ADUK Archive

Horse wrote:
And WRT overtaking, aren't you assuming that JBS was intending to overtake at the junction? I know that I'll occasionally match the speed of a vehicle in lane 1, then accelerate past as we both clear the junction. The 'matching' being an active thing - if the other vehicle slows, so will I.

What jb originally wrote was:

"Onto the 50mph dualtrack where he again opened up it to 70mph fair enough he then slowed into lane one in where I was in two s as I needed to turn off right and then at the last minute he gave what I call a reflex indication and came accross in front of me casuing me to brake and he decided to turn off where I was."

So the picture in my mind is a motorcycle accelerating away onto a dual carriageway in excess of the speed limit being followed by a car. The motorcyclist then moves into lane one and starts to slow, meanwhile the car driver puts on an offside indicator as they approach a slip into the central reservation for a right turn. At this point the rider suddenly puts on an offside indicator and pulls across in front of the car, causing the car driver to brake. This suggests that the car driver was traveling faster than the motorcyclist and had the motorcyclist not pulled out and the car driver not braked an overtake would have resulted. Hence my conclusion that if I had been on a dual carriageway with a right turn immediately ahead then i would not have put myself in an overtaking position on a vehicle in lane one, especially one that had just slowed down.

Oh course jb then rather confirms all this with:

"To clarify I wasn't on a overtake and was 3-4 seconds behind him I was staying in lane 2 with my right hand indicator on because there is a decelartion lane and turning on the right this allows you to head to glastonbury as he did, or in fact head back the way you have come which I did, I had seen enough."

Perhaps I'm being harsh but if I was 3-4 seconds behind someone on a 50mph dual carriageway I don't think i would have to brake if they decided to move out in front of me, not unless the rider had got off his machine and was pushing it across the road.... Alternatively if I was riding my motorcycle along a 50mph dual carriageway in lane one and on looking in my mirrors saw a vehicle 3-4 seconds behind me in lane two I would have no hesitation with indicating and moving into lane two, especially if I wanted to turn right. Oh course, I may have read this all wrong....

It was the last minute bit just as I entered the declertaion lane and then he braked hard...

Thanks jb, I knew I'd missed something.

What if he'd borrowed the high-vis vest and wasn't actually an advanced rider?

Rabiedmushroom wrote:What if he'd borrowed the high-vis vest and wasn't actually an advanced rider?

Personally, wearing hi-viz is not something I do through choice

Horse wrote:

Rabiedmushroom wrote:What if he'd borrowed the high-vis vest and wasn't actually an advanced rider?

Personally, wearing hi-viz is not something I do through choice

IF....is the biggest word in the english language suzie trust me, the groups chairman contacted ne regarding the report on here as it got back to them throughthe grape vine and confirmed it was indeed a member/observer.

Has he been relieved of his hi-viz wearing duties?

jbsportstech wrote: <snip> it was the manor of riding <snip>

so, how do stately homes in your area normally ride


Do I get pedant points for this one

jbsportstech wrote: the groups chairman contacted ne regarding the report on here as it got back to them throughthe grape vine

On another board:
he has not been contacted by the Chairman or for that matter by anyone else from CVAM!

Without this going all panto "Oh no he didn't", could you explain who the person who contacted you was (name, perhaps)?

For that matter, did he/she register here to do it via message?

Phil Dainty posted in reply to my post on another forum who I am reliably informed is the chairman.

So your not a member horse but you know the chairman I assume, where you the person on here who reported my post to them when I posted on here?

Is there any point in discussing it further?

jbsportstech wrote:Phil Dainty posted in reply to my post on another forum who I am reliably informed is the chairman.

So your not a member horse but you know the chairman I assume,

No, not a member of any IAM group, and AFAIK don't know anyone from CVAM.

I am not, and never have been, a member of the Communist Party. Oh, hold on, wrong meeting . . .

Horse wrote:

jbsportstech wrote:Phil Dainty posted in reply to my post on another forum who I am reliably informed is the chairman.

So your not a member horse but you know the chairman I assume,

No, not a member of any IAM group, and AFAIK don't know anyone from CVAM.

I am not, and never have been, a member of the Communist Party. Oh, hold on, wrong meeting . . .

So why question whether I have heard from the chairman on the matter? I did it under another forum name thats probaby why...

Are you the person who passed on my comments on here?

jbsportstech wrote:

Horse wrote:

jbsportstech wrote:Phil Dainty posted in reply to my post on another forum who I am reliably informed is the chairman.

So your not a member horse but you know the chairman I assume,

No, not a member of any IAM group, and AFAIK don't know anyone from CVAM.

