You are reading a single comment by @cyclelove and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
You attacking the policies of the one local organisation that has presided over a substantial increase in cycling in a very challenging environment, and who has come up with a range of solutiins including infrastructure.
They're not attacking all of their policies (neither am I), they are asking them to clarify their position on one particular aspect of them. I tried to make that clear in my first post. As does their letter.
cyclelove
Do you really think no-one else here understands that, you patronising tit?
Let me reiterate the point I made earlier: in your efforts to get more people riding bikes, you (or at least these 'Hackney POB' clowns you are suggesting we support) are attacking the policies of the one local organisation that has presided over a substantial increase in cycling in a very challenging environment, and who has come up with a range of solutiins including infrastructure.
What you also don't seem to get is that this sort of tedious ego-led infighting in advocacy groups is both a depressingly regular feature, much as with local politics in general, and plays straight into the hands of anti-cycling elements. The fact that certain publicity hungry consultants (yes I'm looking at you Copenhagenize) have taken it upon themselves to fan the flames as a sort of cheap way of drawing attention to their 'services' has made things even worse.