Putting the "oh no" into obikes

User avatar
Tequestra
Posts: 193
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 2:12 pm

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby Tequestra » Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:38 pm

mikesbytes wrote:what about seatbelts in Taxi's, most likely touching the skin of a lady dressed to impress on her way to clubbling

Spot on, mate! The secret is, look after your own hygiene in the big city. Keep your hands to yourself, sir. And [sic] your bike and your car and get your movies from one of those piratebay places on the web. There is one thing you can count on in the big city: germs. Yuk!

PS: It has been reported that some poor people have been to Bali thesedays!
Luckily for us that poor people can't afford to catch taxis, but stay away from those cheap obikes. Never know what worms you might catch from those things.
Viva le Tour Electrique' !!!

human909
Posts: 8725
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby human909 » Wed Jun 13, 2018 8:03 pm

Or not care at all about that stuff and live happily and probably longer because you aren't stressing about what you touch. :P

Tequestra wrote:Take for instance, hired cars. They are supposed to be cleaned after every customer has returned them to the yard, so that remnants from the last user are expunged.

You have to be kidding. A quick once over, a quick wash on the outside and a vacuum on the inside. Do you really think all the surfaces are cleaned? HA!

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 18903
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby mikesbytes » Wed Jun 13, 2018 8:35 pm

human909 wrote:Or not care at all about that stuff and live happily and probably longer because you aren't stressing about what you touch. :P

Tequestra wrote:Take for instance, hired cars. They are supposed to be cleaned after every customer has returned them to the yard, so that remnants from the last user are expunged.

You have to be kidding. A quick once over, a quick wash on the outside and a vacuum on the inside. Do you really think all the surfaces are cleaned? HA!

And the previous person might not of washed their hands after going to the bathroom, their hand has touched the door, the ignition the gear leaver, the seat belt, the steering wheel, the indicator etc etc
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

Calvin27
Posts: 1687
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 5:45 pm

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby Calvin27 » Wed Jun 13, 2018 10:03 pm

human909 wrote:Yes it is all a bit sad. Even just a little leadership from ANY of the relevant authorities could have helped. Unfortunately law enforcement and the state government are far from being pro cycling. The councils are very much pro cycling however they are hardly pro vandalism and littering on their turf. Especially because from their perspective it was all headaches and no gains.

There are no winners here. The EPA's reaction was extreme and made the obikes untenable. :cry:


So EPA asking Obike to come up with a plan is extreme?
Fast light bike
Cushy dirt bike
Workhorse bike
No brakes bike
Ebike :)

human909
Posts: 8725
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby human909 » Wed Jun 13, 2018 11:01 pm

Calvin27 wrote:So EPA asking Obike to come up with a plan is extreme?

No. Who said that? What was extreme was the fines being threatened and the time frames involved.

Imagine if somebody stole your car or your bicycle. And then it is reported to the EPA said they had found your stolen car at the bottom of a lake and you had a week to remove it at your expense or they would fine you.

Or alternatively somebody had trashed it and it was blocking a street and you had 2 HOURS to remove it.

tcdev
Posts: 643
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 5:08 pm
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby tcdev » Wed Jun 13, 2018 11:15 pm

1Rowdy1 wrote:Not sure about around your area but here supermarkets have been targeted quit hard for a number of years in regards to trolley's.

Well that makes one of us. Parkland along a major road near a local shopping centre here is a veritable dumping ground for trolleys. At any one point in time, you will easily find two dozen trolleys in that parkland, and that's just visible from a car zooming past on the road. Not to mention those strewn throughout the over-developed streets (aka ghettos) surrounding said shopping centre.

I really don't understand why it's so difficult to keep trolleys in the shopping centres. Yes, I'm aware of various ill-fated attempts to use technology to solve the issue. But since they otherwise pay for tractors and trailers and drivers to collect the trolleys, what's the issue with simply employing 'security' to stand at each of the few exits to the shopping centre car parks?

And getting back to the issue at hand, I'm a fan of the share bike scheme myself but agree that something had to be done about the problem. I don't agree with the current 'solution' of untenable conditions and disproportionate fines though. Obviously given the current culture in Australia dockless simply isn't an option. Sad (but not surprising) because it's a reflection on our citizens, but it also reduces the convenience of the scheme and increases costs for the operators.
2015 Giant XTC Advanced 29er 1, Suunto Ambit2 Black
2011 Schwinn Sporterra Comp

User avatar
AUbicycles
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 13033
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:14 am
Location: Sydney & Frankfurt
Contact:

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby AUbicycles » Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:44 am

What if the city could see the potential and advantage of shared bikes and could work together so that it is better implemented. Here are a set of points and approaches.

