T
TimC
Guest
On 2005-08-07, ProfTournesol (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> How about a mass weekend drive down Beach Road instead of a cycle? If
> we picked one weekend, all drove at 40 km/hr with bikes mounted on the
> car to identify us as cyclists, we could show that:
> we are a large group when acting collectively
> we (mostly) all drive and pay registration fees
> if we chose to drive rather than cycle we would be adding considerably
> to traffic congestion.
>
> imagine if even half of the 6000 cyclists a wekend day did this in an
> organised fashion, (but didn't break any road rules), even Channel 7
> would struggle to vilify us.
That's a fukcing brilliant idea.
I know BV are unresponsive to this kind of thing, but that would be
the place to advertise such a "protest".
Or I wonder how many Melbourne audience cyclingnews has?
This would actually make me want to borrow a car for a day
--
TimC
"Thanks to the joint efforts of OpenOffice, Mozilla, and a few others, Emacs
officially entered the category of lightweight utilities." -- kalifa on /.
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> How about a mass weekend drive down Beach Road instead of a cycle? If
> we picked one weekend, all drove at 40 km/hr with bikes mounted on the
> car to identify us as cyclists, we could show that:
> we are a large group when acting collectively
> we (mostly) all drive and pay registration fees
> if we chose to drive rather than cycle we would be adding considerably
> to traffic congestion.
>
> imagine if even half of the 6000 cyclists a wekend day did this in an
> organised fashion, (but didn't break any road rules), even Channel 7
> would struggle to vilify us.
That's a fukcing brilliant idea.
I know BV are unresponsive to this kind of thing, but that would be
the place to advertise such a "protest".
Or I wonder how many Melbourne audience cyclingnews has?
This would actually make me want to borrow a car for a day
--
TimC
"Thanks to the joint efforts of OpenOffice, Mozilla, and a few others, Emacs
officially entered the category of lightweight utilities." -- kalifa on /.
cfsmtb said:Pah! Discrimination against those of us (freaks) who don't hold a license! Bikesoiler & I will carshare though. Others quite welcome, we could fit another 2-3 on the subary + roof racks.
imagine, 1000 or so cars driving at the speed limit bumper to bumper down Beach Road - point made I think.
Well, I haven't given up on Tibet, eitherDaveB said:
Frankly, the problem seems pretty clear there. And really? I don't think the problems I face as a cyclist come anywhere near the problems faced in Tibet... but, even so...Clearly there are a bunch of motorists that aren't a problem - but saying thankyou to them isn't going to hurt too much. And clearly there are a bunch of motorists (less, but more dangerous!) who aren't going to change no matter what. They aren't just arseholes on the road. They are just arseholes. On my commute there is usually a few each day who seem to dither between "do I cut her off or can I wait a moment and she won't have to hit the brakes?" I think these are the ones that can actually be encouraged.
What are your suggestions? Do you agree there is a problem? And if there is, what do you see the problem being? How do you suggest responding?
cheers,
Ali
alison_b said:I think this is a great idea. But... any chance of car-pooling? We don't all have licenses, and some of us don't have cars.
ali
as long as there is one bike for each rider on a car the point will be made.
It would only be effective if we did it 'en masse' and broke no road rules. imagine channel & selectively showing 2 seconds of the only car traveling through a red light.......alison_b said:
D
DaveB
Guest
alison_b wrote:
>
> Well, I haven't given up on Tibet, either Frankly, the problem
> seems pretty clear there. And really? I don't think the problems I
> face as a cyclist come anywhere near the problems faced in Tibet...
> but, even so...
>
> Clearly there are a bunch of motorists that aren't a problem - but
> saying thankyou to them isn't going to hurt too much. And clearly
> there are a bunch of motorists (less, but more dangerous!) who aren't
> going to change no matter what. They aren't just arseholes on the
> road. They are just arseholes. On my commute there is usually a few
> each day who seem to dither between "do I cut her off or can I wait a
> moment and she won't have to hit the brakes?" I think these are the
> ones that can actually be encouraged.
>
> What are your suggestions? Do you agree there is a problem? And if
> there is, what do you see the problem being? How do you suggest
> responding?
