Re: National Ninja Day - Saturday Oct 6.
Posted: Mon Aug 20, 2012 3:03 pm
Bugger! I saw that reference but couldn't recall the Law...ldrcycles wrote:
And i call Godwin's Law btw.
BNA - For the Australian Cycling Community
http://www.bicycles.net.au/forums/
Bugger! I saw that reference but couldn't recall the Law...ldrcycles wrote:
And i call Godwin's Law btw.
Denied, the point raised was valid. Unfortunately put by reference to the situation in Germany 1933-45 but still valid as other equally suitable comparisons were made.ldrcycles wrote:And i call Godwin's Law btw.
Yeah, that's why I didn't call Godwin's Law.Mulger bill wrote:Denied, the point raised was valid. Unfortunately put by reference to the situation in Germany 1933-45 but still valid as other equally suitable comparisons were made.ldrcycles wrote:And i call Godwin's Law btw.
(My finger was hovering on the lock button until I reread the post.)
Shaun
They released the 1 series BMW.The 2nd Womble wrote:What did the Germans do now?!
Oktoberfest?Mulger bill wrote:They released the 1 series BMW.The 2nd Womble wrote:What did the Germans do now?!
Ah right. You can add A Christmas with David Hasselhoff to that as well.Xplora wrote:Oktoberfest?Mulger bill wrote:They released the 1 series BMW.The 2nd Womble wrote:What did the Germans do now?!
It's a rare individual that doesn't. Often deserving serious respect.human909 wrote: Personally I feel quite comfortable with my set of morals.
That may be partly why there is so much disagreement here. The Golden Rule is too simplistic. People just vary too much. I'd call it a starting point.human909 wrote: In fact I (and others around me) would consider me to be and ethical and moral person. I am not Christian, but I do believe a good basis for life is 'Love thy neighbour' and 'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you'.
Are righteous forum posts really advocacy though?human909 wrote:My goal in cycling advocacy is to make it a safer place for all cyclists.
Infrastructure is a priority for who? In regards to budgets, it's nearly always left to Joe Blow to organise any form of campaign with regards to us. The Qld Govt allocated $100,000 in last years budget for "education" campaigns, all of which was chewed up in three days of statewide publication in print media.Alistair wrote:Are righteous forum posts really advocacy though?human909 wrote:My goal in cycling advocacy is to make it a safer place for all cyclists.
All the good intentions in the world won't make these posters effective. The campaign strategy needs to be smarter, and communicated better.
Fighting the sediment that settles in the comments section of news websites isn't going to achieve anything.
Transport planning is changing fast, and cycling infrastructure is a massive priority - even without state funding here. But what is built often isn't safe. You need to be smart and target the right people, because misguided campaigns won't achieve anything.
Discussions about morals is clearly a big tangent and not exactly needed in this debate. However thanks for your recognition here, and thanks for at least stepping up to philosophical level in reply.kb wrote:It's a rare individual that doesn't. Often deserving serious respect.
[Edit: That didn't come out quite right I'm not casting aspersions. It's clear that you do think about what you do]
That may be partly why there is so much disagreement here. The Golden Rule is too simplistic. People just vary too much. I'd call it a starting point.
I completely agree with you Alistair. I think you may have quoted my comment by mistake though.Alistair wrote:Are righteous forum posts really advocacy though?human909 wrote:My goal in cycling advocacy is to make it a safer place for all cyclists.
All the good intentions in the world won't make these posters effective. The campaign strategy needs to be smarter, and communicated better.
Fighting the sediment that settles in the comments section of news websites isn't going to achieve anything.
Transport planning is changing fast, and cycling infrastructure is a massive priority - even without state funding here. But what is built often isn't safe. You need to be smart and target the right people, because misguided campaigns won't achieve anything.
Every major project - look at feasibilities and master plans for shopping centres to skyscrapers and everything between. What is built often is poorly thought out. That isn't government money, but might be the difference between thousands considering riding a bike or not. These projects conciously don't provide parking now, and promote active transport.The 2nd Womble wrote:Infrastructure is a priority for who? In regards to budgets, it's nearly always left to Joe Blow to organise any form of campaign with regards to us. The Qld Govt allocated $100,000 in last years budget for "education" campaigns, all of which was chewed up in three days of statewide publication in print media.Alistair wrote:Are righteous forum posts really advocacy though?human909 wrote:My goal in cycling advocacy is to make it a safer place for all cyclists.
All the good intentions in the world won't make these posters effective. The campaign strategy needs to be smarter, and communicated better.
Fighting the sediment that settles in the comments section of news websites isn't going to achieve anything.
Transport planning is changing fast, and cycling infrastructure is a massive priority - even without state funding here. But what is built often isn't safe. You need to be smart and target the right people, because misguided campaigns won't achieve anything.
They won't spend and we can't spend.
Finally, if you don't like SCA pointing out the bleeeding obvious, tell your mates to pull their heads in. We all know them, either by name, usual time or usual place.
hurf durf durfThe 2nd Womble wrote:in my opinion and everyone elses
Well we all might as well just ignore all laws, I mean after all there are some that I think are stupid and I am sure there are others who have their own ideas of stupid laws. Where would we be if we all took your attitude?human909 wrote: You haven't answered the question. What is the big problem caused by cyclists running red lights? What is this similar tune?
I will continue to ignore red lights as a pedestrian and a cyclist when they are serving no safety purpose and there is no inconvenience caused by my actions to others. If running red lights is what causes motorists to be hostile to cyclists then they must damn well hate pedestrians!
You are concentrating on an largely irrelevant issue to cycling safety that isn't going to get 'solved' by your campaign rather than focussing on the "real issues" (your words not mine!) in cycling safety. Furthermore you are reinforcing the idea that cyclists running red lights is a pressing problem that needs to be solved. That isn't good PR for cyclists.
No. That is not the logical conclusion.GraemeL wrote:Well we all might as well just ignore all laws
Probably where we are today already! A likely improvement because I would consider myself more law abiding and socially responsible than the average citizen.GraemeL wrote:I mean after all there are some that I think are stupid and I am sure there are others who have their own ideas of stupid laws. Where would we be if we all took your attitude?
AUbicycles wrote:There was a Ninja out today, he must have been in training for the National Ninja Day.
The harder it is to see a ninja, the better they avoid the danger of being hit.
Let make it fun, here is a screengrab from my ride this morning, about 5:30am. Can you spot the Ninja?