• li10@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    As a cyclist, two people cycling side by side while other vehicles are waiting to pass is a bit of a dick move tbh.

    Not illegal, and nothing compared to the shit that drivers do to cyclists, but still a bit of a dick move.

      • li10@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        That image is quite a niche scenario and doesn’t represent the situation in the original image.

        Obviously it’s different with a group of eight compared to just two people…

        • Mr_Blott@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          niche scenario

          Never been to a country where road cycling is massive then? Try living in anyplace that has Alps in it lol

          • li10@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            You’re right. I live in a city and have never seen more than four people cycling together.

            It’s almost like cycling in the alps is a niche situation, and cycling in cities happens much more frequently 🤔

    • AgileLizard@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I disagree since overtaking a cyclist in the same lane is unsafe anyway. In the city I always cycle in the middle of the lane because it prevents unsafe takeovers and dooring.

  • caesaravgvstvs@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    So people saying the bikes side by side are a dick move are implying that you have more right to the road because you’re driving a car?

    Generally speaking, to do an overtake, a car needs to leave the lane completely, so it doesn’t matter whether it’s one or two bikes.

    • SpaceScotsman@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It does matter. It’s safer for everyone if cyclists travel side by side in one lane because then the car driver has to spend less time in the oncoming lane to complete the overtake. A long string of bikes takes more time to safely pass.

    • lorty@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      You are assuming drivers respect the safety distance from a lone biker…

    • The Barto@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If my vehicle had the ability to change its width when I needed to, I’d agree with you, but my car does not have that option, the two bikes do, it wouldn’t take much effort for one to slide behind the other to let the vehicle behind pass, it’s a give and take with society, I’ll actively make sure to keep you safe from my vehicle, while bikes should actively try to allow larger or faster vehicles to pass safely instead of putting themselves at risk over something that takes no effort to do.

      • HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’ll actively make sure to keep you safe from my vehicle

        As someone who cycles on the road, I don’t trust you. Not in the slightest. Far too many close calls with cars trying to “sneak” by me because “oh I’m sure there’s plenty of room to the right” even in a bike-oriented city. I ride alone the vast majority of the time but having someone ride beside would actually make me feel safer because it means you actually have to perform a legal overtake which involves moving into the passing lane. Also, drivers are distracted all the time and I absolutely do not trust that every driver will actually notice a bike that’s off to their side when drivers are prone to straight up miss traffic lights that are right in front of their eyeline.

        • The Barto@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ohh and I don’t trust the bikes I see riding around, the amount of people on bikes who have crossed In front of me while I’m driving the speed limit while never once looking behind them, causing me to have to slam my brakes on because I don’t want to hit someone on a bike.

          Both sides of this argument need to show respect to each other on the road, it’s not a bikes are the problem or cars are the problem, people are the problem.

          Like I said I actively try to ensure you guys are safe on the road when I pass you or see you coming up in front.

  • waz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I won’t lie, I’m split on this one. If I’m in a city and the speed limit is 25 and they are going 15, I’m patient behind them. The next traffic light is going to slow me down more than a pair of bikes. If I’m somewhere rural, the speed limit is over 50, and im on a road that sees about 10 cars an hour, yes you have the right of way, but it feels really inconsiderate not to move over for a couple seconds to let someone pass.

    • yA3xAKQMbq@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If there’s only ten cars per hour you should have plenty of options to pass them …

        • yA3xAKQMbq@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          a) that road definitely is not with a speed limit over 50 and b) you cannot pass even a single bike here in a safe manner, in Germany for example it would be a misdemeanor to even try.

  • Dkarma@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    This sub is pointless until it can provide a solution to having to get somewhere 30 miles from here when it’s 10 below outside for most of the winter.

    Dont give me that it’s not always 10 below excuse. It is often 10 below or lower for long stretches in the north. Biking is simply not viable or practical.

    Look at this example. Looks like it’s 80 and sunny with the top down on a convertible and everyone in summer clothes.

    Everyone doesn’t live in Arizona, kar Karen.

    • mondoman712@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If we assume there isn’t another solution to that, why does it matter? Why does your need for a car for your specific use negate any use of alternatives anywhere? We can still advocate for better transportation and land use in cities, even if the proposed solution doesn’t work for your journey between Plunkett and Blucher.

    • GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Dont give me that it’s not always 10 below excuse. It is often 10 below or lower for long stretches in the north. Biking is simply not viable or practical.

      “It’s sometimes cold, therefore you can never bike”

      Solid take there.

  • TexMexBazooka@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    You left out the part where the ones on the bikes are going the fraction of the speed

    • __dev@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I’ve seen people say this here and on Reddit. I guarantee you the dickheads doing close passes and yelling at me to get off the road would say this.

      EDIT: There’s literally people in this thread saying this…

        • Lenny@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          What are we supposed to do? We can’t cycle on the sidewalk, and if we get closer to the curb, it gives many drivers the false impression that they can overtake without crossing into the other lane, not to mention all the potholes, drains, and trash that we then have to cycle over.

          It seems like a dick move, but I promise you that most cyclists are purposefully being in your way to make sure you notice, slow down, and give us space. We’re just as unhappy about being around your car as you are to see us. We’d happily fuck the fuck off to our own little lane if someone gave us one.

    • arthurpizza@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It would make sense that the ones doing the majority of the damage to the roads (cars) should be the ones paying for it.

      Also, cyclists taxes pay for things like public parking even though we never use it.

    • yA3xAKQMbq@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Right cuz cyclists are totally paying the road fees to keep the road maintained even they don’t cause any damages at all. What was it called? Ah yes. Taxes

      • Smoogs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Didn’t argue that it requires more for a car hence why Registration is a lot more. If it was taxes in general and only for bikes it would not be built for cars to use either. You have to share it. Just like you expect them to share with bikes.

        And speaking of taxes : Just like you expect transit such as buses to also exist for people moving. Which is also paid by taxes and bikes should also have to share with them. if you put a bus or any emergency vehicle in place of that car in that cartoon, those cyclists are the bigger asshole in the equation.

        I’m all for cutting down emissions but putting people in danger or doubling down inconsideration is a foolish, abusive and negligent stance to be taking.

        • RedTie13@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Except pedestrians and cyclists subsidize the roads through taxes while cars wouldn’t even break even with high cost of road maintenance. This is not including the insane parking requirements that most US cities have.

        • yA3xAKQMbq@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Go shift your goalposts somewhere else. You said cyclists didn’t pay for roads. You’re wrong. Now leave, thx.

    • BastingChemina@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yes they are, roads are mostly build and maintained with taxpayer dollars.

      So cyclist only use a portion of the road, don’t generate any wear unlike the other 2 tons vehicles they are sharing the road with but still pay the same amount than car users.

      You are right that it is quite unfair.

      https://www.urban.org/policy-centers/cross-center-initiatives/state-and-local-finance-initiative/state-and-local-backgrounders/highway-and-road-expenditures