AndrewJRenko wrote: » Lr Kilmacud Road Part 2
is_that_so wrote: » It's parked at a bus stop with an advertising poster, that's what they do. Common sense suggests he'll next get out and replace it or has just done so. Not disputing the others but all road users have to deal with that nonsense. No journey is as simple as pointing a wheel or wheels in the direction you want to go.
Casey78 wrote: » It was a joke. Are you as easily triggered in everyday life?
Hurrache wrote: » It's bad when you have to make stuff up to try bolster an argument you're trying to make. Best you bow out of the thread to save yourself from further embarrassment.
Hurrache wrote: » A tabloid reader in the belief that all cyclists are male and middle aged shocker.
meeeeh wrote: » So all the whinging about how bad it is for cyclists and how terrible infrastructure is and at the same time claiming that your interest groups are successful in their approach and that dumping images and twitter links in the thread works. Obviously. I think we'll have flying cars before you manage to achieve something.
Niner leprauchan wrote: » No, let's not. Let's start with what you do want.
Niner leprauchan wrote: » Again, how is the cycle Lane at the airport not acceptable?
Niner leprauchan wrote: » So, that's 2 users asked a direct question and both can only reply with more complaints.
magicbastarder wrote: » as per the comment about comprehension above, you are treating a perfectly legitimate 'i don't want to be treated as a second class road user' complaint with 'i want everything and more'.
Hurrache wrote: » It has been made clear and obvious on numerous occasions on this thread, people have even posted pics and vids of them, but the kool kids are just too chill to look at them. It's been made clear and obvious as to what the issues are with existing ones.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Just to be clear, what you describe as 'moaning that they have to stop and yield' is actually pointing out the ludicrous nature of a cycle lane with a yield sign every 2m or 3m approx. That's a bit different, isn't it? You've never experienced that as a driver, have you? Why don't we start with what we don't want;https://irishcycle.com/2015/11/05/images-25-reasons-why-cyclists-dont-use-cycle-lanes/
Niner leprauchan wrote: » Ok so, what do you want from cycle lanes?
Niner leprauchan wrote: » 194 pages littered with people moaning that they have to stop and yield when using cycle lanes and then people, including yourself suggesting that this is why you use the road. While all ignoring that the road has zebra crossings, pedestrian crossings, junctions and yield signs.
Niner leprauchan wrote: » Presumable you had your indicator on?
Hurrache wrote: » You've a massive comprehension problem, and you double down on it.
magicbastarder wrote: » random aside, but there's a bus lane past our house. it's only happened maybe four times in seven or eight years, but i've had buses drive up my arse and try to bully me out of the bus lane when i'm trying to reverse into the driveway. i.e. i stop just past the driveway, stick the car in reverse, and the bus behind drives right up behind me and starts flashing at me to get out of the way. has led to some rather farcical exchanges with bus drivers ('you should have stuck your reversing lights on before you passed your driveway, to let me know')
Niner leprauchan wrote: » It seems to be that Ireland should introduce cycle lanes that overrule all other users so the cyclist never has to stop or yield regardless of where or how far the journey.
magicbastarder wrote: » was that claim made in the thread? i must have missed it.
is_that_so wrote: » And in fairness to her those possible permits have been reduced from 7 to 4 spots. More than a hint of tough on her about this post.
ecoli3136 wrote: » Is the point that cyclists are being restricted from cycling on footpaths because of bad parking and such?