dcbwhaley wrote:
RobinXe wrote:
Not-fit-to-wear-the-uniform:
It was a specific health problem rather than physical fitness that caused me to fail the navy selection board.
Ahh I see how that confused you; I was referring to my own opinion as a serving commissioned officer, not that of the Navy Selection Board.
Quote:
Quote:
I'm comparing the attitudes of human beings with the attitudes of human beings, so pretty alike I'd say.
Not really. Even if both groups were equally well intentioned towards you in your car it would take the horse riders longer than the cyclists to reorganize their positioning. And there is a degree of unpredictability in equine behaviour which adds to the difficulty.

Not that the make-up of their attitudes were alike, that it was a like-for-like comparison of human attitudes towards others.
Quote:
All of which reinforces your initial complaint that the cyclists were behaving without proper consideration. My impression over the last twenty or so years is that the on road behaviour of equestrians has improved considerably whereas that of cyclists has gone the other way. It is rare these days not to receive a wave of thanks when you slow down for horses. I suspect that a lot of modern cyclists, especially the ATB brigade, simply bought a bike and started cycling without going through the tradition route of joining a club, which is where cyclists of my generation learned road etiquette.
Agree with the first bit, though not that one needs to join a cycling club in order to learn road-manners. This would be analogous to those who wonder how atheists can have a code of morals. Consideration for how one's own actions affect others is a pretty innate human ability (I believe only autistic people and sociopaths lack it), some just seem to ignore it! Cycling Proficiency was the way to go for my generation, but maybe we could help people by mandating a copy of the HC be provided with every bike sale, with a sticker on the front reminding that IT DOES apply to pushbikes.