- Designated share bike zones

- Incentives for share bike users to return bikes or finish their journey (and park the bike) in a designated / preferred zone

- Improved planning by the share bike company to place and collect bikes.

- Slower roll out (which is not what the companies want) rather than an overnight 'explosion' because gradual change is always easier than rapid change.

- Acceptance that increased bike parking (whether shared or personal) is a necessity for a city improving their transport mixed and including cycle transport.

- Vandalism is an issue and my first hand experience in European cities with up to 5 competing city bike schemes, vandalism doesn't happen to the extent as reported in Sydney and Melbourne. There are too many 'people' who are actively vandalising and very clearly, the focus and blame (penalties) is on the bikes and company - rather than the anti-social and illegal behaviour. Security and policing can be managed to work against some of the vandalism and shift some behaviour.


Because the communities and governments benefit from bike riding - many of these points listed can be better coordinated between the government/authorities and private enterprises. It needs more work and focus from bike share companies to begin these discussions (rather than the one dimensional cashed fuelled saturation to reach rapid market dominance). And simultaneously it needs more dialogue, planning and guidance from the government - it saves them paying for and managing a useful transport scheme but is an opportunity to guide it.

Christopher

human909
Posts: 8725
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby human909 » Thu Jun 14, 2018 7:22 am

Sounds good to me :) Christopher for share bike Overseer!

User avatar
AUbicycles
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 13033
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:14 am
Location: Sydney & Frankfurt
Contact:

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby AUbicycles » Thu Jun 14, 2018 7:33 am

Image

fat and old
Posts: 3369
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Mill Park

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby fat and old » Thu Jun 14, 2018 7:40 am

tcdev wrote: But since they otherwise pay for tractors and trailers and drivers to collect the trolleys, what's the issue with simply employing 'security' to stand at each of the few exits to the shopping centre car parks?



I think that the owners of these things would look at what the confrontations would cost them and make a decision based on that. Not a hard choice

And simultaneously it needs more dialogue, planning and guidance from the government - it saves them paying for and managing a useful transport scheme but is an opportunity to guide it.


Anything that the authorities do costs. Anything that does not end with the authorities getting a slice is doomed to failure. No one works for free; and that seems to be the crux of the problem.

Calvin27
Posts: 1687
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 5:45 pm

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby Calvin27 » Thu Jun 14, 2018 9:37 am

human909 wrote:
Calvin27 wrote:So EPA asking Obike to come up with a plan is extreme?

No. Who said that? What was extreme was the fines being threatened and the time frames involved.


I think you don't understand. The 'threat' was produce a plan OR EPA would start dishing out fines. So if they actually engaged with EPA and had a way forward (i.e. a plan) then it was pretty clear the EPA would not pursue fines. Not sure why you are defensive of obikes other than we all love two wheeled things...?

human909 wrote:
Calvin27 wrote:So EPA asking Obike to come up with a plan is extreme?

Imagine if somebody stole your car or your bicycle. And then it is reported to the EPA said they had found your stolen car at the bottom of a lake and you had a week to remove it at your expense or they would fine you.

Or alternatively somebody had trashed it and it was blocking a street and you had 2 HOURS to remove it.


Well that is an outright stupid example yet again. The problems with your example are:
1. I am not running a business
2. The problem is not reoccuring
3. Even as a private vehicle owner I am still responsible for the property. If it is insured, they deal with it.
Fast light bike
Cushy dirt bike
Workhorse bike
No brakes bike
Ebike :)

tcdev
Posts: 643
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 5:08 pm
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby tcdev » Thu Jun 14, 2018 10:15 am

fat and old wrote:
tcdev wrote: But since they otherwise pay for tractors and trailers and drivers to collect the trolleys, what's the issue with simply employing 'security' to stand at each of the few exits to the shopping centre car parks?

I think that the owners of these things would look at what the confrontations would cost them and make a decision based on that. Not a hard choice

I'd argue that the main perpetrators would be uni students and lower socioeconomic groups living in high density housing close to the station, without access to motor vehicles or at least keen to avoid incurring costs using one. I'd suggest that these types of perpetrators would not typically challenge a request/order to leave the trolley within the confines of the shopping centre, unwilling to risk further costs to themselves as a result of fines and/or potential ensuing legal action. As such I'd conclude that the cost of confrontations would be minimal.

But I'm no expert on the subject.
2015 Giant XTC Advanced 29er 1, Suunto Ambit2 Black
2011 Schwinn Sporterra Comp

human909
Posts: 8725
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby human909 » Thu Jun 14, 2018 11:36 am

Calvin27 wrote:Well that is an outright stupid example yet again.

It is quite an apt example. You just seem to be ignoring the position the EPA put Obike in.