>
> cheers,
> Ali
>
>
My point was that you need to work out what the problem you are trying
to fix is, then what it would take to resolve that problem, and finally
the method to fix it. Personally I don't think there is a problem to be
fixed. There is trouble between cyclists and drivers, just as there is
trouble between pedestrians, motorcyclists, cyclists, rollerbalders,
drivers, and other drivers. So what. If people want to try and change
that I don't have a problem with that, I'm just suggesting you work
through it logically so you get the outcome you want. And if I could see
a useful result I would participate. That's why I was there for the
Wheels of Justice ride, because I could see that concerted protests
could influence a government. But I can't see any protests affecting the
conflict on the roads because it is not that simple.
As for the Save Tibet stickers, as far as I'm concerned their sole
purpose is to make people feel good about themselves without actually
going to any effort to change the situation, in much the same way I view
CM rides, and most protests (unless they are for a specific purpose).
DaveB
>
> Well, I haven't given up on Tibet, either
Frankly, the problem> seems pretty clear there. And really? I don't think the problems I
> face as a cyclist come anywhere near the problems faced in Tibet...
> but, even so...
>
> Clearly there are a bunch of motorists that aren't a problem - but
> saying thankyou to them isn't going to hurt too much. And clearly
> there are a bunch of motorists (less, but more dangerous!) who aren't
> going to change no matter what. They aren't just arseholes on the
> road. They are just arseholes. On my commute there is usually a few
> each day who seem to dither between "do I cut her off or can I wait a
> moment and she won't have to hit the brakes?" I think these are the
> ones that can actually be encouraged.
>
> What are your suggestions? Do you agree there is a problem? And if
> there is, what do you see the problem being? How do you suggest
> responding?
>
> cheers,
> Ali
>
>
My point was that you need to work out what the problem you are trying
to fix is, then what it would take to resolve that problem, and finally
the method to fix it. Personally I don't think there is a problem to be
fixed. There is trouble between cyclists and drivers, just as there is
trouble between pedestrians, motorcyclists, cyclists, rollerbalders,
drivers, and other drivers. So what. If people want to try and change
that I don't have a problem with that, I'm just suggesting you work
through it logically so you get the outcome you want. And if I could see
a useful result I would participate. That's why I was there for the
Wheels of Justice ride, because I could see that concerted protests
could influence a government. But I can't see any protests affecting the
conflict on the roads because it is not that simple.
As for the Save Tibet stickers, as far as I'm concerned their sole
purpose is to make people feel good about themselves without actually
going to any effort to change the situation, in much the same way I view
CM rides, and most protests (unless they are for a specific purpose).
DaveB
D
DaveB
Guest
alison_b wrote:
>
> Well, I haven't given up on Tibet, either Frankly, the problem
> seems pretty clear there. And really? I don't think the problems I
> face as a cyclist come anywhere near the problems faced in Tibet...
> but, even so...
>
> Clearly there are a bunch of motorists that aren't a problem - but
> saying thankyou to them isn't going to hurt too much. And clearly
> there are a bunch of motorists (less, but more dangerous!) who aren't
> going to change no matter what. They aren't just arseholes on the
> road. They are just arseholes. On my commute there is usually a few
> each day who seem to dither between "do I cut her off or can I wait a
> moment and she won't have to hit the brakes?" I think these are the
> ones that can actually be encouraged.
>
> What are your suggestions? Do you agree there is a problem? And if
> there is, what do you see the problem being? How do you suggest
> responding?
>
> cheers,
> Ali
>
>
My point was that you need to work out what the problem you are trying
to fix is, then what it would take to resolve that problem, and finally
the method to fix it. Personally I don't think there is a problem to be
fixed. There is trouble between cyclists and drivers, just as there is
trouble between pedestrians, motorcyclists, cyclists, rollerbalders,
drivers, and other drivers. So what. If people want to try and change
that I don't have a problem with that, I'm just suggesting you work
through it logically so you get the outcome you want. And if I could see
a useful result I would participate. That's why I was there for the
Wheels of Justice ride, because I could see that concerted protests
could influence a government. But I can't see any protests affecting the
conflict on the roads because it is not that simple.
As for the Save Tibet stickers, as far as I'm concerned their sole
purpose is to make people feel good about themselves without actually
going to any effort to change the situation, in much the same way I view
CM rides, and most protests (unless they are for a specific purpose).
DaveB
>
> Well, I haven't given up on Tibet, either
Frankly, the problem> seems pretty clear there. And really? I don't think the problems I
> face as a cyclist come anywhere near the problems faced in Tibet...
> but, even so...
