I am extremely impressed at the ability of the couple here who have managed to visit the URL in my nick, follow that to my fundraising page, and attempt to use the lighthearted nonsense I've written there as the basis of some kind of garbled argument against what I've said above. To then go from there to my charity's homepage and take a pop at them because their primary interest is raising money in order to save lives (SHUDDER GASP) is utterly beyond the pale.
But, in order to be affected by the spurious mumblings of such people, I would first need to respect both them and the quality of their argument, which is sadly lacking in the extreme.
The existance of the 'other' thread that demeans the value of running for charity is sufficient evidence to make my comments above stand, given it's the same people treating us to their considered opinion on the matter.
As far as I'm concerned, 50 people running double file would merely be an interesting spectacle for both me and the spectators at the event. Should the London Marathon organisers, who incidentally are far more qualified than anyone here, decide that such a setup compromises safety, they won't be allowed to proceed. If you disagree, host your own marathon and run it how you like, otherwise do try to stop whining like spoilt children.
I'm not inclined to waste any more time on this argument as it would require a greater amount of effort than I'm willing to dedicate to such petulent children, but suffice to say the follow-up comments to my post only reinforce what I've said. 'Fighting back against charities' indeed.
You are right, good causes do get in the way of Serious Running. It must be terrible for those of you who evidently have so little else going on in life that even the notion of people running behind you in various forms of fancy dress is such a source of angst and anger. You must all be proud of such a righteous stance against corporate tyranny. Clap clap.