Rockets

What i am saying is that something has to be done to regulate and enforce bad cycling. Your approach of trying to deflect by saying they're not bikes they're mopeds is not helping anyone and is typical of the "well don't have a problem" narrative displayed by many in the cycle lobby. There is a growing problem around the perception of cycling. It's not a culture war as many in the pro-lobby will tell you, it is something being perpetrated by the action of cyclists and unless our cycling community starts to address it it will hinder the growth of cycling because public perception will begin to dictate policy.

Ha ha Snowy, someone took offence to having the Dulwich Society Transport sub-committee's chair award winning active travel lobbying flagged on the forum and asked the administrator for the name to be removed. Nothing in my post broke forum rules. Someone seemed to not want people to know about her London Cycling Campaign awards etc. I wonder why - perhaps you could enlighten us with your thoughts on that? Nothing in my post broke forum rules. Although the tone of your above post does come close to breaking Forum Rule 1 does it not?

I am not disagreeing with anything you say. The whole point of this part of the thread was to highlight the damage these cyclists are doing to cycling and if something isn't done soon to clamp down on this then cycling as a whole suffers. Whilst both Lime bikes and delivery bikes have been responsible for the majority of post Covid cycle "growth" it is actually creating a much bigger cycling perception problem. Pro-cycle lobby groups seem unwilling to address it because they fear scrutiny of their own ilk. Maybe this is why Earl claims that stronger regulation and enforcement will hinder cycle "growth" because people might realise how much of it is delivery drivers on modified pushbikes and drunk Lime bikes users...neither of which is a good look!

Not sure selective quoting applies here as you did say they were bicycles didn't you...modified bicycles granted but not mopeds? That was exactly my point but Earl seemed to want to pick a fight over it...I wonder if they will turn on you now in the same way they turned on me when i suggested that...let's see.....

Well, it appears the Oracle of all Such Things disagrees with you....see below..thanks Ex-!!! 😉 Earl, I am sure you'll be about to launch an argumentative attack on Ex- anytime now.... And that was exactly the point I was making. Earl, you may think it is a matter of legal fact but the court of public opinion sees them as bad cyclists and it is this type of behaviour that leads to calls for more regulation. This whole debate was stimulated by my experience of such bad cyclists in Soho. Also, a point to remember as well, is that these delivery drivers have been propping up cycling counts for a long time and whilst it might be good for Will Norman's "cycling growth" numbers in London it's really, really bad for the perception of cycling and cyclists.

This is where you're exposing you flawed argument style because I never mentioned illegal mopeds. You did. You referred to push bikes that have an electric conversion kit added (new rear bike wheel and battery slung from under the frame) that can go up to 70 mph as illegal mopeds. The point I was making was the below and based on my experience of walking through London and seeing the push bikes with electric conversion kits being ridden badly and in a way that endangered pedestrians: So the issue here is, again, someone makes Point A, you throw in Point Q and then accuse them of something based on your insertion of Point Q and accuse them of stating Point Q when they did nothing of the sort. And you've done it again. It's just the your flawed "debating" style.

Earl, no honestly, you lose me. We start at Point A and you take it around the houses and try to land a punch by making Point Q which has no bearing on Point A at all....

No, according to the admin update at the time of the removal someone asked for the name to be removed (even though it is all public information).

Earl - you're meandering and losing me again.....what I was arguing about was that push bikes with an electric conversion kit are not identified as mopeds by those pedestrians that they are causing huge problems for. They are seen as bad cyclists. Are you advocating that push bikes with electric conversion kits should be registered as you seem to want to treat them differently to other forms of cycling? But the police can via ANPR.

Someone is seemingly policing what gets posted on the forum.....the public names of Dulwich Society sub-committee chairs who are award winning active travel lobbyists and now Dulwich Roads posts that people have been critical of......that'll get the conspiracy theorists going....;-) March46 maybe repost it again and let's see what happens....

Earl I am the one not ducking the question I can assure you. Those delivery bikes which are wrecking havoc in central London and putting pedestrians at risk are not, in the eyes of the public, motorbikes. They are bicycles. Do you agree or disagree?

But to members of the general public, walking around Soho for example, how do they present themselves (and I remind you this is where this part of the discussion started)?.....;-) Do people look and think "oh look there's a bad cyclist" or do they think "oh look there is someone riding (badly) an illegally modified pushbike that should actually be classified as an electric motorbike/moped due to its power output but of course only if it had a number plate, road fund licence and indicators.......which it doesn't...." They present as a bad cyclist and this is what is moulding the negative perception towards cyclists - delivery riders, Lime bike riders, red light cyclists, pavement cyclists are all doing massive harm to the perception of cyclists and to anyone who cycles, like me, this is something that has to be urgently addressed.

A pushbike with an electric motor that takes it to 70mph is still a pushbike - it's just a pushbike with an electric motor. Do you agree or not?

But Kurt - that was what the preceding "drivel" was about - Earl trying to claim that those are mopeds....which I think we can all agree they are not. They are bikes with an electric motor fitted.

But a push bike with an electric motor is not a moped...the attached is not a moped...is it - thats the drivel being spouted on here people claiming that is a moped? Maybe lets put this to an emoji vote: All those who think these are bikes click the laughing emoji All those who think they are mopeds click the confused emoji Honestly.....