Calvin27 wrote:1. I am not running a business

Are you suggesting you have less responsibility than a business? What if you are a sole proprietor running a business and your bike is stolen? Then is it an issue that you should be getting massive EPA fines for?

Calvin27 wrote:2. The problem is not reoccuring

Absolutely it is. Just not the the same people each time.

Calvin27 wrote:3. Even as a private vehicle owner I am still responsible for the property. If it is insured, they deal with it.

What insurance insures your for parking violations and EPA fines? But that is besides the point. You are just avoiding accepting that you would be damn annoyed if you were issued with an EPA notice to move your destroyed car on the other side of the city within 2hrs. What if you were issued the notice at 2am?

It is unworkable. Which was the point.

Calvin27
Posts: 1687
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 5:45 pm

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby Calvin27 » Thu Jun 14, 2018 11:46 am

human909 wrote:
Calvin27 wrote:Well that is an outright stupid example yet again.

It is quite an apt example. You just seem to be ignoring the position the EPA put Obike in.


Yeah, they asked them to produce a management plan or 'risk' fines. You are ignoring the position obike put EPA in.

*Edit, not even going to respond to your stolen car scenario because anyone with half a brain can see it's not even the same problem both in nature and scale.
Fast light bike
Cushy dirt bike
Workhorse bike
No brakes bike
Ebike :)

Jmuzz
Posts: 400
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 1:42 pm

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby Jmuzz » Thu Jun 14, 2018 12:01 pm

Calvin27 wrote:Yeah, they asked them to produce a management plan or 'risk' fines.


It was over $3000 a week penalty for not getting the plan in this week. That was for the plan submission only.

The removal times and fines for stollen/vandalized bikes seemed to apply regardless?

I reported a knocked down sign (it was bent over cycleway, I ripped it the rest of the way out) and it took 2 weeks to repair.

A collapsed retaining wall fence with 3m drop, a week just to temporary fence it, 2 weeks to mostly repair, still unrepaired because they have got two fence sections mixed up so one is too short but fit with gaps, the other won't fit so it's been left incomplete. They can't see their simple mistake, still unrepaired.

A water main bubbling up the road reported Friday night with warning that it could become a sinkhole wasn't investigated until Monday.

Government departments can't respond to their own issues in 48hrs and certainly not 2hrs. How were EPA timeframe demands reasonable?

fat and old
Posts: 3369
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Mill Park

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby fat and old » Thu Jun 14, 2018 12:23 pm

tcdev wrote:
fat and old wrote:
tcdev wrote: But since they otherwise pay for tractors and trailers and drivers to collect the trolleys, what's the issue with simply employing 'security' to stand at each of the few exits to the shopping centre car parks?

I think that the owners of these things would look at what the confrontations would cost them and make a decision based on that. Not a hard choice

I'd argue that the main perpetrators would be uni students and lower socioeconomic groups living in high density housing close to the station, without access to motor vehicles or at least keen to avoid incurring costs using one. I'd suggest that these types of perpetrators would not typically challenge a request/order to leave the trolley within the confines of the shopping centre, unwilling to risk further costs to themselves as a result of fines and/or potential ensuing legal action. As such I'd conclude that the cost of confrontations would be minimal.

But I'm no expert on the subject.


Nor am I :) My reasoning, based on your two groups

"Costs" are not limited to the dollars spent on enforcement. I'm thinking specifically the cost to reputation, once the first example hits social media. Uni students and lower socioeconomic groups have proven themselves adept at marshalling the social media forces of indignation and both present a sympathetic face that can be plastered all over facebook, MSN etc etc.

Right now at work, I am 750m from Northland in Melbourne. The heart of both groups. I can tell you without doubt that the people around here will arc up, and there will be violence if someone tries to stop them taking a trolley. Sooner or later, it will happen. I reckon the reality would be somewhere between your argument and mine. That would be enough for the owners to give it a miss, imo.

That's my hypothetical for the day :D

human909
Posts: 8725
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby human909 » Thu Jun 14, 2018 12:43 pm

Calvin27 wrote:*Edit, not even going to respond to your stolen car scenario because anyone with half a brain can see it's not even the same problem both in nature and scale.

Quite true. The scale is far bigger and more expensive. For stolen cars that is.

Calvin27
Posts: 1687
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 5:45 pm

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby Calvin27 » Thu Jun 14, 2018 12:56 pm

Jmuzz wrote:Government departments can't respond to their own issues in 48hrs and certainly not 2hrs. How were EPA timeframe demands reasonable?


