So to you the phrase “Stay Back” doesn’t actually relate to anything about “Staying” or “Back,” it just means some completely different stuff about not undertaking or passing unless it’s safe?

It’s imperfect. But I’ve yet to see anyone come up with anything better. Least of all you.

Actually hang on, I’ve just realised I only need to write “you’re wrong”

That’s ok. I’m not stippong you riding up the indside of big vehicles. Go ahead. Let us know how you get on.

aracer – but do you go out and get your wheels dirty in the argument? can you?
I’m in London, you could live on the Isle of Skye, for all I know.

I think splitting into camps just results in these pointless arguments about semantics.

I resent being labeled a STAY BACK “sticker zealot”.

A short form of cycle training could be taught, to cover the most dangerous positions, but as things stand teaching the complete National Standard course is the only way for a cyclist to be instructed on how best to deal with complex junctions.

No, it’s a lot worse than that, it’s fundamentally useless, wrong and justifies bad driving.

That’s ok. I’m not stippong you riding up the indside of big vehicles. Go ahead. Let us know how you get on.

For that you get one of these, congratulations!

FWIW I’ve commuted by bike in London.

That’s ok. I’m not stippong you riding up the indside of big vehicles. Go ahead. Let us know how you get on.

But the sticker doesn’t mention anything about riding up the indside of big vehicles does it?

Especially when it’s on a fricking taxi!

You might as well say “That’s okay, feel free to ignore the sticker and douse yourself in petrol. Let us know how you get on”

Go on. I’m not stippong you.

stoffel – Member

That’s ok. I’m not stippong you riding up the indside of big vehicles

Not coincidentally, neither is a sign that just says “stay back”. Especially when it’s not on the back of a big vehicle.

It does for me. And many others. Fell free to ignore it.

No, it’s a lot worse than that, it’s fundamentally useless, wrong and justifies bad driving.

Stop pissing your knikers over this. It’s an effective sign, and it’s use raises iscussion and debate. Stop usingyour own biased interpretation of it to denigrate it’s intention, and to suggest those who don’t agee with you are wrong. As I sid, feel free o ignore the stickers if they offend you so much.

Even when it’s on the back of a taxi? Going to answer that question at any point in this debate?

Though I’m also curious – if it wasn’t for stickers saying “stay back” would you ride down the inside if large vehices?

Okay stoffel, so you’re in stationary traffic, filtering up the inside on the cycle lane with plenty of room.

Ahead you see a taxi with a “Stay Back” sticker.

So what do you do?

So what do you do?

Rwad the sign. Consider it’s meaning. jinterprt it in my own way. Act accordingly.

Not get killed ridng up the side of a left turnong vhicle.

Surely the answer to that is obvious, Graham, he doesn’t ride up the inside of any big vehicles. Hopefully he won’t ever be confused by encountering a big vehicle without a taxi with a sticker to help him.

stoffel – Member

It does for me.

Yes, because you have the capacity to extrapolate a paragraph of guidance from 2 completely unrelated words.

The problem I think is that you already know what you should and shouldn’t be doing. Try and see it from the point of view of people who don’t. They can’t take a 2 word sign and extract all the other stuff you already know from it.

As I said; feel free to ignor the stickers. Go and ride up thie insie of vehivles. Good licuk. Good nigthgt.

Ah, but what if there were no stickers for you to ignore? Would you then ride up the inside of big vehicles?

Feel free to ignore the awkward questions.

As I said; feel free to ignor the stickers.

Thankyou I I will

Obviously I won’t ride up the inside of large moving vehicles, because that’s a bit daft, but luckily the sticker doesn’t say anything about that.

Likewise I look forward to hearing about you being stuck in a traffic jam for five hours because the taxi in front of you had a “Stay Back” sticker so you couldn’t overtake him.

The problem I think is that you already know what you should and shouldn’t be doing. Try and see it from the point of view of people who don’t. They can’t take a 2 word sign and extract all the other stuff you already know from it.

