly reasonable post, bore off you sanctimonious pillock. You've read it and flipped it into something completely different.

What f**king planet do you need to be on to think I was proposing anything other than a more pragmatic conversation about the issue?

You can't make a broad point on this forum without someone zeroing in on a particular statement and taking it out of context.

P.S Of course building regs cover parking on new estates. (see Bolnore village comment for proof of context, not that I should need to spell it out to you)

 

[wuntbedruv]

that was a perfectly reasonable post, bore off you sanctimonious pillock. You've read it and flipped it into something completely different.

What f**king planet do you need to be on to think i was proposing anything other than a more pragmatic conversation about the issue?

You can't make a broad point on this forum without someone zeroing in on a particular statement and taking it out of context.

P.s of course building regs cover parking on new estates. (see bolnore village comment for proof of context, not that i should need to spell it out to you)

fight,fight fight

 

[Bold Seagull]

That was a perfectly reasonable post, bore off you sanctimonious pillock. You've read it and flipped it into something completely different.

What f**king planet do you need to be on to think I was proposing anything other than a more pragmatic conversation about the issue?

You can't make a broad point on this forum without someone zeroing in on a particular statement and taking it out of context.

P.S Of course building regs cover parking on new estates. (see Bolnore village comment for proof of context, not that I should need to spell it out to you)

Planning policies cover parking, not Building Regulations.

You can make a point on this forum, but if someone disagrees, it's best to try to at least keep some of the toys in the pram.

In terms of 'pragmatic conversation', by shifting the blame to 1930s planners, what exactly was the issue you were trying to make, or solution to the problem, or was your point just to say car owners aren't to blame?

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Looking at the pictures it's a 1930's ex-council estate.

These estates have parking issues because there's no off street parking and the roads are narrow. In mid-sussex Hurstpierpoint around willow way springs to mind, it's exactly the same. Also for a modern example see Bolnore estate in Haywards Heath.

It's not the fault of drivers if bad planning or restrictive building regs (modern estates have limited parking) mean there's not sufficient parking space for the number of cars on the road. It would be better to address the issue rather than demonize residents who don't have allocated parking.

*EDIT* Just had a look at the comments and there's definitely an element of middle class snobbery to this - "if you can't store a car don't buy one" ""these oiks and their vans should get a better job and buy a house with a drive" "park further away"

Looking at those pictures there seems to be plenty of parking but just like on my road there is only room for parking on one side. Most seem to have understood this concept but one car driver has not and is 100 % at fault. That car should be towed.

 

[Billy the Fish]

Planning policies cover parking, not Building Regulations.

You can make a point on this forum, but if someone disagrees, it's best to try to at least keep some of the toys in the pram.

In terms of 'pragmatic conversation', by shifting the blame to 1930s planners, what exactly was the issue you were trying to make, or solution to the problem, or was your point just to say car owners aren't to blame?

You're not disagreeing though are you, you've simply set out to belittle me and play at semantics.

 

[Billy the Fish]

Looking at those pictures there seems to be plenty of parking but just like on my road there is only room for parking on one side. Most seem to have understood this concept but one car driver has not and is 100 % at fault. That car should be towed.

Those pictures are just a snapshot in time, when the cars were parking those spaces might have been occupied or there might simply be some politics on the street about parking in front of houses. I'm not offering any solutions here, there probably isn't one. I just think that shaming residents on twitter isn't going to help, neither is towing the cars of residents who most likely don't have any other option.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Those pictures are just a snapshot in time, when the cars were parking those spaces might have been occupied or there might simply be some politics on the street about parking in front of houses. I'm not offering any solutions here, there probably isn't one. I just think that shaming residents on twitter isn't going to help, neither is towing the cars of residents who most likely don't have any other option.

But parking only on one side of the road works on my road. If parking spaces are finite then that really is too bad. The resident will have known that when they moved in. The answer really isn’t to park on the pavement. I have no issue with public shaming of selfish parking. On your other point nobody has the right to park in front of their house.

 

[Stat Brother]

It must be nice to have a protected cycle lane, like this one.

[tweet]1518680534486036482[/tweet]

 

[Acker79]

It must be nice to have a protected cycle lane, like this one.

[tweet]1518680534486036482[/tweet]

How rude! That other cyclist in red farts as the guy rides past him at around 25 seconds. Not just that he wafts it in his direction...

 

[Stat Brother]

Bloody pavementists getting in the way.

[tweet]1519190665376239617[/tweet]

 

[zefarelly]

Bloody pavementists getting in the way.

[tweet]1519190665376239617[/tweet]

 

[maresfield seagull]

View attachment 147320

Just unplug it Throw it back towards the house
Why blow up some cable crops ?

 

[Stat Brother]

Wouldn't have happened if he was in single file

[tweet]1519432743767130121[/tweet]

 

[Stat Brother]

If only it were a joke.

https://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news...n-for-benefit-of-angry-drivers-20220428220316


BRITAIN is governed with the sole aim of appeasing red-faced drivers with high blood pressure, it has been confirmed.

Both the Conservative and Labour party have a tacit agreement that any legislation they propose to tackle congestion or climate change must be toothless enough not to annoy Britain’s car owners in any way.


Tory MP Norman Steele said: “We want a greener future, cleaner air and safer roads for the sake of our children. We even want more pedestrianised areas for scum who can’t afford an Audi.

 

[Chicken Run]

It would seem this cyclitoras wanted the pedestrians using the crossing to move over, delighted Sussex Police fined him.


https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/20106167.cyclist-fined-riding-red-light-shoreham/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro