...being sensible about organising rides

[LancsGirl]

I maybe need some advice... I have just begun to organise short rides with people I have never met, about 30k, with road, easy off-road and towpath and riverside routes and I have no idea about my liability if a rider or a third party is injured or suffers loss, and no experience coping with accidents.
Can anyone offer some advice and is there a source of advice on this?

British Cycling's Ride Leader courses are here:

https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/recre ... l-1-0?c=EN

I looked into the Ride Leader courses, very briefly, when I was wondering about organising rides for work colleagues. But I didn't pursue it because I thought that in order to do the BC Ride Leader course one had to be "used to riding in groups", which I'm not. Looking at the site now I can't find that stipulation, so maybe I misread or imagined it.

The place I work at has some experienced cyclists, and at least one serious alpine cycling couple. So there would, hopefully, be a a fair bit of cycling experience in the group. Plus we all know each other, to some extent. I would be a lot more nervous about your idea, organising rides with strangers.

[Cowsham]

I don't see what the problem is - it certainly isn't discourteous or inconsiderate. I don't read cycle chat, or any of the other places the OP may or may not have asked this question.

Nor me,

Me neither.

The whole point of asking a question on a forum is to gather a range of responses and form a consensus of opinion. If anyone chooses to ask the same question elsewhere then they are just widening the net that will help to make an informed decision. Seems perfectly sensible to me.

Nor me -- slowster, what you up to?

[mjr]

I agree. The OP has been perfectly courteous. In their very first post here, it should be noted. Different forums, on the same subject, have different areas of expertise. So if the OP has adopted something of a "scattergun" approach in asking the same question in several places, maybe that's the best way of getting a range of answers, which is usually good.

The OP is wasting participants' time, as they will be giving the same answers and doing the same research as earlier replies on another site.

[...] one then feels the need to spend even more time asking the poster to warn readers that it is a duplicate post...

... one probably needs to look at one's life/forum balance.

And if you write a long post criticising such a post, that goes double for you!

And if it takes you long to write posts, don't assume slowster is the same.

[LancsGirl]

I agree. The OP has been perfectly courteous. In their very first post here, it should be noted. Different forums, on the same subject, have different areas of expertise. So if the OP has adopted something of a "scattergun" approach in asking the same question in several places, maybe that's the best way of getting a range of answers, which is usually good.

The OP is wasting participants' time, as they will be giving the same answers and doing the same research as earlier replies on another site.

The OP hasn't wasted any of my time. Because I only saw their post here. Because I don't know anything about CycleChat.

But the OP did get an answer from me, a link to British Cycling's Ride Leader courses. They wouldn't have got that answer from me if they hadn't posted here. They might have got it from somebody else, but as they have asked the same question in at least two different places, presumably they don't mind duplicate answers.

Like I said, if some members are spending so much time reading multiple cycling forums, to such an extent that they feel their time is being wasted reading occasional duplicate posts, then that's their problem. Perhaps they should address the amount of time they are spending on cycling forums.

[...] one then feels the need to spend even more time asking the poster to warn readers that it is a duplicate post...

... one probably needs to look at one's life/forum balance.

And if you write a long post criticising such a post, that goes double for you!

And if it takes you long to write posts, don't assume slowster is the same.

My WPM typing speed lies somewhere between 80-100, depending on material. Towards the top end if it's not copy-typing. For me, none of this sort of stuff is what I would call a "long post". And I'm certainly not going to complain about feeling obliged to write a post complaining about having to read a duplicate post.

Slowster is quite free to simply ignore duplicate posts, rather than take on the mantle of policing not one, but multiple cycling forums.

[mjr]

The OP hasn't wasted any of my time. Because I only saw their post here. Because I don't know anything about CycleChat.

But the OP did get an answer from me, a link to British Cycling's Ride Leader courses. They wouldn't have got that answer from me if they hadn't posted here. They might have got it from somebody else, but as they have asked the same question in at least two different places, presumably they don't mind duplicate answers.

The OP had already been given a link to British Cycling's Ride Leader courses, as well as to CUK's, so your effort was wasted, in one view, whether or not you know about the other forum.

Like I said, if some members are spending so much time reading multiple cycling forums, to such an extent that they feel their time is being wasted reading occasional duplicate posts, then that's their problem.

I think you've misunderstood the complaint. I suspect slowster was more worried about the great volunteers on this site wasting efforts telling the OP stuff they've already been told elsewhere.

Perhaps they should address the amount of time they are spending on cycling forums.

And perhaps you should reconsider the assumptions you are making about others!

Slowster is quite free to simply ignore duplicate posts, rather than take on the mantle of policing not one, but multiple cycling forums.

Slowster is also quite free to show readers what answers have been given elsewhere so we don't all waste time repeating ourselves. That's not policing so much as community spirit and remedying an omission in the opening post.

[keyboardmonkey]

... The OP is wasting participants' time, as they will be giving the same answers and doing the same research as earlier replies on another site...

Well, if the answers are the same on both forums then that might help to give the OP confidence in those answers as they’re not the responses of just one clique. Which I can’t help feeling is a good thing.

As it happens, over on CycleChat the forum members there have been carrying out the perverse activity of actually answering the OP’s question, whereas us guys have been largely engaged in bickering among ourselves. So maybe we needn’t worry about the OP ‘wasting’ our time again in the future after all

[LancsGirl]

Like I said, if some members are spending so much time reading multiple cycling forums, to such an extent that they feel their time is being wasted reading occasional duplicate posts, then that's their problem.

I think you've misunderstood the complaint. I suspect slowster was more worried about the great volunteers on this site wasting efforts telling the OP stuff they've already been told elsewhere.

There isn't a single "correct" answer to the OP's question. They aren't asking what the size of rear hub Shimano bearings are, are they?

Your notion that once the OP has got the "correct" answer there's no need to ask somebody else for a second, third, fourth opinion is mistaken. As others have said, a variety of answers and opinions is valuable. The question is about responsibility, liability, the law, and so on. If the answer were simple there would be no need for lawyers, would there?

[gazza_d]

If a Sustrans ride then then you would need to complete a risk assessment and have it approved before a ride. It's not that onerous a process once you are used to it and for regularly used routes it only needs checking and updating every year or two.

Sounds like someone has to do the ride before the ride? Not very practical IMO.

Or at least be familiar with the route and potential hazards. But that's kinda the point of a guided ride though IMO.

[PH]

I think you've misunderstood the complaint. I suspect slowster was more worried about the great volunteers on this site wasting efforts telling the OP stuff they've already been told elsewhere.

I don't consider myself a great volunteer, but rather as someone here because they have a bit of time to waste.
I wish people would not appoint themselves forum police, all it seems to do is scare people away.
There, replying to you was no more, or less, a waste of time than any other post I've ever written.

Plus - I've found the replies to this thread interesting, whether the OP has been back to read them or not.

[mjr]

Your notion that once the OP has got the "correct" answer there's no need to ask somebody else for a second, third, fourth opinion is mistaken.

That's not my notion. Is there any dissenting opinion that you will not misrepresent?

As others have said, a variety of answers and opinions is valuable. The question is about responsibility, liability, the law, and so on. If the answer were simple there would be no need for lawyers, would there?

Indeed, it's valuable, but having several posters basically repeat posts already made, researching links and so on, isn't variety, is it? It's much better if people can say how they agree or not with what's already been posted.

I wish people would not appoint themselves forum police, all it seems to do is scare people away.
There, replying to you was no more, or less, a waste of time than any other post I've ever written.

and I really don't think posting a link to the previous episode of the discussion was to "appoint themselves forum police" — unlike the four people who posted basically "me too" or "I agree" to the "I don't see the problem" response. That felt like some sort of swarm or mob.

[mjr]

Back on topic:

If a Sustrans ride then then you would need to complete a risk assessment and have it approved before a ride. It's not that onerous a process once you are used to it and for regularly used routes it only needs checking and updating every year or two.

Sounds like someone has to do the ride before the ride? Not very practical IMO.

Or at least be familiar with the route and potential hazards. But that's kinda the point of a guided ride though IMO.

I dislike how the term "guided ride" seems to have been hijacked. What's the difference between a Sustrans/BC "guided ride" and a "led ride"?

[Full disclosure: I've posted this before a couple of years ago but didn't get any answers:] "Guided rides" was already used for group rides that aren't led in a BC/CTC ride leader fashion. You know, none of that rotating, snaking or "clear" stuff: just agreeing a route and riding along normally in a loose convoy and waiting for each other at safe stopping points. If HSBCUKBC hijacks "guided rides", what do we call the other sort? No- one's going to call them "ride socials" sorry and "social rides" is already something else in cycling clubs.

[gazza_d]

Sorry to burst your conspiracy theory but I'm not hijacking anything here, nor am I using the term for any dubious or nefarious reasons. I dislike the insinuation that I am.

I also have zero affiliation with BC or CTC. So have no idea of the back story behind your misplaced blethering.

I'm using the term purely to mean the sorts of rides I lead (or at least did until last march) under the Sustrans umbrella which are easy social rides suitable for all, where I lead or guide around a route I know.
As far as I am concerned the two terms are interchangeable. And I am not going to change

[mjr]

Sorry to burst your conspiracy theory but I'm not hijacking anything here, nor am I using the term for any dubious or nefarious reasons. I dislike the insinuation that I am.

Sorry if it was unclear: I accuse BC and now Sustrans of hijacking the term.

If you think they are interchangable, what do you call non-led group rides?

[gazza_d]

Rides. What do you call them?

And to be ultra clear about this as it seems to be difficult for you to grasp. The choice of the wording was personal.

Mine.

No one else's.

Not some corporate script. I do not work for Sustrans.

And yes your replies are making me cross with your continued insinuations. Stop being so pedantic and trying to drive wedges between and spilt people who should be on the same side.

[mattsccm]

My mum would bang your heads together.