Bike Courier Melbourne

Drs said:

"byron27" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:YeBqc.-
[email hidden]:[email hidden]-
etserver.com
[...]

Quoted message said:

8) Be a deviant when the cops arent looking and a model citizen when
they are. Traffic lights are for cars, not bikes (oh oh, i might
have started something here!)

That's exactly the sort of antisocial behaviour that causes the rest of
us so much grief because we cop the backlash.

mmmmm..... i dont know about that. I dont make any excuses for what
did when i was a courier and i know i broke the law. There ar
reasons for what i did and if you like i can go through them all
Essentially the faster i cut through the city the more coin
made. I received no holidays, no sick days, nothing. From firs
thing in the morning i started on zero. I personally feel it i
unfair for someone else to criticise couriers for their actio
until YOU, yourself have done the job, having to rely on what yo
made each day to look after yourself. I never hit anyone, i di
not endanger lives, I did not ride on sidewalks at 30kph and di
not fang it through pedestrian crossings almost hitting people.
knew how to ride in a way that made me mostly unnoticable. Peopl
didnt notice me and that way i could do what i wanted

If you spend 8 hours a day in a city you will soon see ho
inefficient and ineffective routes are around a city. Cities are mad
cars, not bikes

-

Found this OLD news:
http://www.messengers.org/news/news.melbourne.html

Did the courier companies actually introduce a code of conduct

Is it followed

Is it possible to earn a living in this job WITHOUT breakin
(m)any laws

Do all/most/some/little of the couriers break the laws

cheers! hipp

-

hippy said:

Found this OLD news: http://www.messengers.org/news/news.melbourne.html
Did the courier companies actually introduce a code of conduct?
Is it followed?
Is it possible to earn a living in this job WITHOUT breaking
(m)any laws?
Do all/most/some/little of the couriers break the laws?
cheers! hippy

apologies, i didnt answer all the questions, i was ranting..

i would say that in the first week 70% of couriers follow the laws an
that rapidly declines to about 0% after 3-4 months

-

"byron27" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Drs said:

"byron27" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:YeBqc.-

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

[email hidden]:[email hidden]-

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

etserver.com
[...]

Quoted message said:

8) Be a deviant when the cops arent looking and a model citizen

when

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

they are. Traffic lights are for cars, not bikes (oh oh, i might
have started something here!)

Quoted message said:

That's exactly the sort of antisocial behaviour that causes the rest

of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

us so much grief because we cop the backlash.

mmmmm..... i dont know about that. I dont make any excuses for what i
did when i was a courier and i know i broke the law. There are
reasons for what i did and if you like i can go through them all.
Essentially the faster i cut through the city the more coin i
made. I received no holidays, no sick days, nothing. From first
thing in the morning i started on zero. I personally feel it is
unfair for someone else to criticise couriers for their action
until YOU, yourself have done the job, having to rely on what you
made each day to look after yourself.

What does that have to do with you breaking the law and us copping the
backlash from it? Traffic lights are most certainly also for bikes. The
law says so.

Quoted message said:

I never hit anyone, i did
not endanger lives, I did not ride on sidewalks at 30kph and did
not fang it through pedestrian crossings almost hitting people. I
knew how to ride in a way that made me mostly unnoticable. People
didnt notice me and that way i could do what i wanted.

If you spend 8 hours a day in a city you will soon see how
inefficient and ineffective routes are around a city. Cities are made
cars, not bikes.

Which has got what to do with what?

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

Drs said:

"byron27" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:LgUqc.-
[email hidden]:[email hidden]-
enetserver.com...

Quoted message said:

Drs said:

"byron27" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:YeBqc.-news:YeBqc.-

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

[email hidden]:[email hidden]-

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

etserver.com [...]
> 8) Be a deviant when the cops arent looking and a model citizen

when

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> they are. Traffic lights are for cars, not bikes (oh oh, i
> might have started something here!)

Quoted message said:

That's exactly the sort of antisocial behaviour that causes the
rest

of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

us so much grief because we cop the backlash.

mmmmm..... i dont know about that. I dont make any excuses for what i
did when i was a courier and i know i broke the law. There are
reasons for what i did and if you like i can go through them
all. Essentially the faster i cut through the city the more coin
i made. I received no holidays, no sick days, nothing. From
first thing in the morning i started on zero. I personally feel
it is unfair for someone else to criticise couriers for their
action until YOU, yourself have done the job, having to rely on
what you made each day to look after yourself.

