human909 wrote:sogood wrote:Riding on road then deliberately stop and obstruct (even 1 mins) is not a bullying behaviour?
No.
Old school.
Latest Reviews and Articles
Postby sogood » Thu Nov 29, 2012 2:53 pm
human909 wrote:sogood wrote:Riding on road then deliberately stop and obstruct (even 1 mins) is not a bullying behaviour?
No.
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
Postby il padrone » Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:53 pm
sogood wrote:Well, then CM can get on with the time and protest to those who are in charge.
.
Postby sogood » Thu Nov 29, 2012 8:11 pm
il padrone wrote:CM is not a protest movement, just a bunch of people who get together to go for a ride. There are no causes, policies nor representatives - just a love of riding bikes.
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
Postby find_bruce » Thu Nov 29, 2012 10:12 pm
sogood wrote:il padrone wrote:CM is not a protest movement, just a bunch of people who get together to go for a ride. There are no causes, policies nor representatives - just a love of riding bikes.
That's a terrible way to present the group Pete. I understand from their movement site that they do have an objective. If they didn't and also deliberately cause traffic delay, then they really have no more defence of their action.
http://www.bikesarefun.org/faq.html wrote:What are the aims of Critical Mass?
Every participant rides in Critical Mass for their own reasons, and there are almost as many reasons as there are participants. However, some common reasons to ride are:
Having fun. (Seriously, would we keep turning up on the last Friday of every month if it wasn't!)
Meeting up with friends and making new ones.
Getting to enjoy bicycling/rollerblading/skateboarding on the smooth city roads, without the cars.
Showing off flashy and unusual bikes and clothes.
Being seen and vocal about creating a vision and experience of a possible future.
Networking with like minded people and organising similar activities.
Educating people about sustainable transport - cycling, roller blading, walking, public transport.
Show that all sustainable forms of transport can be used in the city, and that we need to sharing the road with each other.
Campaign for safe, use able cycling facilities.
To create a space that is Car-free in the centre of our city.
To reclaim the space street space for people
To encourage thought on Clean Air and healthier living.
The list goes on and on ... Turn up and ask some of the people
http://www.bikesarefun.org/faq.html wrote:Who are the organisers?
Nobody organises Critical Mass ...
Postby Nobody » Thu Nov 29, 2012 10:28 pm
Well, you can tell why I didn't want to be part of this debate.find_bruce wrote:Perhaps we should ask Nobody, apparently he organises it in Sydneyhttp://www.bikesarefun.org/faq.html wrote:Who are the organisers?
Nobody organises Critical Mass ...
Postby Red Rider » Thu Nov 29, 2012 10:29 pm
find_bruce wrote:Perhaps we should ask Nobody, apparently he organises it in Sydneyhttp://www.bikesarefun.org/faq.html wrote:Who are the organisers?
Nobody organises Critical Mass ...
Postby sogood » Thu Nov 29, 2012 10:42 pm
find_bruce wrote:In short, critical mass don't set out to achieve anything & so far they have met that objective, much like "occupy Sydney".
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
Postby AUbicycles » Thu Nov 29, 2012 10:59 pm
Postby sogood » Thu Nov 29, 2012 11:19 pm
Nobody wrote:Well, you can tell why I didn't want to be part of this debate.
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
Postby human909 » Fri Nov 30, 2012 1:08 am
AUbicycles wrote: I still picture loonies who go beyond the principles of making a stance to being aggresive and putting themselves in dangerous situations, ' standing infront of oncoming traffic on the habour bridge to make a point' rather then keeping to one or two lanes.
Postby diggler » Fri Nov 30, 2012 1:45 am
Postby Alien27 » Fri Nov 30, 2012 7:33 am
human909 wrote:AUbicycles wrote: I still picture loonies who go beyond the principles of making a stance to being aggresive and putting themselves in dangerous situations, ' standing infront of oncoming traffic on the habour bridge to make a point' rather then keeping to one or two lanes.
They are not loonies. I am starting to get less and less amazed at how conservative and how different and cohort is found on BNA forums vs the actual cyclist cohort. These aren't loonies involved in critical mass, these are regular cyclists. There is a whole another world of cycling out there beyond the constrained cohort of road cycling. It is sad that there is such a rift, you can see this on MHLs and other such topics.
