Cycling on paths and other cycling issues (updated title)

Hurrache

TaurenDruid wrote: »

I know perfectly well what the M50 speed limits are. I don't drive on it too often, thank ****, but there are plenty of places where it's three lanes wide.

Wait, what? Better check your online security, seems you've been hacked based on the below statement from you.

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Well, there's the circular one that goes all the way around Dublin that I'd use reasonably frequently.

Nah, I'm just messin, you weren't hacked. You were hoisted by your own petard and are still trying to excuse yourself after the weekend has passed.

You don't know the speed limits of a road you use frequently (or is it that you don't drive too often, excuse the confusion).

meeeeh

I think it's sad that someone would know exactly what speed limit on m50 is. It means they spend their life sitting in there. Or that they are so obsessed with it they actually studied speed limits.

There is a reason why we have speed limits signposted. I drive there couple of times per year, usually when going on holidays. Sitting in my kitchen speed limit on m50 is completely irrelevant to me. It's only relevant when I drive there.

AndrewJRenko

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Sorry to burst your bubble, but nope.

I asked about bikes obeying speed limits, yes. My question, I think, still hasn't been answered. Andy instead got very stalkery and wants to know where I live. But still didn't answer the question.

I know perfectly well what the M50 speed limits are. I don't drive on it too often, thank ****, but there are plenty of places where it's three lanes wide.

So, yeah, magic - is it ok for bikes to break speed limits?

I can't answer the question until I understand it properly.

Speed limits don't apply to cyclists on the road.

So it seems that you're talking about park bye-laws, but you still haven't clarified ;

1) What park(s) you are talking about?
2) What actual rule or law you are talking about?
3) How is the rule or law communicated to cyclists - signage, or markings on the path or other?

So if can properly understand the situation, then I can answer the question.

ewc78

magicbastarder wrote: »

funny thing is that one thing many of us cyclists hate is when we're stopped at traffic lights, another cyclist comes up from behind, passes you, and then plonks themselves right in front of you.

07Lapierre wrote: »

What's worse is when the light goes green, you overtake this cyclist and when you get to the next light, They don't take the hint and do it again!

micar wrote: »

Especially when you've previously overtaken them.......FFS.

They also usually position themselves ahead of the line and are blissfully unaware the light has turned green.

And I'm the one who watching the lights and have began to move off just before the lights go green.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What's the point in overtaking the cyclist when you know you're going to have to stop at the lights?

Indeed

magicbastarder

meeeeh wrote: »

I think it's sad that someone would know exactly what speed limit on m50 is.

uhh..

uhm...

never mind.

meeeeh

magicbastarder wrote: »

uhh..

uhm...

never mind.

It means your life is spent sitting in the traffic. (Assuming it's not some other obsession).

Stark

Why would you need to know what the speed limit is if you're stuck in traffic? It's something you need to be aware of when the traffic is free flowing.

meeeeh

Stark wrote: »

Why would you need to know what the speed limit is if you're stuck in traffic? It's something you need to be aware of when the traffic is free flowing.

Because you have to observe the signs around you. It's not just the speed limit you have to know.

Hurrache

meeeeh wrote: »

I think it's sad that someone would know exactly what speed limit on m50 is. It means they spend their life sitting in there. Or that they are so obsessed with it they actually studied speed limits.

Don't be absolutely ridiculous, if you can't remember a few places were it changes, with only a short 120kmh section and not know where that is, you've got problems, especially if you use it regularly, or don't use it that often. We're still not quite sure that the truth us, although I suspect the poster makes things up to point score, and then forgets their own stories.
Even more so if you try to be smarmy about it and you're the person that brought it into the conversation.

Stark

I'm an off peak M50 user so very rarely get stuck in traffic and I know what the speed limits are for the various sections. 100km/hr for the 3 lane sections and 120km/hr for the 2 lane sections is a trivial amount of information for someone of average or above intelligence to remember.

meeeeh

Thanks for telling us your intelligence is at least average. That's some achievement. However I didn't know intelligence is measured by knowing speed limits on M50.

meeeeh

Hurrache wrote: »

Don't be absolutely ridiculous, if you can't remember a few places were it changes, with only a short 120kmh section and not know where that is, you've got problems, especially if you use it regularly, or don't use it that often. We're still not quite sure that the truth us, although I suspect the poster makes things up to point score, and then forgets their own stories.
Even more so if you try to be smarmy about it and you're the person that brought it into the conversation.