What does that have to do with you breaking the law and us copping the
backlash from it? Traffic lights are most certainly also for bikes. The
law says so.

Quoted message said:

I never hit anyone, i did not endanger lives, I did not ride on
sidewalks at 30kph and did not fang it through pedestrian
crossings almost hitting people. I knew how to ride in a way
that made me mostly unnoticable. People didnt notice me and that
way i could do what i wanted.

If you spend 8 hours a day in a city you will soon see how
inefficient and ineffective routes are around a city. Cities are made
cars, not bikes.

Which has got what to do with what?
--
A: Top-posters.
B: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

just because something is the law, doesnt make it the "right" thing t
do. Who makes the laws?, humans with just as many preconceptions a
anyone else. If you believe in the laws of the land, and you hav
thought through them and they feel rationally, logically and sociall
sound, then good for you. If you just follow them because they are th
rules, dont you think you need to think about them and ask yourself "D
i really agree with this?"

I dont agree with some laws, and as such i dont respect them

-

byron27 said:

just because something is the law, doesnt make it the "right" thing to
do. Who makes the laws?, humans with just as many preconceptions as
anyone else. If you believe in the laws of the land, and you have
thought through them and they feel rationally, logically and socially
sound, then good for you. If you just follow them because they are the
rules, dont you think you need to think about them and ask yourself "Do
i really agree with this?".

I dont agree with some laws, and as such i dont respect them.

Just because you DON'T agree with some laws, does NOT make it ok to
break them.

If you truly think they are unjust - then go about lobbying to have them
changed. Civil disobedience is a grossly overused cop out by those who
can't be arsed living by the rules of society.

Your actions advocate anarchy - where everybody does what they want to
do 'coz it 'seems' right to them.

---
Cheers

PeterC

[Rushing headlong: out of control - and there ain't no stopping]
[and there's nothing you can do about it at all]

byron27 said:

Drs said:

"byron27" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:LgUqc.-
[email hidden]:[email hidden]-
enetserver.com...

Quoted message said:

Drs wrote:
> "byron27" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:YeBqc.-news:YeBqc.-

Quoted message said:

>

[email hidden]:[email hidden]-

Quoted message said:

> etserver.com [...]
> > 8) Be a deviant when the cops arent looking and a model citizen

when

Quoted message said:

> > they are. Traffic lights are for cars, not bikes (oh oh, i
> > might have started something here!)

> That's exactly the sort of antisocial behaviour that causes the
> rest

of

Quoted message said:

> us so much grief because we cop the backlash.

mmmmm..... i dont know about that. I dont make any excuses for what i
did when i was a courier and i know i broke the law. There are
reasons for what i did and if you like i can go through them
all. Essentially the faster i cut through the city the more coin
i made. I received no holidays, no sick days, nothing. From
first thing in the morning i started on zero. I personally feel
it is unfair for someone else to criticise couriers for their
action until YOU, yourself have done the job, having to rely on
what you made each day to look after yourself.

What does that have to do with you breaking the law and us copping the
backlash from it? Traffic lights are most certainly also for bikes. The
law says so.

Quoted message said:

I never hit anyone, i did not endanger lives, I did not ride on
sidewalks at 30kph and did not fang it through pedestrian
crossings almost hitting people. I knew how to ride in a way
that made me mostly unnoticable. People didnt notice me and that
way i could do what i wanted.

If you spend 8 hours a day in a city you will soon see how
inefficient and ineffective routes are around a city. Cities are made
cars, not bikes.

Which has got what to do with what?
--
A: Top-posters.
B: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

just because something is the law, doesnt make it the "right" thing to
do. Who makes the laws?, humans with just as many preconceptions as
anyone else. If you believe in the laws of the land, and you have
thought through them and they feel rationally, logically and socially
sound, then good for you. If you just follow them because they are the
rules, dont you think you need to think about them and ask yourself "Do
i really agree with this?".

I dont agree with some laws, and as such i dont respect them.

--

Oh no, here we go again.

DaveB

Quoted message said:

Oh no, here we go again.
DaveB

i agree, this isnt going to go anywhere

Lets talk about bike related things again...

anyone seen the new White Industries Eric's Eccentric ENO single spee
hub yet?. Means you can use a single speed (fixie?) on a bike wit
vertical dropouts. Very interestin

http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech.php?id=tech/2004/reviews/white_ind_eno_
eccentric_hu

-

Drs said:

That's exactly the sort of antisocial behaviour that causes the rest of
us so much grief because we cop the backlash.

