2 ms·
> How well does that high-vis gear sell in Copenhagen? I don't know, but it's not relevant. > it doesn't mean that it is in the interests of the rest of us to
by baddox 11y ago
> How well does that high-vis gear sell in Copenhagen?
I don't know, but it's not relevant.
> it doesn't mean that it is in the interests of the rest of us to agree with the idea that it's the answer.
Of course not. Like any product, each of us can decide whether it is worth more to us than the money required to acquire it.
- SideburnsOfDoom 11y ago> but it's not relevant. The point is, if a city does cycling well, extremes of hi-vis gear become irrelevant. The endless focus on hi-vis gear is a distraction from getting to that state. The good examples of Copenhagen and Amsterdam are relevant to that. When the mayor or some other official suggest that cyclist need "more shiney" and to "keep your wits about you" (1) it is a way of fobbing off with cheap placebos. I don't entirely blame a company for promoting their product, but calling it a "solution" is wrong, and seeing this "solution" roundly rejected here is encouraging. 1) http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/boriss-comments-on-hasty-rash-precipitous-cyclists-is-classic-government-victimblaming-8940052.html http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/boriss-comments-...