>
> Clearly there are a bunch of motorists that aren't a problem - but
> saying thankyou to them isn't going to hurt too much. And clearly
> there are a bunch of motorists (less, but more dangerous!) who aren't
> going to change no matter what. They aren't just arseholes on the
> road. They are just arseholes. On my commute there is usually a few
> each day who seem to dither between "do I cut her off or can I wait a
> moment and she won't have to hit the brakes?" I think these are the
> ones that can actually be encouraged.
>
> What are your suggestions? Do you agree there is a problem? And if
> there is, what do you see the problem being? How do you suggest
> responding?
>
> cheers,
> Ali
>
>
My point was that you need to work out what the problem you are trying
to fix is, then what it would take to resolve that problem, and finally
the method to fix it. Personally I don't think there is a problem to be
fixed. There is trouble between cyclists and drivers, just as there is
trouble between pedestrians, motorcyclists, cyclists, rollerbalders,
drivers, and other drivers. So what. If people want to try and change
that I don't have a problem with that, I'm just suggesting you work
through it logically so you get the outcome you want. And if I could see
a useful result I would participate. That's why I was there for the
Wheels of Justice ride, because I could see that concerted protests
could influence a government. But I can't see any protests affecting the
conflict on the roads because it is not that simple.
As for the Save Tibet stickers, as far as I'm concerned their sole
purpose is to make people feel good about themselves without actually
going to any effort to change the situation, in much the same way I view
CM rides, and most protests (unless they are for a specific purpose).
DaveB
ProfTournesol said:
FINALLY! something constructive!! Great idea PT
it has merit and is just simple enough to send a clear message
flyingdutch said:FINALLY! something constructive!! Great idea PT
it has merit and is just simple enough to send a clear message
would perhaps make for a strong image if all cars ended up at Parliament steps. Be rather ironic all them damn rego-paying cars congesting the area like that, taking up a whole lane
whatabout flying a yellow/green ribbon off the aerial for Amy and others?
(like the police-killed-in-line-of-duty ribbons...)
So...
Proposal of date/time, anyone?
so, if there is no problem to be fixed, as far as you can see... why not just say "all is as peachy as can be expected"? If you're happy with the way things are on the roads when you're cycling then more power to you. Perhaps you could share your secret? Clearly we differ. I don't think that's a big drama, I'm not expecting anybody who is happy with the current state of affairs to do anything but go about their business.DaveB said:alison_b wrote:
>
> Well, I haven't given up on Tibet, either
> seems pretty clear there. And really? I don't think the problems I
> face as a cyclist come anywhere near the problems faced in Tibet...
> but, even so...
>
> Clearly there are a bunch of motorists that aren't a problem - but
> saying thankyou to them isn't going to hurt too much. And clearly
> there are a bunch of motorists (less, but more dangerous!) who aren't
> going to change no matter what. They aren't just arseholes on the
> road. They are just arseholes. On my commute there is usually a few
> each day who seem to dither between "do I cut her off or can I wait a
> moment and she won't have to hit the brakes?" I think these are the
> ones that can actually be encouraged.
>
> What are your suggestions? Do you agree there is a problem? And if
> there is, what do you see the problem being? How do you suggest
> responding?
>
> cheers,
> Ali
>
>
My point was that you need to work out what the problem you are trying
to fix is, then what it would take to resolve that problem, and finally
the method to fix it. Personally I don't think there is a problem to be
fixed. There is trouble between cyclists and drivers, just as there is
trouble between pedestrians, motorcyclists, cyclists, rollerbalders,
drivers, and other drivers. So what. If people want to try and change
that I don't have a problem with that, I'm just suggesting you work
through it logically so you get the outcome you want. And if I could see
a useful result I would participate. That's why I was there for the
Wheels of Justice ride, because I could see that concerted protests
could influence a government. But I can't see any protests affecting the
conflict on the roads because it is not that simple.
As for the Save Tibet stickers, as far as I'm concerned their sole
purpose is to make people feel good about themselves without actually
going to any effort to change the situation, in much the same way I view
CM rides, and most protests (unless they are for a specific purpose).
DaveB
As far as Tibet, you know sweet FA about me. If you do actually go to some effort to change the situation then pleased to meet you.
cheers,
Ali
D
DaveB
Guest
alison_b wrote:
> so, if there is no problem to be fixed, as far as you can see... why
> not just say "all is as peachy as can be expected"? If you're happy
> with the way things are on the roads when you're cycling then more
> power to you. Perhaps you could share your secret? Clearly we differ.