The reason you cop so much grief is because cyclists are identified a
'cyclists', not individuals. That's as much the fault of communit
minded cyclists as anybody else - though it also shows an astonishin
failure of reason on the part of car drivers who employ this logic. Fe
people suggest that car drivers as a whole are idiots because on
person speeds, or drives dangerously near a bunch, or whatever. I
someone careers through a red light and cleans up themselves,
pedestrian, hits a car, or slows someone down, that's thei
responsibility. It shouldn't reflect on me as an individual. I jus
happen to ride a bike. If I choose to go through a red light and caus
noone inconvenience then I have broken the law, but it's my choice an
it reflects badly on me only. Frankly, I don't give a damn if peopl
drive up the Hume in a new porsche or an HSV at 140 as long as they pa
attention. They are breaking the law, but it's pretty safe in a ca
with excellent brakes and handling, and a competent driver. In
similar way, there are safe ways to negotiate your way through som
illegal situations on a bike, and if I make the choice I don't see wh
it would worry you all so much. It's my choice, not yours, and whateve
it reflects, it reflects on me, not you

And as for being a courier... I'm with byron on this, you don't kno
until you've ridden a (40) mile(s) in our rain soaked, road gritty, wor
out shoes. By the way, the bike cops are top blokes, but they'll stil
book you if you roll a red most of the time during the day while you
working. They give a little leeway sometimes, but ultimately it's thei
job to enforce the law. They caught me out once, and I don't begrudg
them that

-

Zebee Johnstone <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
[snip]

Quoted message said:

People don't think badly of cyclists because of seeing a lawbreaker.

Not what I here/see

Quoted message said:

Because there are plenty of cyclists who aren't lawbreakers, they just
aren't "seen". A cyclist who does something a car driver can't is not
upsetting the car driver cos the cyclist is breaking the law. They are
upsetting them cos the driver is stuck and the cyclist isn't.

End result is the same. Can we ask car drivers, ney, demand car
drivers to respect the laws, particluarly the laws which are most
relevent to cyclists, when a minority, but a very very visible one,
refuse to ?

Isn't it time that we cyclists actually behave better than motorists,
'cos in the end car v bike is a no contest ?

Quoted message said:

People aren't rational and law abiding and disliking those who aren't.
People - car, pushbike, motorbike - will do what they think they can get
away with, and are annoyed by people who get away with more.

Face it.. if a cyclist could monster a car into the ditch, think that
not one cyclist would do it?

Just confriming really that there are morons in all walks of life

byron27 <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Drs said:

"byron27" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:YeBqc.-
[email hidden]:[email hidden]-
etserver.com
[...]

Quoted message said:

8) Be a deviant when the cops arent looking and a model citizen when
they are. Traffic lights are for cars, not bikes (oh oh, i might
have started something here!)

That's exactly the sort of antisocial behaviour that causes the rest of
us so much grief because we cop the backlash.

mmmmm..... i dont know about that. I dont make any excuses for what i
did when i was a courier and i know i broke the law. There are
reasons for what i did and if you like i can go through them all.
Essentially the faster i cut through the city the more coin i
made.

well thank goodness every single road user does not adpat the
philosophy of lawlessness for the "more coin".

[crock of [censored] and made excues after you said I dont make excuses
snipped]

byron27 said:

Quoted message said:

Oh no, here we go again.
DaveB

i agree, this isnt going to go anywhere.

Lets talk about bike related things again....

anyone seen the new White Industries Eric's Eccentric ENO single speed
hub yet?. Means you can use a single speed (fixie?) on a bike with
vertical dropouts. Very interesting

http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech.php?id=tech/2004/reviews/white_ind_eno_-
eccentric_hub

--

I don't know what the design and manufacturing costs would amount to,
but it seems a tad expensive given 1) the cheaper alternatives, and
2) the low-cost/no-cost 'essence' of SS

Still, I'd have one 🙂

--
Nick

Rickster said:

