thirdcrank wrote:Let's agree that everyone should be considerate of others. I think it's fair to say that generalisations are not always helpful, especially when they tend to be based on the worst examples. But:-
Owning a dog seems to bring out the worst in some people: an unwillingness / inability to keep their animals under control; not recognising that others may be frightened of dogs or at least don't welcome contact with them; and some disgusting behaviour with dog faeces.
Owning a bike brings a similar effect with some people, as does a car or runners too. The worst in all those groups comes out. It's when their activity and others activities are happening in a location that doesn't work for all users. Whether that's not enough space or incompatible behaviours or speeds.
The classic examples are runners and cyclists on a narrow towpath with other users but still insists it's ok to maintain their significantly faster pace. My 7 year old nearly got barreled into the canal once when an angry runner gave us no warning he was coming and simply pushed past. Unfortunately I was too far ahead to realise what had happened. I was bigger than him!!
You see conflict between users is often put down to irresponsible individuals but the inconvenient truth is often that they aren't compatible on the route in question. A narrow towpath is IMHO only good for walking pace. Perhaps 4mph speed limit?? Totally unenforceable of course so pointless.
There's a sign that's been put up on our local canal. Basically it asks everyone to use the towpath responsibly but one out if 4 points specifically asked cyclists to be considerate around other users. That annoyed me because it picked out one type of user. IME speed of use is the issue and that point should have included runners. I've had more issues with runners than cyclists during the first few months of lockdown. That's despite there actually being more cyclists using the path.