http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: Addressing negative comments about cycling en Mon, 20 Apr 2026 07:51:33 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5751#post-61880 Mon, 19 Mar 2012 14:35:15 +0000 chdot 61880@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"If not for the opponent then at least for the audience"</p> <p>Can be entertaining!</p> <p>"<br /> RULES No personal insults. No swearing.<br /> " </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5751#post-61862 Mon, 19 Mar 2012 13:38:41 +0000 Instography 61862@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I've often said, in a wise old man kind of a way that people's opinions never change in an argument. They only become entrenched. Change doesn't happen until the argument stops and then the participants have a chance to reflect on it and adapt their views. So, only argue with people who seem willing to think. No point arguing with idiots.</p> <p>But if they're not an idiot then I think the argument's worth having, especially online (tho maybe not Twitter). If not for the opponent then at least for the audience. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5751#post-61861 Mon, 19 Mar 2012 13:33:15 +0000 wingpig 61861@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Twitter's great for people who can't argue properly as it makes it difficult for properly-explained or reasoned statements to be conveyed fully and quickly, allowing the improper argumentalists to create smokescreens of terse disconnected statements. Arguing with people who can't argue properly on a platform which allows lengthier statements is still like (to mix similes) punching a herd of cats, though (like punching cats would be) is very satisfying when one wriggles the one way or gets hemmed-in by cats moving in opposite directions long enough for a punch to connect. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5751#post-61855 Mon, 19 Mar 2012 13:21:30 +0000 chdot 61855@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"my strong views on pavement cycling became a lot more lenient last week for instance"</p> <p>OOH </p> <p>nice admission</p> <p>This thread - <a href="http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5698">RLJing and pavement cycling</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5751#post-61853 Mon, 19 Mar 2012 13:18:22 +0000 Uberuce 61853@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>See also:</p> <p><img src="http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/internet_argument.png"></p> <p><a href="http://xkcd.com/438" rel="nofollow">http://xkcd.com/438</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5751#post-61848 Mon, 19 Mar 2012 13:00:12 +0000 Dave 61848@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Sally's observation applies in spades to any kind of conversation IMO. People have an opinion, it's often not rational, which means either you can't change it whatever you do, or it's well-considered enough that your arguments will be too weak regardless.</p> <p>There are still good reasons to argue online. For instance, having to defend your own position makes you think about it more, and for fun you can try to argue a position you don't really hold, and it may rub off on you (my strong views on pavement cycling became a lot more lenient last week for instance) but I'd never try to change someone's mind...</p> <p><a href="http://xkcd.com/386/"><img src="http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png"></a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5751#post-61847 Mon, 19 Mar 2012 12:55:38 +0000 ARobComp 61847@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I shall take your sage advice - thanks. I need to not get wound up about this sort of thing!! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5751#post-61837 Mon, 19 Mar 2012 11:58:19 +0000 recombodna 61837@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>+1 to the above comments. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5751#post-61835 Mon, 19 Mar 2012 11:57:31 +0000 Min 61835@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Yes I agree. You are not going to win this "argument". What you said was very reasonable, leave it there and don't take the bait this guy is obviously trying to wave at you. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5751#post-61833 Mon, 19 Mar 2012 11:50:53 +0000 sallyhinch 61833@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>My life has taken an enormous turn for the better, with a massive increase in sweetness and light, when I stopped trying to change anyone's mind on twitter. I still say the odd controversial thing but if anyone responds disagreeing I just say something like 'you're probably right'. If they keep going I ignore them. I've seen so many people who agree with each other 99% of the time fall out over the 1% on twitter. Twitter's great but it's no place to have a reasoned discussion. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5751#post-61797 Mon, 19 Mar 2012 10:35:12 +0000 Dave 61797@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I haven't heard of any cyclists killed running red lights other than one in London where the driver was prosecuted because they were on the phone. So, although I'm sure it happens, I doubt anyone is doing anything differently because of such an event.</p> <p>Are people no longer riding in bus lanes after the most recent death? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5751#post-61795 Mon, 19 Mar 2012 10:32:02 +0000 chdot 61795@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"Maybe the cyclists in that area wised up after that girl got herself killed jumping red lights a year or so ago"</p> <p>Not even sure if it's true. </p> <p>If you know person talk to them - not in public (Twitter). </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5751#post-61794 Mon, 19 Mar 2012 10:30:29 +0000 wingpig 61794@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Well, for a start cyclists pass through lots of areas. It's more likely to be the behaviour of other vehicles (including other cycles) in a particular area they pass through frequently which changes their behaviour than a single event which they might not even have heard about. If he's 'reasonable' otherwise he can be reasonable about cyclists. What is his preferred mode off commuting? I saw one car encroaching on the solid-white-line-protected bus lane along Earl Grey St and another actually driving in if it's any help. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5751#post-61792 Mon, 19 Mar 2012 10:24:02 +0000 ARobComp 61792@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>So I was commenting on twitter on the number of cyclists on Lothian road this morning and how great it was to see 10 bikes waiting at the lights next to the western approach this morning (usually max 3). </p> <p>I got the following reply:<br /> "@AlexDRobertson More impressive that the cyclists are waiting at the lights I'd say."</p> <p>Which I took lightly and replied with a fairly standard:<br /> "@******** yes some cyclist are naughty. I shouted at one myself this morning for cycling on the pavement at the west end. We'll get there."</p> <p>Which is true - there was a chap cycling quite carelessly on the pavement by HoF/costa by the tramworks. I wanted to convey a nonchalant well we're growing in number and soon people will see why there are rules etc etc.</p> <p>He replied with:<br /> "@AlexDRobertson Maybe the cyclists in that area wised up after that girl got herself killed jumping red lights a year or so ago." </p> <p>This to me is fairly callous and pretty disappointing as it shows the feeling that people have about cyclists being "just a cyclist" - the "well they did it to themselves" Syndrome.</p> <p>I know the guy fairly well and he's a hard working father, reasonable, but he clearly has an issue with cyclists. I've no idea how to reply to this. </p> <p>Anyone any thoughts/comments? </p>