End result is the same. Can we ask car drivers, ney, demand car drivers
to respect the laws, particluarly the laws which are most relevent to
cyclists, when a minority, but a very very visible one, refuse to ?
I don't ask car drivers to obey the law. I ask them to behave in a
safe and responsible way, and respect my safety. If they break a law
and it doesn't affect anyone (and isn't likely to - not reckless etc),
I care not.
If you want to examine concepts of moral obligation further try reading:
Isn't it time that we cyclists actually behave better than motorists,
'cos in the end car v bike is a no contest ?
'We' aren't two year olds fighting over cake, and 'we' don't behave
collectively. Inter-vehicle behaviour is at its best when it is
regulated by respect for the safety and wellbeing of others, not when
read strictly legalistically. I would certainly advocate riding
defensively because cyclists do come off second best in collisions with
motorists, but that has nothing whatsoever with driver attitudes to
cyclists who break the law.
Some cyclists are totally reckless, others are 'safe' lawbreakers,
still others ride totally within the law. People ride for all sorts of
different reasons, with many different attitudes. There is no 'we'.
Getting past the 'we' might be a good first step to adjusting the
attitudes of the small minority of car drivers who hate 'us'. Cyclists
are a cross section of the community.
Note: Even if there are smaller identifiable 'we's, there's definitely
no you and me buddy.
Just confriming really that there are morons in all walks of life

I'm not sure who exactly has been 'confrimed' as a moron. Perhaps yo
could explain? Is it bad to be confrimed? How is this different t
regular friming

Other words to look up when your done correcting the error of your way
with 'A Primer in Reason and Logic': 'ney' 'relevent

-

Rickster said:

Not what I here/see
'HEAR' you gimp... I mean, if you are going to go around insulting
people (see 'moron' line at the bottom of this post'😉, you could at
least demonstrate yourself to be a person of reasonable intellect.
End result is the same. Can we ask car drivers, ney, demand car drivers
to respect the laws, particluarly the laws which are most relevent to
cyclists, when a minority, but a very very visible one, refuse to ?
I don't ask car drivers to obey the law. I ask them to respect my safety
and ability to travel on the road. If they break the law and it doesn't
affect anyone (and isn't likely to - not reckless), I care not. They are
risking penalties if they get caught, but it's not my problem and I
don't waste my life worrying about it.
Shockingly, I drive a car. I try to give cyclists a good amount of
space when I pass them, like I do to pedestrians (even jaywalking ones)
and slower cars. That's all I ask. Treat people decently, and mind your
own business.
Funnily enough, I don't fly into fits of anger when I see pedestrians
cross against a red man, or cars roll through a stop sign. Furthermore I
don't think either of these things tarnish the biped collective or the
car driving community.
Note for rickster: 'biped' means you have two feet. Bi - meaning two,
ped - meaning foot. Why not look it up after you've looked up some of
the words you already know but can't spell correctly.
Isn't it time that we cyclists actually behave better than motorists,
'cos in the end car v bike is a no contest ?
As Margaret Thatcher once said, 'there is no such thing as society'. I
don't think this is strictly philosophically true, but I think it's
interesting - there is no we. My behaviour is not the behaviour of
anyone else but me, and it reflects only on me (and possibly, drawing a
long bow, those who influence me and who brought me up).
I do advocate riding defensively though - for the reason you express,
bike riders lose in a crash. I even advocate riding defensively where it
involves not standing on ones strict legal rights - eg not taking up a
full lane where this will aggravate drivers or hold them up. Is this a
bad idea in your opinion?
Just confriming really that there are morons in all walks of life

I'm not sure who has been 'confrimed' as a moron... Could you explai
what 'confriming' is please? How is it different to regular 'friming'
What about 'ney' (neigh?) and 'relevent' (see above)

Note for Rickster: Although I've been pretty insulting, I haven't swor
in my post, nor have I reproduced your smallminded language directe
towards byron27. Perhaps you could try running with this - you neve
know who might read this stuff and get offended

-

Cut and pasted from a post I made on the "do you obey traffic lights
thread. Seemed relevant

While I do occasionally roll though pedestian lights if I can see tha
the peds using them have already crossed, I do largely stick to th
letter of the law. Now I consider myself to be a capable, intelligen
adult who can cross a road without endangering myself and others. Th
problem with me ignoring the laws that I feel I'm bright enough to d
without is that almost EVERYONE who breaks a law like that feels tha
they're doing so in a reasonable manner, including drink drivers, peopl
breaking the speed limit by a significant margin, people who decide tha
they should be entitled to take the law into their own hands and bea
the snot out of someone else etc etc. Clearly, there's a good portion o
the population that's NOT capable of thinking for themselves in man
circumstances. If I break the law, regardless, of how careful an
capable I may be, then why shouldn't they? Your judgement of your ow
capability is far from objective. So I follow the law because I expec
others to. Incidentally, this is why I support gun control. You and
might be responsible enough to own a firearm and never use it in a
inappropriate manner, but take a walk around your local shopping mal
and ask yourself if you really want everyone in there armed... </rant

-

Quoted message said:

