So a recent email from the Energy Saving Trust’s transport division was just the ticket: promote and prove the benefits of ’smart driving’ to local authorities in 100 words. We were proud to have the final email – which packs costs, savings, benefits, proof points, a headline, two subheads and a call to action into precisely 106 words

They were asked to deliver the message in 100 words and delivered precisely 106? FAIL.

What an idiot this bloke is.

I have just read this on twitter, complete lack of any understanding

And Exeter FM have never had such a large amount of good publicity…..

Hook, line and sinker.

he’s just had a direct message from me… cock….

What an idiot this bloke is.

I have just read this on twitter, complete lack of any understanding

I don’t think some of the reactionary cyclists on this thread are operating on all four cylinders to be honest..

the bloke may not have any understanding of cyclists.. and may not know how to address a bunch of bitter wallies on a cycling forum..
he may even be a complete wally himself..
but if you would look into what he’s on about..the trail in question.. you will see that as a non-cycling taxpayer living in the area he must be more than a bit confused regarding the seemingly unexplainable actions of the cyclists that he’s upset about..

I’m not really trying to defend him but a load of poorly informed forum vigilantes getting their knickers in a twist and writing daft comments and complaints about the article will only give local cyclists a bad name..

some of you are clearly not very well

nevermind all that.
phonic fm FTW.
106.4 kids. 😀

you effin knows it…! 😀

I don’t think some of the reactionary cyclists on this thread are operating on all four cylinders to be honest..

Isn’t that a pre-requisite for posting? 😉

I think he makes a fair and reasoned point, just because you’ve set off half an hour early for work to parade around town in your budgie smugglers doesn’t mean that you have a god given right to hold up normal people trying to get to work using a normal mode of transport in a normal way. After all, car drivers pay road tax.

😉

After all, car drivers pay road tax.

That’s true, I hadn’t thought of it that way. Fair enough then.

After all, car drivers pay road tax.

If cyclists could afford road tax then they’d drive cars like normal people.

if you would look into what he’s on about..the trail in question.. you will see that as a non-cycling taxpayer living in the area he must be more than a bit confused regarding the seemingly unexplainable actions of the cyclists that he’s upset about..

“I don’t understand them therefore they’re all ignorant, selfish, stupid, mushy-minded, road-hogging lycra-clad idiots”

He’d fit in well on many of the STW threads – ‘your opinion is different to mine therefore you’re wrong’ 🙂

hmm.. cycling’s militant fundamentalists have been mobilised.. the outraged and indignant are calling in the pedantry division for back-up.. this can only end in tears..

Therefore I am out.. 8)

If cyclists could afford road tax then they’d drive cars like normal people.

Are people trolling here or genuinely thick?

After all, car drivers pay road tax.

No they don’t. But you knew that, yes?

Are people trolling here or genuinely thick?

I beleive it was sarcasm

No they don’t.

Saved by the edit 😉

No they don’t. But you knew that, yes?

It was quite clearly sarcasm, anyone not realising that needs to stand in the corner and think about the shame they have brought upon themselves and their families.

[/quote]juan samwell – Member
I dont condone any right to an opinion, but I do condone inciting acts of violence against other people, ignorance, and a lack of respect for others.

You mnay want to review that – “condone” means “agree with” or “support”

Or maybe that *is* what you meant

yea not sure what my brain was doing then.. must be a lack of tea =)

Insert ‘object to’ for all ‘condone’ stupid brain!

C___P___P
O___I___A
C___S___R
K___S___T
________R
________I
________D
________G
________E

Never ceases to amaze me how many get reeled in, having said that I’ve often wondered what the benefit of reeling in ‘saddoh complain for attention types’ is to a business unless it’s a webvertising medium which an FM station isn’t really.

but if you would look into what he’s on about..the trail in question.. you will see that as a non-cycling taxpayer living in the area he must be more than a bit confused regarding the seemingly unexplainable actions of the cyclists that he’s upset about..

As a non-driving tax payer, I can’t understand why drivers continue to drive inside the town when we built them a bypass.

aw shucks guys, opinions & actions

weve all had to bear the brunt of ‘said’ red eyed car driver that thinks cyclists are there to wind him up

we are talking about a published article here so before we all look at the deeper meaning of this lets just deal with what we have shall we…

Interesting article tbh. It does beg the question, why if there is a dedicated cycle path from a -> b are cyclists still using the road? I suspect that either said cyclists are actually travelling from a -> some other location, or the cycle path is unsuitable, irrelevant, or maybe more of a pain to use than being stuck in rush hour traffic (which would be quite an achievement in itself).