Iq and personal problems, what else are you going to diagnose on the basis of knowledge of M50.

micar

Better Than Christ wrote: »

On most urban bus routes, you're never far from a bus stop. The only way a bus driver can be guaranteed to avoid the situation you've described is to remain behind the cyclist at all times and allow that one individual to dictate the pace of the bus and its passengers. This is a very common occurrence in the bus lane along the Stillorgan Rd.

Correct a bus stop every few hundred metres.

What you are staying is that the safety of a cyclist is less important than the small delay that may be experienced by the bus and it's passengers.

You do realise that in order for a bus to pick up passengers, it needs to 1) slow down 2) stop and 3) open its doors.

The time taken to do all those things is more or less the same had the bus driver not overtaken the cyclist.

Hurrache

meeeeh wrote: »

Iq and personal problems, what else are you going to diagnose on the basis of knowledge of M50.

Ignorance.

If you have any other issues you feel too embarrassed about to admit publicly, I'm here all day for free consultation so feel free to PM me. Comprehension may be one such issue as I never came near IQ.

meeeeh

Hurrache wrote: »

Ignorance.

If you have any other issues you feel too embarrassed about to admit publicly, I'm here all day for free consultation so feel free to PM me.

Ouch. A cat showed her claws and her not so goody good personality. (Someone else mentioned IQ btw, I don't bother multi-quoting different people).

Hurrache

meeeeh wrote: »

Ouch. A cat showed her claws and her not so goody good personality. (Someone else mentioned IQ btw, I don't bother multi-quoting different people).

So you just attribute what other people say to the wrong person for what, sake of yet another made up argument?

meeeeh

Hurrache wrote: »

So you just attribute what other people say to the wrong person for what, sake of yet another made up argument?

You thanked that statement. There wasn't much more in that post than discussion on average and above average intelligence of people who know m50 speed limits.

Anyway it's pointless discussion. I can see you are a bit excited so I will leave you to it.

Hurrache

meeeeh wrote: »

You thanked that statement. There wasn't much more in that post than discussion on average and above average intelligence of people who know m50 speed limits.

Anyway it's pointless discussion. I can see you are a bit excited so I will leave you to it.

I don't what your problem is to be honest, but you do like to attribute random things to people that haven't actually said them. I thanked the post, of which there were two parts to.

It's quite easy to get a feel for people's opinions on things without wrongly attributing statements to people. If you make a mistake, admit it and move on, don't pretend you're above all these 'pointless' discussions when you're heavily involved and steered it wrongly.

TaurenDruid

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Like, why not take the lane behind the cyclist and make it safer for everyone?

What's the point in overtaking the cyclist when you know you're going to have to stop at the lights?

Concern for the cyclist.

I mean, there he is, in his all-black lycra, deliberately chosen because some non-cyclist once suggested cyclists might benefit from wearing hi-viz, so now he can't ever wear anything bright, and it's sunny out, and he's sweatin' like a pig in his helmet, which he shouldn't have to wear, but how else will he take photos of people in cars?!

Anyway, he's barrelin' along, and there's a car coming up behind him, and even though he could use the segregated cycle lane, there were some leaves on it last winter, so he won't.

So he's taking the lane, but thinking about that bollocks on Boards who was giving out about cyclists on footpaths, and look, sure there's a JOGGER now on that cycle lane, and the blood pressure goes up again, and dips a little when he realises he can post "What about joggers on cycle lanes, eh, EH?" on boards when he gets into town, and THAT CAR IS STILL BEHIND HIM, the MURDERER, and his blood pressure shoots up again...

So, yeah, I'd hate to be responsible for an aneurysm, so I overtake as soon as possible, when it's safe to do so. If the cyclist gets in front of me at the lights, I just have to do it again. But maybe I won't get stopped at the lights.

meeeeh

That made me laugh.