I am not, and never have been, a member of the Communist Party. Oh, hold on, wrong meeting . . .

So why question whether I have heard from the chairman on the matter? I did it under another forum name thats probaby why...

Are you the person who passed on my comments on here?

Yes, I did.

FWIW I've use the same name on every forum I've ever used, so it would be daft for me to try and deny it!

'Why?' Because the chap on the other forum bluntly stated you hadn't. One of you is wrong or has been misinformed.

You seem to be upset - although I may be reading too much into the tone of your post - that I wanted to find out 'more' of the background. Really it's no different to what you did in posting the original post here, is it? This forum isn't 'secret' or 'secure' - and cross posting between boards is common, as I'm sure you know as you post on more than one.


Also, FWIW, here's the two latest post from that other board:

Yes but not very informative, not that I'm making any criticism of CVAM's 'leadership' in deciding to handle the matter privately, I understand that.
So, yes the matter has been investigated and the matter concluded - I believe that the CVAM rider has been contacted and no doubt responded but I am not privvy to what was said. Also a reminder has been sent out to our Observers team re CVAM policy on wearing CVAM 'branded' hi-vis vests when not on 'official business'.

TBH imho whilst we should take on board any comments such as made on the aduk forum consideration should be given to the way in which any comments are made......in this instance I can't help but wonder what that guy's real agenda was and personally find his comments hard to believe (and clearly I'm not alone looking at some of the responses on that forum). He's since attempted to 'stir' things up elsewhere even making innacurate (proven) statements in response to an online copy of a local papers' mention of CVAM (his comment being particularly out of place and somewhat insensitive as the article was about the funeral rideout for Tom Gaden) which the editor of said article has since removed.

So in summary, the matter was looked at, investigated/discussed by the appropriate persons and is now closed. My recommendation is to take the comments posted on aduk with a large pinch of salt!!!!


And:

The guy who posted the ADUK comments posted this earlier:

Quote: ......the groups chairman contacted ne regarding the report on here as it got back to them throughthe grape vine and confirmed it was indeed a member/observer

More evidence as to the credence this guy can be afforded, the guy lives in cloud cuckoo land........he has not been contacted by the Chairman or for that matter by anyone else from CVAM!


You'll notice that I - perhaps wrongly, but I wanted to spare your feelings - heavily preci'd the posts.

Horse I am not sure why you are intent on dragging the matter out : and trying to make me look like a liar, I can only assume I have knocked your nose out of joint with my comments and persona on the forum. (If you speak to the mebers who have met me I am not a total muppet).


Posted on another forum where I used another name but it was noted that I was james from this forum

by phild on Wed Mar 04, 2009 10:04 pm

Welcome to the forum, I hope you will remain an active member.

The matter has been concluded already


and andy w

by AndyW on Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:49 am

Hi (James isn't it?.....if you are the guy that posted this story on another forum a few days back?) and welcome to the forum. A shame about the nature of your very first post on our forum but thanks to the biking community 'grape vine' this story of alleged 'bad riding' by one of our members was flagged up at the beginning of the week.

It is most unfortunate that one of our members was perceived by a member of the public to be riding badly and tbh I find you report rather incongruous with the standard of riding I see all the time from all of our members let alone an Observer.

You mention your association RoSPA as a car driver - although this is a motorcycle related forum we are interested in all aspects of advanced driver/rider skills and road safety, so I hope you will return to contribute.

PS: my personal opinion, there has been no benefit from you posting your story publicly, I feel you should have contacted CVAM direct by email (contact information easily found on the Internet).

jbsportstech wrote: Horse I am not sure why you are intent on dragging the matter out : and trying to make me look like a liar,

As my last posts show, I actually posted very little 'against' you from the other poster on that board. The full text I posted later gives a fuller flavour.

jbsportstech wrote: I can only assume I have knocked your nose out of joint with my comments and persona on the forum. (If you speak to the mebers who have met me I am not a total muppet).

Nose out of joint? Nope.

FWIW, I actually defended your position on the other board . . .
http://www.bammo.org.uk/forum/viewtopic ... e2db19f485

And, also FWIW, it was picked up by another member of another board I used.
http://www.therevcounter.com/staying-al ... -duty.html

. . .And you may be interested to read my final post in that thread too.

Now, tell me wht you think you put my nose out of joint?


And, to repeat: if you post something in public in t'interweb, you can't be shocked or surprised (well, you could be but you'd have to be a muppet ) if it goes viral.

If you didn't want to 'drag it out', why not let it go the moment the guy rode out of sight, let alone post about it. It almost sounded as if you spent the whole afternoon stalking him!