This is interesting, isn't it? On the one hand, the rider (who isn't using the 'cycle path'/the sub-divided footway) is accused of being selfish. But why would he/she be selfish unless the commenter on that image recognised that the carriageway offered superior riding here? (NB I'm not saying it does, just trying to unpick the logic.) And if it does, isn't the commenter likewise selfish for wanting the rider to ride in worse conditions?
This is interesting, isn't it? On the one hand, the rider (who isn't using the 'cycle path'/the sub-divided footway) is accused of being selfish. But why would he/she be selfish unless the commenter on that image recognised that the carriageway offered superior riding here? (NB I'm not saying it does, just trying to unpick the logic.) And if it does, isn't the commenter likewise selfish for wanting the rider to ride in worse conditions?