Also, junction where it was filmed seems to have lights out-of-phase. It's clearly still amber on right when she's well across stop line...
Just sayin!
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Cycling News
Nice Way Code - the 'code'
(44 posts)-
Posted 11 years ago #
-
Maybe they fudged it in the studio so that she didn't actually need to run a red to make the film.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Phewwww! I feel so much safer now. Way to go, Nice Way Code!
Posted 11 years ago # -
@k. WELL spotted!
@I. Likely explanation.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Tweet claims right-hand visual "aimed at all on wheels". When you go to the full slide, it's patently obvious who it's aimed at. The repeated use of the words "you" and "your bike" are a bit of a giveaway.
Posted 11 years ago # -
The cyclist isn't running a red, the other (circled) traffic light is on Amber.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Hello,
Just had a quick look at photo and noticed there is a right turn filter at this junction which is why the lights would appear out of sync. The lights would still go through the amber phase for right turning traffic while red light for straight ahead is on.
Paul
Posted 11 years ago # -
Hi Paul,
don't think so.
You are 'seeing' a no right turn sign as a filter arrow -
http://a.yfrog.com/img875/692/hc9hbl.jpg
What do you think of the campaign?
Posted 11 years ago # -
"Nothing annoys drivers more than"
whatever the most recent most annoying thing to annoy them happened to be, if they're the type to allow themselves to be annoyed whilst operating heavy machinery.I once heard an alleged driving-instructor advisement which went along the lines of:
ADI: "Q: what is the most important road sign?"
L: "Urm...STOP?"
ADI: "INCORRECT. The most recent road sign you saw."
which is a nice try, but the correct answer would be "all the signs you have seen which are still in force due to not being superseded or nulled" but it wouldn't be so snappy.If the NWC was going to be even faintly based on real-world observations then there would have to be an entire leaflet just for things which are often the thing which most annoys motor vehicle operators, in order to avoid that thing about not having more than seven bullet-pointed points per slide to avoid overloading the brain's input buffer. This is probably why the proper Highway Code doesn't bother with anything more fuzzy than safety/predictability; if it were to start mentioning things like mood it'd be ten times the thickness and full of caveats.
Maybe there's a secret underground media network reserved for those motorists who never cycle on which a more motorist-targeted version of this is circulating.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Hi Chris,
You're right, my bad, apologies. I just zoomed in from the twitter feed and missed that!!!
Unfortunately I am off work just now (have been since May, nerve damage in shoulder), and have only been following campaign on social media etc.
I think the idea of 'Increasing respect for each other' is a good thing, and has always been what I have believed in, and what I have tried to do. Personally, I think any campaign that gets drivers thinking more about cyclists is a good thing.
Until I get back and find out more about the operational side, then I'm not really qualified to comment too much.
Paul.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Personally, I think any campaign that gets drivers thinking more about cyclists is a good thing
I do agree with you. And all the facts I've been tweeting relentlessly for past week on Twitter support this, as the majority of cyclist KSIs are driver-fault. Which is why I'm spitting with rage that so much of the nicewaycode is focussed on re-inforcing negative stereotypes about cyclists and is patronising claptrap aimed directly at cyclist. I'd be up for a well spent £500k road safety campaign aimed at protecting cyclists, in confrontation with proper funding and legal backing from government and authorities. But that's not what we're getting. They've asked focus groups of drivers what they want to hear, they've listened to the preconceptions from the panel and then they've told them what they want to hear right back to them. It's actually quite a dangerous approach. I worry that because this is coming from an "official" agency, and reinforcing this concept that all cyclists go through red, and that therefore must be root cause of all road-related evil that people will actually believe it and take it as fact. There's no evidence or facts to support either viewpoint by the way.
Posted 11 years ago # -
"Until I get back and find out more about the operational side, then I'm not really qualified to comment too much."
Fair enough (get well soon).
One problem 'we' have with all this is the claim about the 3Es -
education, engineering, enforcement
The latter seems to consist of the (successful) week that has already happened - with no indication of repeats.
Posted 11 years ago # -
The Education phase(s) are/were run in conjunction with (by) CEC. During the week of action, there was still a lot of education and engineering, probably more than the enforcement part, unfortunately media like stats to report on and the number of people being charged often overshadows the number of people actually spoken to, or engaged with, engagement being the 4th E if you like.
I have PM'd you Chris, and hopefully I can get along to PY for a coffee and some cake.
Posted 11 years ago # -
It seems that Transport for London has gone full Nice Way Code. Not cool
https://twitter.com/FamilyByCycle/status/1463779259726671874
Posted 3 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