The roads are full of stress, and I save my battles for where they can
make a difference.
> As far as Tibet, you know sweet FA about me. If you do actually go to
> some effort to change the situation then pleased to meet you.
>
At what point did I say anything peronal about you and Tibet? None at
all. My point was around bumper stickers and their effectiveness
(explained three times now) , but if you want to take it personally,
knock yourself out.
DaveB "killfile updated"
> so, if there is no problem to be fixed, as far as you can see... why
> not just say "all is as peachy as can be expected"? If you're happy
> with the way things are on the roads when you're cycling then more
> power to you. Perhaps you could share your secret? Clearly we differ.
The roads are full of stress, and I save my battles for where they can
make a difference.
> As far as Tibet, you know sweet FA about me. If you do actually go to
> some effort to change the situation then pleased to meet you.
>
At what point did I say anything peronal about you and Tibet? None at
all. My point was around bumper stickers and their effectiveness
(explained three times now) , but if you want to take it personally,
knock yourself out.
DaveB "killfile updated"
E
Euan
Guest
>>>>> "flyingdutch" == flyingdutch <[email protected]> writes:
flyingdutch> flyingdutch Wrote:
>> FINALLY! something constructive!! Great idea PT
>>
>> it has merit and is just simple enough to send a clear message
flyingdutch> would perhaps make for a strong image if all cars ended
flyingdutch> up at Parliament steps. Be rather ironic all them damn
flyingdutch> rego-paying cars congesting the area like that, taking
flyingdutch> up a whole lane
flyingdutch> whatabout flying a yellow/green ribbon off the aerial
flyingdutch> for Amy and others? (like the
flyingdutch> police-killed-in-line-of-duty ribbons...)
flyingdutch> So...
flyingdutch> Proposal of date/time, anyone?
Before we get to that, shouldn't we figure out how we're going to get
the word out about it?
The McGee affair was a highly charged affair. Due to the excellent
efforts of a small number of people we mustered up 3-500 people and it
got a bit of news.
Imagine if we can get 2,000 people to do this? That won't just make the
local news, that could well go international.
So who's got the social network to get the word out to the people that
use Beach Road? How do we get this communicated to the people it's
going to affect? I believe we need to work that out before we pick a
date.
--
Cheers | ~~ __@
Euan | ~~ _-\<,
Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*)
flyingdutch> flyingdutch Wrote:
>> FINALLY! something constructive!! Great idea PT
>>
>> it has merit and is just simple enough to send a clear message
flyingdutch> would perhaps make for a strong image if all cars ended
flyingdutch> up at Parliament steps. Be rather ironic all them damn
flyingdutch> rego-paying cars congesting the area like that, taking
flyingdutch> up a whole lane
flyingdutch> whatabout flying a yellow/green ribbon off the aerial
flyingdutch> for Amy and others? (like the
flyingdutch> police-killed-in-line-of-duty ribbons...)
flyingdutch> So...
flyingdutch> Proposal of date/time, anyone?
Before we get to that, shouldn't we figure out how we're going to get
the word out about it?
The McGee affair was a highly charged affair. Due to the excellent
efforts of a small number of people we mustered up 3-500 people and it
got a bit of news.
Imagine if we can get 2,000 people to do this? That won't just make the
local news, that could well go international.
So who's got the social network to get the word out to the people that
use Beach Road? How do we get this communicated to the people it's
going to affect? I believe we need to work that out before we pick a
date.
--
Cheers | ~~ __@
Euan | ~~ _-\<,
Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*)
P
Peter Signorini
Guest
"DaveB" wrote:
>
> At what point did I say anything peronal about you and Tibet? None at all.
"As for the Save Tibet stickers, as far as I'm concerned their sole
purpose is to make people feel good about themselves without actually
going to any effort to change the situation"
By implication you are saying that Alison's Tibet bumper stickers made her
feel good about the situation without her actually making any effort to
change the situation. That's how she's read it anyway. She may actually be
quite active re. the Tibetan people. I don't know.
> My point was around bumper stickers and their effectiveness (explained
> three times now) , but if you want to take it personally, knock yourself
> out.
>
> DaveB "killfile updated"
A bit harsh don't you think, to killfile her over such a tiff. She did say
she could be pleased to meet you :-O
Cheers
Peter
>
> At what point did I say anything peronal about you and Tibet? None at all.