Oh you mean he timeframe to deliver the plan starts when the media picks up the story? Or could the alternative possibly be that there is a long history of no engagement and the plan was requested long before the herald sun ran the story...?
Fast light bike
Cushy dirt bike
Workhorse bike
No brakes bike
Ebike :)

fat and old
Posts: 3369
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Mill Park

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby fat and old » Thu Jun 14, 2018 12:58 pm

human909 wrote: issued with an EPA notice to move your destroyed car on the other side of the city within 2hrs. What if you were issued the notice at 2am?



Don't want to buy into the car argument, but 2AM? Really? What EPA notice is going to be issued at 2AM? These aren't EMS we're talking about. Maybe they recieve an e-mailed or phoned in (you have to open an account first ffs) report at 2am, that then gets actioned at 7am when the worker drones start their day.

human909
Posts: 8725
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby human909 » Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:06 pm

fat and old wrote:but 2AM? Really? What EPA notice is going to be issued at 2AM?

Dunno. Highly unlikely I suspect.

But those were the conditions being give to Obikes. 2hr response time didn't have clauses regarding the time of day, whether it be weekends or public holidays. It is a deliberately impossible expectation to meet.

Calvin27 wrote:Oh you mean he timeframe to deliver the plan starts when the media picks up the story? Or could the alternative possibly be that there is a long history of no engagement and the plan was requested long before the herald sun ran the story...?

I'll take my statement from the EPA thanks.
https://www.epa.vic.gov.au/about-us/new ... -on-obikes

Oh and the earlier MOU:
https://bit.ly/2JIwR8i
Last edited by human909 on Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Calvin27
Posts: 1687
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 5:45 pm

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby Calvin27 » Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:20 pm

human909 wrote:
Calvin27 wrote:Oh you mean he timeframe to deliver the plan starts when the media picks up the story? Or could the alternative possibly be that there is a long history of no engagement and the plan was requested long before the herald sun ran the story...?

I'll take my statement from the EPA thanks.
https://www.epa.vic.gov.au/about-us/new ... -on-obikes


And what you just decide to skip over the details:
The rules are a result of EPA’s ongoing engagement with Councils and the operator

The EPA rules seem quite reasonable. In your example, if my car was a hazard, it would cop a fine and get towed without my permission almost immediately!
Fast light bike
Cushy dirt bike
Workhorse bike
No brakes bike
Ebike :)

Jmuzz
Posts: 400
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 1:42 pm

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby Jmuzz » Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:39 pm

Calvin27 wrote:Oh you mean he timeframe to deliver the plan starts when the media picks up the story? Or could the alternative possibly be that there is a long history of no engagement and the plan was requested long before the herald sun ran the story...?


No the timeframe for 48hr and 2hr removals.

The post was about the removal fines applying regardless of the management plan deadline being met.
You have been saying they only had to meet the submission deadline ignoring the impossible removal times.

Anyway EPA did RACV's dirty work well and destroyed bikeshare.
That's done now and cycling will be poorer for it.

human909
Posts: 8725
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby human909 » Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:41 pm

Calvin27 wrote:And what you just decide to skip over the details:
The rules are a result of EPA’s ongoing engagement with Councils and the operator

They are the exact details I am referring to.

Calvin27 wrote:The EPA rules seem quite reasonable. In your example, if my car was a hazard, it would cop a fine and get towed without my permission almost immediately!

You seem to forget we are talking about somebody else's misuse and vandalism here.

human909
Posts: 8725
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby human909 » Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:43 pm

And in other news the NSW state government is looking at clamping down on bike share too.

Calvin27
Posts: 1687
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 5:45 pm

Re: Putting the "oh no" into obikes

Postby Calvin27 » Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:54 pm

Jmuzz wrote:No the timeframe for 48hr and 2hr removals.


2 hours for a hazard, 24hrs for a damaged or vandalised bike and 48hrs in strange places would seem reasonable. What would you propose as suitable time frames? I would imagine a well run bike share scheme would have capacity to meet that if, and only, if they were actually running a well managed scheme. The blue bikes are always moving bikes from one place to another and keeping them generally well maintained. On the contrary, I haven't seen any o bike maintenance or collections at all.

Jmuzz wrote:Anyway EPA did RACV's dirty work well and destroyed bikeshare.
That's done now and cycling will be poorer for it.


No helmets did that already. The blue docked ones were fine.

human909 wrote:
Calvin27 wrote:The EPA rules seem quite reasonable. In your example, if my car was a hazard, it would cop a fine and get towed without my permission almost immediately!

You seem to forget we are talking about somebody else's misuse and vandalism here.


Same goes if it was my car that was vandalised and dumped. Just because you have insurance that deals with it doesn't mean they can just leave it there.
Fast light bike
Cushy dirt bike
Workhorse bike
No brakes bike
Ebike :)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Arbuckle23, Aussie Bruce, human909, vitellan, wicksey