From
<https://road.cc/content/feature/why-dont-cyclists-stick-left-lane-267623>

"We all know that hugging the kerb means that when you do encounter a
drain, broken glass or anything else lurking at the side of the road,
your only means of avoiding it is to steer outwards – perhaps sharply –
into traffic that's potentially passing at a speed much faster than you.
That's clearly dangerous. Hugging the kerb also reduces your visibility
to drivers coming out of side roads and drives".

QUOTE

"When you do encounter a drain, broken glass or anything else...your
only means of avoiding it is to steer outwards"

ENDS

NO! You can always come to a stop! Doing this would give you the
opportunity to assess the full situation, such as traffic volumes and
speeds, pedestrian traffic, etc, and then to walk your cycle round the
alleged hazard or wait for a break in the traffic.

The absolutely worst thing you could do is to veer into traffic
unexpectedly - as the article says "...traffic that's potentially
passing at a speed much faster than you. That's clearly dangerous".

Talk of 'primary position' and 'secondary position' is to trivialise the
need for personal safety, which should be paramount. It is to their
shame that effective personal safety techniques are not promoted to a
much greater extent by cycling pressure groups than is currently the case.

--
Spike

On 19/04/2022 11:45, Spike wrote:
> From
> <https://road.cc/content/feature/why-dont-cyclists-stick-left-lane-267623>

QUOTE

"Members of the Hat and Glove Wearing Driver's Club, especially those on
social media, will often tell you that cyclists should ..."

ENDS

On 19/04/2022 12:50 pm, TMS320 wrote:

> On 19/04/2022 11:45, Spike wrote:

>> From
>> <https://road.cc/content/feature/why-dont-cyclists-stick-left-lane-267623>
>>
> QUOTE
> "Members of the Hat and Glove Wearing Driver's Club, especially those on
> social media, will often tell you that cyclists should ..."
> ENDS

That is a blatant lie.

It isn't a "quote" from anything. Notfrom the cited article. Not from
the PP's post.

Still, anything's easier than actually addressing the issues, isn't it?

On 19/04/2022 11:50, TMS320 wrote:
> On 19/04/2022 11:45, Spike wrote:

>> From
>> <https://road.cc/content/feature/why-dont-cyclists-stick-left-lane-267623>
> QUOTE

> "Members of the Hat and Glove Wearing Driver's Club, especially those on
> social media, will often tell you that cyclists should ..."

> ENDS

QUOTE

"When you do encounter a drain, broken glass or anything else...your
only means of avoiding it is to steer outwards"

ENDS

NO! You can always come to a stop! Doing this would give you the
opportunity to assess the full situation, such as traffic volumes and
speeds, pedestrian traffic, etc, and then to walk your cycle round the
alleged hazard or wait for a break in the traffic.

The absolutely worst thing you could do is to veer into traffic
unexpectedly - as the article says "...traffic that's potentially
passing at a speed much faster than you. That's clearly dangerous".

--
Spike

On 19/04/2022 14:04, JNugent wrote:
> On 19/04/2022 12:50 pm, TMS320 wrote:
>> On 19/04/2022 11:45, Spike wrote:
>
>>> From
>>> <https://road.cc/content/feature/why-dont-cyclists-stick-left-lane-267623>
>>>
>> QUOTE
>> "Members of the Hat and Glove Wearing Driver's Club, especially those
>> on social media, will often tell you that cyclists should ..."
>> ENDS
>
> That is a blatant lie.

But it struck a chord with you.

> It isn't a "quote" from anything. Notfrom  the cited article. Not from
> the PP's post.
>
> Still, anything's easier than actually addressing the issues, isn't it?

Nothing to address.

On 20/04/2022 01:08 am, TMS320 wrote:
> On 19/04/2022 14:04, JNugent wrote:
>> On 19/04/2022 12:50 pm, TMS320 wrote:
>>> On 19/04/2022 11:45, Spike wrote:
>>
>>>> From
>>>> <https://road.cc/content/feature/why-dont-cyclists-stick-left-lane-267623>
>>>>
>>> QUOTE
>>> "Members of the Hat and Glove Wearing Driver's Club, especially those
>>> on social media, will often tell you that cyclists should ..."
>>> ENDS
>>
>> That is a blatant lie.
>
> But it struck a chord with you.
>
>> It isn't a "quote" from anything. Notfrom  the cited article. Not from
>> the PP's post.
>>
>> Still, anything's easier than actually addressing the issues, isn't it?
>
> Nothing to address.

Nothing you are capable of addressing, certainly.