"As for the Save Tibet stickers, as far as I'm concerned their sole
purpose is to make people feel good about themselves without actually
going to any effort to change the situation"
By implication you are saying that Alison's Tibet bumper stickers made her
feel good about the situation without her actually making any effort to
change the situation. That's how she's read it anyway. She may actually be
quite active re. the Tibetan people. I don't know.
> My point was around bumper stickers and their effectiveness (explained
> three times now) , but if you want to take it personally, knock yourself
> out.
>
> DaveB "killfile updated"
A bit harsh don't you think, to killfile her over such a tiff. She did say
she could be pleased to meet you :-O
Cheers
Peter
Pete, read the rule again....it is confusing but I read what you say and I don't agree..Peter Signorini said:
Rule 151 (1) applies to say "must not ride on a road that is not a multilane road etc...." meaning, single lane roads or single marked lanes in multi laned roads.... see reference to excluding multilane roads below , so thus you ride two abreast on a single lane road, or two abreast in any marked lane, not that you cant ride in the remaining marked line...there is no reference to excluding riders from the remaining marked lane(s), therefore theoretically, (and legally) on say Beach Road at a two lane section, two pace lines each in their lane can move side by side and each can be overtaken by a single rider ( in each lane) thus 6 riders can ride abreast providing two ( one in each lane) are overtaking).....
essentially permitting what channel 7 filmed from the air and screened recently ..... Rule follows:-
quote:
151. Riding a motor bike or bicycle alongside more than 1 other rider
(1) The rider of a motor bike or bicycle must not ride on a road that is not a multilane road alongside more than 1 other rider, unless subrule (3) applies to the rider.
Penalty: 1 penalty unit.
Note
Bicycle, motor bike and multi-lane road are defined in the dictionary, and rider is defined in rule 17.
(2) The rider of a motor bike or bicycle must not ride in a marked lane alongside more than 1 other rider in the marked lane, unless subrule (3) applies to the rider.
Penalty: 1 penalty unit.
Note
Marked lane is defined in the dictionary.
(3) The rider of a motor bike or bicycle may ride alongside more than 1 other rider if the
rider is—
(a) overtaking the other riders; or
(b) permitted to do so under regulation 403 of the Road Safety (Road Rules)
Regulations 1999.
Note
Overtake is defined in the dictionary.
(4) If the rider of a motor bike or bicycle is riding on a road that is not a multi-lane road alongside another rider, or in a marked lane alongside another rider in the marked lane, the rider must ride not over 1.5 metres from the other rider.
Penalty: 1 penalty unit.
(5) In this rule—
road
does not include a road related area, but includes a bicycle path, shared path and
any shoulder of the road.
Note
Bicycle path is defined in rule 239, road related area is defined in rule 13, shared path is defined in
rule 242, and
shoulder is defined in rule 12.
T
TimC
Guest
On 2005-08-07, cfsmtb (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>
> *Claps hands again*
>
> Ladies, Gentlemen, enough.
Thankyou.
In the words of the Fonzi:
"Ayyyyy! Sit on it!".
> Go to bedibyes - now!
>
> Thank you
Awww! Can't I have dinner first?
--
TimC
"Application encountered an error while failing. Error recovered
successfully, proceeding to fail"
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>
> *Claps hands again*
>
> Ladies, Gentlemen, enough.
Thankyou.
In the words of the Fonzi:
"Ayyyyy! Sit on it!".
> Go to bedibyes - now!
>
> Thank you
Awww! Can't I have dinner first?
--
TimC
"Application encountered an error while failing. Error recovered
successfully, proceeding to fail"
D
dave
Guest
Euan wrote:
>>>>>>"flyingdutch" == flyingdutch <[email protected]> writes:
>
>
> flyingdutch> Let's stop whineing to the converted and start putting
> flyingdutch> some positive steps in place here people!
>
> flyingdutch> So, who's on board? REALLY onboard??
>
> I'm in.
And me.
Sorry I didnt get there on friday.. Funeral I,m afraid.
>>>>>>"flyingdutch" == flyingdutch <[email protected]> writes:
>
>
> flyingdutch> Let's stop whineing to the converted and start putting
> flyingdutch> some positive steps in place here people!
>
> flyingdutch> So, who's on board? REALLY onboard??
>
> I'm in.
And me.
Sorry I didnt get there on friday.. Funeral I,m afraid.