Exactly! You understand that “Stay Back” actually means “do not undertake large moving vehicles because they might not see you and could turn left” because you already know about that risk.

But it’s not the ones that know about the risk that need warning!

Simple fact, lorries have blind spots. The FTA card on p2 of this thread tells users to,”Be aware of blind spots”

If it’s a blind spot, it’s a blind spot

An “average” lorry has six mirrors to scan, the drivers are only human and with the best will in the world can’t stop, get up, walk 2.5m across the cab, look down 2.5m, get back in the driver’s seat, scan six mirrors and then turn left safe in the knowledge that a cyclist couldn’t have got into a blind spot at 20mph

Any reminder to help prevent this situation is a good thing until reliable technology can be fitted to every lorry and, as a cyclist, I don’t mind what the wording is

Then you have to look for that pedestrian somewhere in front and below, and that you’re not about to prang that car parked at the junction, or take out the pedestrian that is stepping off the kerb perilously near to your rear nearside wheels…

I see that the Internet bullies GrahamS and araracer are out in force.

7/10 for collusion trolling though. Decent effort, but ultimately it’s not very nice.

I had no idea those signs were supposed to imply a message about undertaking. I mean, not undertaking is common sense for me but that sign doesn’t do anything to spread a message.

My interpretation (when I saw these signs out-and-about) was “Bike riders: You’re annoying and I don’t want to share the road with you. Stay out of my way and everything will be ok.” It’s passive-aggressive and it implies a hierarchy on the road, in which cyclists are somewhere between insects and wild mammals, way below dogs/pedestrians/cars/scooters/lorries/taxis/motorbikes/vans etc.

The main problem on roads isn’t blind spots or red-light-jumpers etc. it’s a fundental lack of respect for different road users. And this sign exacerbates that – therefore worsening a problem it was designed to improve. That’s why it’s a terrible thing.

botanybay – Member
I see that the Internet bullies GrahamS and araracer are out in force.

7/10 for collusion trolling though. Decent effort, but ultimately it’s not very nice.

😐

Sorry if anyone thinks I’m bullying. I thought I was just debating a point 😐

Anyway… give us your lunch money fatty!

I think the signs are better than nothing on large vehicles but they are open to all sorts of interpretation so should be more succinct.

Stoffel quite rightly interprets them as advising him not to ride up the inside of large moving vehicles in case he gets crushed in their blind spot.

Other, less experienced, cyclists that don’t understand what blind spots are might take that sign more literally and never pass a vehicle with one of those stickers.

Since these stickers are also being used on smaller vehicles I think it’s fair to say that they could be being misinterpreted by other road users also. Why would a taxi or van driver need one?

‘This vehicle may turn unexpectedly. You may be crusehed as a result. It’s probably a good idea you don’t try to overtake up in the indide, and stay back until you are sure it’s safe to do otherwise.’

as said you’re reading a hell of a lot into two words, where as

Danger: Blindspots. Do not undertake

Conveys to me “Be careful this vehicle has blind spots, undertaking is a bad idea”, useful info I’m sure you’ll agree.

“Stay back” just conveys “**** off” to which the majority of cyclists are going to think “**** you too” and pass the vehicle. Issuing demands rather than warnings is not going to educate nor win you respect. Having warning stickers on normal vehicle is just stupid, lazy drivers pushing the onus onto cyclists to stay out of their way instead of them concentrating on driving safely around vulnerable road users.

So as a warning exercise the Stay Back stickers have already failed…
and you can add all the cyclist bashing and second class road user thing on top if you’re feeling militant.

Stoffel quite rightly interprets them as advising him not to ride up the inside of large moving vehicles in case he gets crushed in their blind spot.

but they don’t, they give a very unhelpful “keep away from me”* message, no mention of blind spots or where they are, just a seemingly obstructive command, so useless apart from possibly annoying cyclists. Properly thought out signs, yeah go for it.

