Cycle campaigning

This just in:

http://www.boltburdonkemp.co.uk/services-bolt-burdon-kemp-no-win-no-fee-solicitors/personal-injury-bolt-burdon-kemp-no-win-no-fee-solicitors/cycling%20claims/%7E/media/Assets/BBK/Buttons/londoncyclerevolution4.ashx?w=700&h=1156&as=1

... as reported in the Evening Standard:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/dramatic-rise-in-cyclists-in-london-road-revolution-8870826.html

The data is, of course, quite old now, having been released in January, but it's nice to see it published again. Perhaps ojeffcott could say something about how they combined the different data sources?

excellent graphic. Cheers Oliver (+Olli J)

Can anyone help me with schoeigner cat on twitter? I can barely reply while at work.

Nope
S/he's been flaming me (and insulting Oliver and I) for a couple of weeks. I have stopped feeding that troll. Do the same Ed

Whoever it is, WAC.

Another day another dig:

http://www.voleospeed.co.uk/2013/10/motion-for-lcc-agm-uniformity-of.html?m=1

Can anyone clarify to me, the uninvolved, what exactly LCC's stance on cycling is?

I seem to recall when I've asked before is that LCC effectively had a vote where you had to choose between 'vehicular'/fast cycling in the road or dutch style tootling on segregated cycle paths, LCC chose the latter and now anyone else should GTFO and anyone who tries to proffer up any other attitude will get harassed and shot down by LCC members.

Is this truly the case? And if so, what affect is this going to have on cycling in the city if the main campaigners have agressively created and are enforcing a fracture within cycling? And is there anything that can be done about it?

Can anyone clarify to me, the uninvolved, what exactly LCC's stance on cycling is?

I seem to recall when I've asked before is that LCC effectively had a vote where you had to choose between 'vehicular'/fast cycling in the road or dutch style tootling on segregated cycle paths, LCC chose the latter and now anyone else should GTFO and anyone who tries to proffer up any other attitude will get harassed and shot down by LCC members.

Is this truly the case? And if so, what affect is this going to have on cycling in the city if the main campaigners have agressively created and are enforcing a fracture within cycling? And is there anything that can be done about it?

IIRC at the last AGM before the mayoral election the LCC board decided to adopt the 'Go Dutch' campaign to push for more segregated infrastructure, and I think the new Space For Cycling campaign is following on from that. Charlie from LCC is probably the man to ask if you're interested in how the decisions were reached.

Differences of opinion are inevitable in any type of campaign. I don't think it's reasonable to accuse the LCC of being 'splitters' - people aren't always going to agree on everything. If you don't think the organisation reflects your views as a member, you can look for another campaign that does, or stand as a trustee and try and change the direction of travel.

Another day another dig:

http://www.voleospeed.co.uk/2013/10/motion-for-lcc-agm-uniformity-of.html?m=1

Bloody hell that is piss poor! They really seem to be making wild assumptions and daft jumps in logic, not to mention uneccessary personal attacks on Mr Dansky.

And there is equality in NHS provision, social services and education across the UK is there? Really? If anyone's living an eternal fantasy its that loon. I'm sure any non suppoting comment will be blocked so there will be no debate but there needs to be some flaming of that.

I'd be interersted to see how their subscriptions are affected by their new views, I'd be surprised if they have increased since taking such a one sided stance.

New LCC trustees elected Ann Kenrick, Mustafa Arif, Tony Levene, Oliver Schick, Dan Barnes #space4cycling

^ The "Schrodingers Cat / AlternativeDfT" character is already calling one of those folks an arsehole via twitter.

It's lovely to see campaigners functioning in harmony....

New LCC trustees elected Ann Kenrick, Mustafa Arif, Tony Levene, Oliver Schick, Dan Barnes #space4cycling

Great to see Oliver elected: )

New LCC trustees elected Ann Kenrick, Mustafa Arif, Tony Levene, Oliver Schick, Dan Barnes #space4cycling

No issues with any of these people but for an organisation as important as LCC its a little disappointing that only one of the trustees is a woman.

No issues with any of these people but for an organisation as important as LCC its a little disappointing that only one of the trustees is a woman.

Why?

No issues with any of these people but for an organisation as important as LCC its a little disappointing that only one of the trustees is a woman.
The four women elected last year are still on the board. Now there are five women and five men.

who is this guy "Schrodingers Cat / AlternativeDfT"?

Why?

Because the same as women in business, the representation of women in cycling is typically woeful and that includes people in positions of organisation and influence. Part of encouraging the equitable status of cycling is demonstrating that in areas other than participation. Furthermore, as more women are getting involved in local, regional and national governance, planning and politics, having more women in equal level positions on the campaigning side has a particular value that serves us all.

The four women elected last year are still on the board. Now there are five women and five men.

And thankfully I misunderstood what was being posted upthread and LCC represents an important equitable quality at it's top level.

The strange thing is, the "arsehole" tweet was re-tweeted from the official LCC account, and the re-tweet was public for most of the day, including for some time after the election result was announced.

As it happens, Oliver got my second-preference vote, and this in an election which saw around 7% of LCC members exercising their right to vote. A typical turnout, from what I understand.

I may have voted for Oliver, but I was not at all happy with his procedural mischief during the AGM, which led to the Twitter outburst. Neither were the Lewisham and Greenwich people with whom I was sitting in the hall.

The four women elected last year are still on the board. Now there are five women and five men.

Thank you for posting.

I don't care if the candidates are pink with blue spots and come from Mars; as long as they can do the job, then that is what matters.

The strange thing is, the "arsehole" tweet was re-tweeted from the official LCC account, and the re-tweet was public for most of the day, including for some time after the election result was announced.

As it happens, Oliver got my second-preference vote, and this in an election which saw around 7% of LCC members exercising their right to vote. A typical turnout, from what I understand.

I may have voted for Oliver, but I was not at all happy with his procedural mischief during the AGM, which led to the Twitter outburst. Neither were the Lewisham and Greenwich people with whom I was sitting in the hall.

I was in the hall, and voted for Oliver's amendment, as did 20 odd other people, so we were all happy with his procedural mischief. Rachel Aldred had no objections either, and she proposed the motion which Oliver was trying to amend.

I disagreed with your motion, and tried to amend it. Does that make me an 'arsehole' too?

^ The "Schrodingers Cat / AlternativeDfT" character is already calling one of those folks an arsehole via twitter.

It's lovely to see campaigners functioning in harmony....

Same guy described Oliver & David Dansky as the BNP of cycle advocacy, and John Franklin as the Grand Wizard.

I was in the hall, and voted for Oliver's amendment, as did 20 odd other people, so we were all happy with his procedural mischief. Rachel Aldred had no objections either, and she proposed the motion which Oliver was trying to amend.

I disagreed with your motion, and tried to amend it. Does that make me an 'arsehole' too?

It wasn't me who made the "arsehole" comment, but it seems that you associating me with it.

It wasn't me who made the "arsehole" comment, but it seems that you associating me with it.

I know perfectly well it wasn't you, but you're not exactly distancing yourself from it, are you?

I know perfectly well it wasn't you, but you're not exactly distancing yourself from it, are you?

Now you're libelling me.

I would not give my second preference board vote to Oliver if I regarded him as an arsehole. I don't, and am pleased to see him back on the board.

Now you're libelling me.

I would not give my second preference board vote to Oliver if I regarded him as an arsehole. I don't, and am pleased to see him back on the board.

Thanks for clearing that up. I am little sick of certain (Parimal, AltDfT & Katya) of the kerb nerds calling anyone that disagrees with them names, and am probaby a little over-sensitive. Apologies for any offence caused, none was intended.