TaurenDruid

Hurrache wrote: »

Wait, what? Better check your online security, seems you've been hacked based on the below statement from you.



Nah, I'm just messin, you weren't hacked. You were hoisted by your own petard and are still trying to excuse yourself after the weekend has passed.

You don't know the speed limits of a road you use frequently (or is it that you don't drive too often, excuse the confusion).

I guess it depends on what you define as "frequently".

No, I'm not trying to wriggle out of this. I live northside. I've driven as far as Tallaght zero times in the last year. I've driven to the N7 exit and back I think twice in the last year, the N6 exit the same, and the Finglas or Ballymun exits less than half a dozen times. Is that "frequent"? I dunno. I know I rarely reach the part where the speed limit goes up to 120kmh. I also know there's a fair stretch of the 100kmh part that is three lanes wide, so...

AndrewJRenko

meeeeh wrote: »

That made me laugh.

Me too. Is that what's called 'projecting'?

TaurenDruid

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I can't answer the question until I understand it properly.

Speed limits don't apply to cyclists on the road.

So it seems that you're talking about park bye-laws, but you still haven't clarified ;

1) What park(s) you are talking about?
2) What actual rule or law you are talking about?
3) How is the rule or law communicated to cyclists - signage, or markings on the path or other?

So if can properly understand the situation, then I can answer the question.

Oh, I already answered all of those questions. (I may not have listed the actual bye-laws, but someone else certainly did link to them).

Although I don't understand what difference is made by where a limit is posted, once it's clearly visible.

AndrewJRenko

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Oh, I already answered all of those questions. (I may not have listed the actual bye-laws, but someone else certainly did link to them).

Although I don't understand what difference is made by where a limit is posted, once it's clearly visible.

You really didn't. You said : "All parks". What does that mean? All the parks in the country? All in Dublin? All in Dublin City Council?

Are you just being obtuse or what? And yes, the nature of the signage IS significant, mainly because there's a chance that it doesn't actually exist.

So please, what park(s) and what sign(s) please?

Hurrache

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Concern for the cyclist.

I mean, there he is, in his all-black lycra, ....

But he's all in black, how on earth would you even know he or she is there?

07Lapierre

Bleedin cyclists!

https://twitter.com/citizenw0lf/status/1277654197983461376?s=21

07Lapierre

Hurrache wrote: »

But he's all in black, how on earth would you even know he or she is there?

It's amazing what you can see when your driving and NOT on your phone!

Stark

07Lapierre wrote: »

Bleedin cyclists!

https://twitter.com/citizenw0lf/status/1277654197983461376?s=21

OMG.

That dog's not wearing a helmet!

FinnC

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Concern for the cyclist.

I mean, there he is, in his all-black lycra, deliberately chosen because some non-cyclist once suggested cyclists might benefit from wearing hi-viz, so now he can't ever wear anything bright, and it's sunny out, and he's sweatin' like a pig in his helmet, which he shouldn't have to wear, but how else will he take photos of people in cars?!

Anyway, he's barrelin' along, and there's a car coming up behind him, and even though he could use the segregated cycle lane, there were some leaves on it last winter, so he won't.

So he's taking the lane, but thinking about that bollocks on Boards who was giving out about cyclists on footpaths, and look, sure there's a JOGGER now on that cycle lane, and the blood pressure goes up again, and dips a little when he realises he can post "What about joggers on cycle lanes, eh, EH?" on boards when he gets into town, and THAT CAR IS STILL BEHIND HIM, the MURDERER, and his blood pressure shoots up again...

So, yeah, I'd hate to be responsible for an aneurysm, so I overtake as soon as possible, when it's safe to do so. If the cyclist gets in front of me at the lights, I just have to do it again. But maybe I won't get stopped at the lights.

Very good! Made me laugh.

ewc78

07Lapierre wrote: »

Bleedin cyclists!

https://twitter.com/citizenw0lf/status/1277654197983461376?s=21

Ultimately no one was hurt though eh?!!