I can understand his point, although it’s not presented well, probably on account of him being a bit of a numpty. So why if an awful lot of taxpayers money has been spent on a path is it not being used? It would seems that something has failed.

From personal observation, the cycle paths I’ve seen and works done to improve byways have been a little misguided at best, or maybe they’re just not factoring in the full scope of cyclists requirements. I know of one cycle specific path that has so many anti-motorbike/horse gates that it’s a right old pain to use, hence I’m often inclined to use the road instead.

As a non-driving tax payer, I can’t understand why drivers continue to drive inside the town when we built them a bypass.

oh FFS.. 🙄

everything has to be us and them with some of you guys doesn’t it..

evolve

yunki – Member

oh FFS..

Please elaborate.

He’s not as funny as Clarkson is he?

if there’s a cycle path cyclists should be forced to use it rather than destroy the motorists spiritual uplift, a bad drive to work can ruin someone’s day. Or better still cyclists should be forced to stop damaging the country rights of way network and just use the vast network of dedicated trail centres should they wish to play on their superseded form of transportation.

I have to say most of the cycle paths in my area are covered in moss and grime making them dangerous & are full of fallen branches and hedge cuttings making them a puncture ripe zone.

If you are travelling at any speed the cycle paths just dont work for the purpose of commuting im afraid but for general cycling are great

why bother engaging with the guy and giving him and his website the attention he’s trying to get?

Cook pass babtridge

why bother engaging with the guy and giving him and his website the attention he’s trying to get?

^^ this.
You can almost see the meeting at Exeter FM:
“guys, our website only get 34 hits a day, we need to do something to up the traffic and please our advertisers”
“I know, why don’t I write an anti-cycling piece, it’s worked for all the local provinical newspaper websites”
“excellent, troll away”

Please elaborate.

did you read the link I provided..?
I lived in Exmouth and Exeter for 37 years.. the road in question is not one that I would ever ride along..

It is fast and it can barely carry the rate of motorised vehicles that it is expected to at rush hour and is too narrow and undulating along much of it to allow safe overtaking.. we’re not talking congested city centre here.. this is a semi-rural suburban link road

The new Sustrans route is good.. well thought out and long overdue.. it effectively now enables many normal cyclists to commute that would otherwise not have been able to..
And after much campaigning it was paid for out of the taxes of East Devon and Exeter residents.. very few of whom are regular cyclists..

so it must seem like a bit of a snub when some unnecessarily stubborn and foolhardy cyclists still choose to use the hazardous old crossing..

what has this got to do with by-passes..?

the ranting radio bloke is a nob with a bad turn of phrase but he has a very valid point..
it upsets me that so many folk on here have such a narrow focus that they will automatically back the cyclists without actually considering the whole picture..

it’s a type of insanity and not something that I feel proud to be associated with..

believe it or not, sometimes people that use a different mode of transport to us can be correct too..

I’m just grateful I don’t live anywhere with ‘cycle infrastructure’ that I’m supposed to feel obliged to use …

Maybe if he’d explained the problem a bit more carefully rather than bash out an ill-informed rant himself, there wouldn’t be a problem. Or maybe that was the point? It just has all the hallmarks of, well, complete b0ll0cks. What has 20mph speed limit or wearing lycra got to do with cyclist not using the path for instance.

Yunki the cycle path in question maybe a spiritual journey with a constant tail wind, views to die for and flunkis at either end to give you a rub down and clean and shine your bike. That’s not the point, the tool in question is making a clarkson-esque rant having a pop at cyclists and putting all the neanderthal drivers in the frame of mind so whenever they see a scrap of badly thought out, broken surfaced completely unmaintained cycle lane at the side of their road they will think cyclists should jump out of their way too. The article is a example of journalistic ****wittery* any valid point has been lost.

* and/or shrewd marketing ploy

C___P___B
O___A___A
O___S___R
K___S___T
________R
________I
________D
________G
________E

FTFY 🙂

I’m just grateful I don’t live anywhere with ‘cycle infrastructure’ that I’m supposed to feel obliged to use …

me too.. 😀

Maybe if he’d explained the problem a bit more carefully rather than bash out an ill-informed rant himself, there wouldn’t be a problem.

ok.. possibly..

The article is a example of journalistic ****wittery* any valid point has been lost.

true..

I shall untwist my knickers and have a cup of tea.. (it is a very beautiful cycle route though.. 8) )