> As expected we've had plenty of feedback on yesterday's story about the government rejecting calls from Labour MP Fleur Anderson for cyclists to be required to use a bell...

> On Facebook, Carol Loughlin told us she finds using one is a bit of a "lottery" as "some pedestrians move across without issue but some seem to see it as a personal attack on their freedom to spread out across the entire shared path."

"...a personal attack on their freedom to spread out across the entire
shared path."

Well, they have that right, as pedestrians are the top level of the
hierarchy and above cyclists. It's up to cyclists to accommodate
pedestrians.

> Martin Hawkins reports "once [being] told if I rang that bell again he'd stick it up my a**e, charming!"

Once! What's he complaining about?

> Rog Davies also pointed out the ding of a bell can sometimes come across as rude or entitled..."The thing for me is 'good morning - just letting you know I'm here as I didn't want to make you jump' is infinitely more friendly than ding, ding get out of my way!"

"...the ding of a bell can sometimes come across as rude or entitled".
One has to ask how this view of cyclists came about.

> While, Andrew Drake agreed: "I can shout a warning and in a more friendly way."

"...I can shout a warning and in a more friendly way."

And doubtless the pedestrians can shout back in a friendly way.

> We had a couple of emails in on the subject too. One, probably sent from under a bridge somewhere, aksed: "Read an article about bells on bikes, is this to make pedestrians using a crossing aware the cyclist is about to go straight though the red lights and nearly hit them?"

Only in a friendly way, of course.

> Rod also got in touch to say: "That very conservative organisation the Road Time Trials Council then removed the requirement for time triallists to carry a bell whilst riding in a time trial. I along with most riders removed the bell from both my TT bike and my training bike and they are still to this day on the shelf in my workshop. I have no intention whatsoever of using them again! At 75 I am still riding 200 miles a week on road and turbo...... without a bell in sight." No bell on the turbo? Surely that's a bit of a risk...

"...removed the bell from both my TT bike and my training bike and they
are still to this day on the shelf in my workshop".

Well, sunshine, bells are recommended by the Highway Code, as is the
1.5m close pass limit. Ask yourself why cyclists demand the one for
themselves, and deride the other that assists others. It's up to
cyclists to accommodate pedestrians, and not the other way round.

Selfish? You decide.

> This morning, group of *eight* people wondered across my path on the Armstrong Bridge:

> 50m out: 🛎️🛎️!
> 30m: 🛎️ 🛎️🛎️!
> 15m: 🛎️🛎️🛎️🛎️!
> 10m (braking): 🛎️🛎️🛎️🛎️🛎️!
> 5m (walking pace): "Excuse me! Coming through!"

> Pedestrians scattering, with, "WHY DON'T YOU USE YOUR RUDDY BELL!?"

Well, perhaps you should have shouted 'in a friendly way' even though
you didn't have priority...whereas pedestrians do. It seems like
cyclists are having a hard time learning this simple fact.

More drivel at...

<https://road.cc/content/news/cycling-live-blog-9-march-2022-290929#live-blog-item-32369>

--
Spike

On 10/03/2022 10:06 am, Spike wrote:
>
>> As expected we've had plenty of feedback on yesterday's story about the government rejecting calls from Labour MP Fleur Anderson for cyclists to be required to use a bell...
>
>> On Facebook, Carol Loughlin told us she finds using one is a bit of a "lottery" as "some pedestrians move across without issue but some seem to see it as a personal attack on their freedom to spread out across the entire shared path."
>
> "...a personal attack on their freedom to spread out across the entire
> shared path."
>
> Well, they have that right, as pedestrians are the top level of the
> hierarchy and above cyclists. It's up to cyclists to accommodate
> pedestrians.
>
>> Martin Hawkins reports "once [being] told if I rang that bell again he'd stick it up my a**e, charming!"
>
> Once! What's he complaining about?
>
>> Rog Davies also pointed out the ding of a bell can sometimes come across as rude or entitled..."The thing for me is 'good morning - just letting you know I'm here as I didn't want to make you jump' is infinitely more friendly than ding, ding get out of my way!"

And of course, fairy-cyclists, especially in London and especially the
ones working as couriers and the ones dressed up like a Marvel Comics
super-hero, renowned for their politeness to pedestrians, aren't they?

I mean... "Good morning - just letting you know I'm here as I didn't
want to make you jump" is their trademark.

Or something.

> "...the ding of a bell can sometimes come across as rude or entitled".
> One has to ask how this view of cyclists came about.

>> While, Andrew Drake agreed: "I can shout a warning and in a more friendly way."

"Can"... or "do"...?
>
> "...I can shout a warning and in a more friendly way."
>
> And doubtless the pedestrians can shout back in a friendly way.
>
>> We had a couple of emails in on the subject too. One, probably sent from under a bridge somewhere, aksed: "Read an article about bells on bikes, is this to make pedestrians using a crossing aware the cyclist is about to go straight though the red lights and nearly hit them?"
>
> Only in a friendly way, of course.
>
>> Rod also got in touch to say: "That very conservative organisation the Road Time Trials Council then removed the requirement for time triallists to carry a bell whilst riding in a time trial. I along with most riders removed the bell from both my TT bike and my training bike and they are still to this day on the shelf in my workshop. I have no intention whatsoever of using them again! At 75 I am still riding 200 miles a week on road and turbo...... without a bell in sight." No bell on the turbo? Surely that's a bit of a risk...
>
> "...removed the bell from both my TT bike and my training bike and they
> are still to this day on the shelf in my workshop".
>
> Well, sunshine, bells are recommended by the Highway Code, as is the
> 1.5m close pass limit. Ask yourself why cyclists demand the one for
> themselves, and deride the other that assists others. It's up to
> cyclists to accommodate pedestrians, and not the other way round.
>
> Selfish? You decide.
>
>> This morning, group of *eight* people wondered across my path on the Armstrong Bridge:
>
>> 50m out: 🛎️🛎️!
>> 30m: 🛎️ 🛎️🛎️!
>> 15m: 🛎️🛎️🛎️🛎️!
>> 10m (braking): 🛎️🛎️🛎️🛎️🛎️!
>> 5m (walking pace): "Excuse me! Coming through!"
>
>> Pedestrians scattering, with, "WHY DON'T YOU USE YOUR RUDDY BELL!?"
>
> Well, perhaps you should have shouted 'in a friendly way' even though
> you didn't have priority...whereas pedestrians do. It seems like
> cyclists are having a hard time learning this simple fact.
>
> More drivel at...
>
> <https://road.cc/content/news/cycling-live-blog-9-march-2022-290929#live-blog-item-32369>