-
Wow, he pretty much missed out some of the great response in this topic and just focus on the most negative one.
Look like he'll do well in sensational journalism.
-
Why did you choose lfgss to argue your case? #clickbaiting>
I honestly had no idea that it would turn into such a... robust... debate. And I had no prior intention to write a blog post, that happened as a result of the discussion here.
CycleLove (the blog) was something I started because I wanted to celebrate bike culture in all its forms. If you dig around on there you'll find lots of stuff about fixed gear riding. And in a roundabout way, CycleLove became something to promote cycling without being a typical 'pro-cycling' campaign. Basically just by talking about interesting people doing stuff on and around bikes.
I think cycle training is a good thing, and I've pointed a lot of people who read my blog in the direction of their local council's training scheme.
I think that protected cycling infrastructure can be a good thing if done properly.
I don't think that cycling infrastructure is a magic pill that will fix everything, or that it should be everywhere, or deny that people will have to ride in traffic some of the time. We need it in places and not in others.
Not sure who the person calling himself "Crap CycleLanes" that posted on my blog is, but I agree with you that "Lots of cyclists find cycle lanes more of a hindrance than a help".
But...
(1) I don't think we should dismiss cycle lanes because they've been (thus far) badly implemented in the UK.
(2) The evidence from the rest of the world (see my blog post) suggests that well-designed protected cycling infrastructure enables more people to enjoy riding a bike.
(3) Dedicated some road space to cycle lanes doesn't (and shouldn't) have to mess things up for people who are already cycling, isn't 'letting motorists win', and won't make drivers behave more aggressively towards cyclists. (Not possible seeing how bad it is already).
PS. Some of my earlier posts on this thread were cunty and I apologise for that.
You are reading a single comment by @skydancer and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
edscoble
cyclelove
@skydancer
Post by @cyclelove abut his discussions here yesterday
http://greig.cc/journal/2014/12/cycling-infrastructure-is-not-for-cyclists
Why did you choose lfgss to argue your case? #clickbaiting
That term Vehicular Cyclists is nonsense and irrelevant. Whether or not there are segregated lanes built people will have to use local roads with no segregation (as they still do in the majority of trips in North Europe). Cycles are vehicles (and capable of speed). The Dutch recognise that which is why they train cyclists to share the road with drivers too.