On 23 Oct, 12:56, Adrian wrote:
MIG gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:

What I said. *You get to the front to help you survive, nothing to do
with impatience.
********.
Obviously the people who designed those green areas at the front don't
agree with you.

No, they're to help the impatient survive despite their best efforts.

How would you squeeze between the bumpers to get to the right anyway?
Why do you need to "squeeze between the bumpers"?
Either that or leapfrog over the vehicles. *I can't imagine what you
have in mind.

Fairly straightforward, I'd have thought.

Would it be safe to pop out from between vehicles into the middle of
the road?
Of course it wouldn't. But why would you be doing that, anyway?
By taking a fairly rigid bicycle through a two-foot gap at right angles
to the direction of traffic.

Umm, why are you putting yourself into the position where you have to DO
that?

Seems to me like you don't have the first clue about defensive cycling
and basic road positioning.
It seems to me that you've never seen a road. *Maybe you've seen one
described in a book and misunderstood.

Are you talking to yourself again? Because I well understand that, for
cyclists, there's rather more to the road than the gutter and "the bit
for cars".

I made a perfectly reasonable point about when use of indicators might
make a difference to a cyclist.

Your and Boltar's responses have basically been on the lines of
cyclists shouldn't be on the road, and if they weren't then it
wouldn't make any difference to them whether anyone indicated. No
doubt that would work.

I won't waste any more time on this.