Originally posted by Nickzx6r re: ENO I don't know what the design an
manufacturing costs would amount to, but it seems a tad expensive give
1) the cheaper alternatives, an

Problem is, the cheaper alternatives often don't work as well. Th
eccentric hub is a much nicer fix (it's still a fix though) than a chai
tensioner or dropout filing, for example

Quoted message said:

2) the low-cost/no-cost 'essence' of S

Meh.. you should see what some of the yanks are spending on their SS's
Have a read of the mtbr SS forum! :

It seems to work like this
1) You hear about singlespeed
2) You decide to build one on the cheap because you might not like i
3) You love i
4) You decide to build a "nice" singlespee
5) You spend more money on your "nice" singlespeed than you
"good" bike
6) You buy/build more singlespeeds..
7) ...then you discover fixies..

hipp

-

"Roadie_scum" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]

[...]

Quoted message said:

And as for being a courier... I'm with byron on this, you don't know
until you've ridden a (40) mile(s) in our rain soaked, road gritty,
worn out shoes.

Just what is it I supposedly don't know? The point is that Byron27 reckons
it's OK to ignore the law whenever you feel like it. I don't give a flying
[censored] about the conditions of being a bike courier. It's nothing to do with
anything. It's like truckies saying it's OK to take amphetamines to stay
awake whilst they speed to meet their deadlines. It isn't OK for them and
it isn't OK for bike couriers either. If you don't like the law then write
a letter to your local MP but don't try to pretend you have some special
dispensation to pick and choose when you'll bother obeying the law because
you don't.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

Roadie_scum <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Rickster said:

End result is the same. Can we ask car drivers, ney, demand car drivers
to respect the laws, particluarly the laws which are most relevent to
cyclists, when a minority, but a very very visible one, refuse to ?
I don't ask car drivers to obey the law. I ask them to behave in a
safe and responsible way, and respect my safety. If they break a law
and it doesn't affect anyone (and isn't likely to - not reckless etc),
I care not.
If you want to examine concepts of moral obligation further try reading:
Isn't it time that we cyclists actually behave better than motorists,
'cos in the end car v bike is a no contest ?
'We' aren't two year olds fighting over cake, and 'we' don't behave
collectively. Inter-vehicle behaviour is at its best when it is
regulated by respect for the safety and wellbeing of others, not when
read strictly legalistically. I would certainly advocate riding
defensively because cyclists do come off second best in collisions with
motorists, but that has nothing whatsoever with driver attitudes to
cyclists who break the law.
Some cyclists are totally reckless, others are 'safe' lawbreakers,
still others ride totally within the law. People ride for all sorts of
different reasons, with many different attitudes. There is no 'we'.
Getting past the 'we' might be a good first step to adjusting the
attitudes of the small minority of car drivers who hate 'us'. Cyclists
are a cross section of the community.
Note: Even if there are smaller identifiable 'we's, there's definitely
no you and me buddy.
Just confriming really that there are morons in all walks of life

I'm not sure who exactly has been 'confrimed' as a moron. Perhaps you
could explain? Is it bad to be confrimed? How is this different to
regular friming?

ooooh, a spelling mistake, you really nailed me

Quoted message said:

Other words to look up when your done correcting the error of your ways
with 'A Primer in Reason and Logic': 'ney' 'relevent'

WTF ? Got anything to add to this debate or are you Dr Spellcheck ?

Roadie_scum <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Rickster wrote:
[snip]

Quoted message said:

I'm not sure who has been 'confrimed' as a moron... Could you explain
what 'confriming' is please? How is it different to regular 'friming'?
What about 'ney' (neigh?) and 'relevent' (see above)?

Note for Rickster: Although I've been pretty insulting, I haven't sworn
in my post, nor have I reproduced your smallminded language directed
towards byron27. Perhaps you could try running with this - you never
know who might read this stuff and get offended.

Mr Scum, I don't think you know who you are responding too, 'cos there
is some serious mix up in the quotes here.

And you pull me up on spelling mistakes ? Sure sign of the beaten.

In article <[email hidden]>,

hippy said:

It seems to work like this:
1) You hear about singlespeeds
2) You decide to build one on the cheap because you might not like it
3) You love it
4) You decide to build a "nice" singlespeed
5) You spend more money on your "nice" singlespeed than your
"good" bike!
6) You buy/build more singlespeeds...
7) ...then you discover fixies...

8) And then you have one of those light-bulb monets, where you realise
why someone invented the derailleur...

--
Shane Stanley