Just saying...
Postby il padrone » Fri Nov 30, 2012 8:00 am
Alien27 wrote:The fact is people still picture loonies being aggressive and disruptive. If CM wants to help cycling rather than hinder it then they need a re branding, their past is inescapable.
Postby g-boaf » Fri Nov 30, 2012 9:06 am
Postby human909 » Fri Nov 30, 2012 9:19 am
g-boaf wrote:his topic even suggests that CM still polarises opinions, given the robust debate on the issue here.
Postby AUbicycles » Fri Nov 30, 2012 9:23 am
Postby Alien27 » Fri Nov 30, 2012 12:11 pm
human909 wrote:...Saying that CM suffers from a image or branding problem silly. As long as you are appealing to your target market then their is no branding problem. (Their target market is NOT all cyclists, it simply cannot cover that range.) It is like saying that Bathurst (the car race) suffers from an image problem. Those that love the culture don't see a problem. Those that dislike the culture perceive a problem. I'm sure many would CM would find lycra clad culture not appealing.
il padrone wrote:Alien27 wrote:The fact is people still picture loonies being aggressive and disruptive. If CM wants to help cycling rather than hinder it then they need a re branding, their past is inescapable.
CM is not a public relations firm or large corporation. 'Branding' doesn't really enter the picture.
Postby Baldy » Fri Nov 30, 2012 1:03 pm
Postby sogood » Fri Nov 30, 2012 1:32 pm
il padrone wrote:CM is not a public relations firm or large corporation. 'Branding' doesn't really enter the picture.
"Loonies being aggressive and disruptive" = any cyclist who doesn't stick to singe file (in the minds of most drivers)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
Postby human909 » Fri Nov 30, 2012 1:45 pm
Alien27 wrote:human909 wrote:...Saying that CM suffers from a image or branding problem silly. As long as you are appealing to your target market then their is no branding problem. (Their target market is NOT all cyclists, it simply cannot cover that range.) It is like saying that Bathurst (the car race) suffers from an image problem. Those that love the culture don't see a problem. Those that dislike the culture perceive a problem. I'm sure many would CM would find lycra clad culture not appealing.
Its not silly when the question I'm trying to answers was the OP's original one; "Are they (CM) helping or hindering cycling?" they need a re-branding if they are going to help cycling, otherwise their past and the public perception of them just makes it near imposable for them to get their message through. i would also imaging that no cyclists are their primary target market.
Alien27 wrote:Targeting cyclists would preaching to the converted wouldn't it?
Postby Alien27 » Fri Nov 30, 2012 3:14 pm
human909 wrote:We all have different perceptions of what "cycling" is and what "helping cycling is". Sometimes I don't think the obsession with lycra, strava, speed and bunch helps the "cycling brand".
human909 wrote:Alien27 wrote:Targeting cyclists would preaching to the converted wouldn't it?
Who said they are trying to preach to non cyclists? Who said they are trying to preach?
Postby boss » Fri Nov 30, 2012 3:59 pm
Alien27 wrote:il padrone wrote:Alien27 wrote:The fact is people still picture loonies being aggressive and disruptive. If CM wants to help cycling rather than hinder it then they need a re branding, their past is inescapable.
CM is not a public relations firm or large corporation. 'Branding' doesn't really enter the picture.
Whether CM's branding enterers the picture or not in their eyes doesn't mean its not a problem for them.
Postby greyhoundtom » Fri Nov 30, 2012 4:50 pm
Postby boss » Fri Nov 30, 2012 5:20 pm
greyhoundtom wrote:I therefore see no problem with their brand, as it describes what they do........just can’t see how their actions benefit cycling.
However I can see how their actions could make more motorists dislike cyclists as a group.
Postby sogood » Fri Nov 30, 2012 6:23 pm
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
Return to “General Cycling Discussion”
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], thamete
The largest cycling discussion forum in Australia for all things bike; from new riders to seasoned bike nuts, the Australian Cycling Forums are a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.