Bike parts you hate.

^ harsh. The more visible you are on your bike the better even though they do look crap.

Nonsense - they perpetuate the myth that as cyclists it is our responsibility to do drivers seeing for them and that if they fail to spot us in normal conditions we are somehow at fault for not looking like a fucking bellend.

I'm talking about at night. If you don't think its the cyclist responsablity to make themselves visible at night than you're a fucking bellend

Stupid argument. It's obviously better to wear some sort of high visibility jacket at night than none at all, even if its a nodder vest like that. Fair enough you might have something nicer. I hate the vanity over safety argument.

I don't, I make myself visible by riding in a good position and using lights at night. High vis is shit in the dark anyway, you need reflective crap at night if you want to go down that route.

Those jackets have reflective bands on them. I Agree that the fluro yellow is useless and I didn't mean they should substitute lights. Anyway should probably get off the soap box, it's just a major pet peeve of mine.

I'm in two minds regarding this...

I have a hi-vis bag cover that I use occasionally, particulary in winter as my backpack is black, and I know in wet misty conditions it works quite well. I also ride with lights on every morning, and whenever it is overcast or dark. I also have hi-vis Defeet gloves for winter. However, I think every cyclist wearing hi-vis starts "conditioning" motorists to only see cyclists when they are wearing hi-vis. I manage to see black cars and pedestrians dressed in dark clothing. I don't mind the mandatory helmet law in Australia, but there was discussion of making hi-vis mandatory for cyclists in South Australia, which I think is going a bit too far.