AndrewJRenko wrote: » Maybe, just maybe, maybe it's not me that has the blindspot.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » It's possible to engage with people calmly, in a civil manner, assertively and directly as Mikey generally does with now gesticulation and no getting in people's faces.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » So all the decades of antagonistic driving by motorists in the UK, and over here too, is now down to Mikey and other cyclists who don't tug their forelock quite enough when asking the nice motorist to - pretty please with bells on - not kill them on their journey today? Funny how there wasn't huge outcry or concerns about the route cause of antagonistic drivers until Mikey came along - but until he gets his tone exactly right he's going to get a virtual kicking round here.
km991148 wrote: » And you want to talk about strawmen and other poor debating techniques :pac: Your some man for a bit of spin! You don't like it when people tell you how to cycle (as is often the case when you post videos). Why do you think others are different? All this forelock nonsense.. it's really telling about your attitude and I fear it will get you into serious trouble one day.
km991148 wrote: » Maybe. I'm always looking to improve, there is always room. I guess one man's calm is anothers passive aggressive arseshole. Mickey doesn't often gesticulate, I think that much is clear. He literally gets in people's faces tho!
on_the_nickel wrote: » No, Andrew - and I would appreciate it if you could stop re-wording my posts to suit your argument - what I said was, in the case of this specific road, knowing it as I do, I chose not to put my convenience ahead of that of other road users. I also, and this is important Andrew, because you seem to have difficulty understanding what I'm saying or maybe just seeing past your own pre-conceptions, I specifically said it was up to others to make their own choices.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Why is "do people like it" a key factor here? Is there some global rule about not offending the sensibilities of dangerous drivers?
AndrewJRenko wrote: » He literally doesn't get in people's faces as he is always beside them, not in front of them.
km991148 wrote: » Semantics and pedantry. He literally stands in front of or beside people. If I'm beside you telling you how to behave, I think colloquially it would be described as getting in your face. I would go further and say beside is literally in your face. The side of one's face is still the face. Or do you only want to include people directly on front of you within a certain range? Taking a line parallel to the forehead, we will draw another perpendicular line through the nose and only count 45 degrees either side? Maybe cap it as no further than 50cm from the forehead? Regardless of where he stands, his attitude makes him a bit of a prick. His work and reporting is still great, but could be better.
km991148 wrote: » Why do you always view it that way? It's really is coming across as trolling. I think it's been explained pretty clearly why people object to the little chats Mikey has and it has got sweet fa to do with 'offending' drivers (dangerous or otherwise). No matter how many times you try and frame the conversation that way.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Just have a little think about that, and how out of all the bad things happening in that cycle, it is Mikey's tone that you keep highlighting as the bit that needs to be fixed.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » When he stands in front, there is a windscreen and a bonnet between him and them - a long way from "in yer face".
km991148 wrote: » And beside? That s different is it? .. I don't know whats worse at this stage - if your posts are similar to trolling, I'm now feeding away here :pac:
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Well, yes - it is different. It's not "literally in your face" when there's a windscreen and bonnet in between.
km991148 wrote: » I'm asking is "beside" literally in your face - I just want to understand your exact definitions - we are so far from any sensible point I may as well try to understand this part at least!
Eamonnator wrote: » He's a bellend.
Eamonnator wrote: » It's a week and 180 posts since I made this remark. Nothing, that has been said since, has changed my mind. I wonder has anybody changed their mind about Mikey's behaviour.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » with your points about compromise and choosing the better option.
on_the_nickel wrote: » Andrew, read that again, in the context of this thread, and maybe life in general and ask yourself why you think compromise and choosing the better option are things to argue against, and why you're arguing against them. I'm going to leave it at that.
km991148 wrote: » Cringehttps://youtu.be/bHtI1plraEg?t=56
Eamonnator wrote: » I don't understand, why there are not more negative comments on UTube. Can Mikey delete comments, that he doesn't like? "I'm the guy, who caught Guy Richie" What a knob!
Deleted User wrote: » Church of Mickey