*keeping away from lorries is probably all round a good idea but when they are driving up and down city/residential streets you can’t avoid them, and when they are stuck in the terminable 3mph crawl of heavy commuter traffic what are you going to do?

How do you interpret this one?

Simple fact, lorries have blind spots. The FTA card on p2 of this thread tells users to,”Be aware of blind spots”

If it’s a blind spot, it’s a blind spot

No one disputes this though timba. We know lorries have blind spots, and we’d be quite happy with a sign warning about blindspots to spread that message. “Be aware of blind spots” is fine.

“Stay Back” is meaningless. Especially as it is appearing on other vehicles which don’t have big blindspots:

(That last guy seems to be using it because he has his right hand wing mirror folded in!)

stoffel – Member

some of us decide that arguing is pointless

Yeah, did really well there didn’t you.

especially for graham and aracer[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxfI8BWe2Ck&feature=kp[/video]

I see that the Internet bullies GrahamS and araracer are out in force.

7/10 for collusion trolling though. Decent effort, but ultimately it’s not very nice

Dont go on the independence thread is my advice

Neither of those two are even big hitters never mind bullies.

That is meant as compliment…I am not sure it worked that well 😳

the signs dont offer advice they just tell you to **** off and leave them alone. IMHO it is part of the demonisation of cyclists and minimising our right to be on the road. YOu dont see cars saying dont break the speed limit, park nicely, look out for others….nope just advice for us to stay away from them

You won’t find me using the road.cc sticker, mainly because I object to the tiresome misappropriation and overuse of ‘awesome’.

But cyclists are awesome faustus

well I am, dunno about you.

Neither of those two are even big hitters

Actually cynic-al admitted me to The Brotherhood recently for my efforts on another thread (which unfortunately also involved stoffel).

But I’ve deliberately avoided mentioning children or their faces in this thread, so I think I’m okay.

There are more appropriate adjectives I think…;-)

GrahamS – Member

“Stay Back” is meaningless. Especially as it is appearing on other vehicles which don’t have big blindspots:

(That last guy seems to be using it because he has his right hand wing mirror folded in!)

You talk as if the drivers in your images have a choice about the signs. All quite clearly commercial vehicles that drivers will be employed to drive. The fleet operators in your examples have made the choice to display those signs – not the drivers.

I.N.R.A.T.S…but the frightened cynic in me can’t help thinking, one might as well have a sticker in one’s car saying;

“Bike Thieves, potential booty in house! Keep being awesome!”

An A5 sized sticker on the back of your car? WTF.

I think they’ve got their sizing quite abit out.

If anyone can advise about things being too small it is certainly Hora- reference to bike frames not the beautiful organ

The fleet operators in your examples have made the choice to display those signs – not the drivers.

Which is why LCC, CTC, RDRF, RoadPeace, Bikeability and the London Boroughs Cycling Officers Group have campaigned for TfL to tell members of its Fleet Operators Recognition Scheme (FORS) to remove the stickers from vans and cars.

Which TfL finally agreed to yesterday.

Transport for London sees sense at last over “Cyclists stay back” stickers

Which TfL finally agreed to yesterday.

But… hang on, surely the stickers are good? Aren’t they stoffel?

My interpretation (when I saw these signs out-and-about) was “Bike riders: You’re annoying and I don’t want to share the road with you. Stay out of my way and everything will be ok.” It’s passive-aggressive and it implies a hierarchy on the road, in which cyclists are somewhere between insects and wild mammals, way below dogs/pedestrians/cars/scooters/lorries/taxis/motorbikes/vans etc.

The main problem on roads isn’t blind spots or red-light-jumpers etc. it’s a fundental lack of respect for different road users. And this sign exacerbates that – therefore worsening a problem it was designed to improve. That’s why it’s a terrible thing.

Well done superficial, sums up my thoughts on the matter. 🙂

I would happily put one of the stay awesome stickers on my car if there was a version that wasn’t so large, already have a ‘Think Bike, Think Biker’ one

Something maybe A6 size or the size of 2 credit cards…?