While the majority on this thread are perfectly reasonable, I despair of some of the 'logic' used by the anti-cycling posters.
If I'm on a quiet country road and if other road users can't pass me safely then I will pull over if it is reasonable and safe for me to do so. I won't do it multiple times in a 1 mile stretch though - if I'm only going to hold you up for a couple of mins max, then suck it up. I can honestly say there are only a handful occasions in my cycling life (I am 33 and ride sportives) that I have felt it was necessary to do this because in the main, there will be a wide / straight bit of road along in short order.
The post about huffing and puffing up a hill made me laugh. You ever done a hill start in a car? Now imagine pulling over to let the cars pass, then trying to do the same thing: the difference is in this case, the extra revs to stop you slipping back are being provided by your legs.
Also, drivers don't probably realise this (unless they also cycle), but cycling is much faster the less you have to stop. Much faster. (This is whammy average speed is so much faster on my Sunday afternoon runs than my rush hour commute). Making me stop from 25km/h and then get going again is quite a bit more effort than just keeping going. Now imagine I have to do that for every impatient driver on a 50-100km run...
Cycle paths? Great, except the buses churn up the tarmac on the 'on road' ones and then silly buggers park in them. The off road ones? Well apparently I cycle too fast and I should be on the road
not to mention the off leash dogs and free range toddlers on a few of our local ones Can't win either way.
OP I get your point, I do and I do try to be a considerate cyclist. I'm also a cyclist who got yelled at by a taxi driver for not stopping to let him pull out on the way home tonight and had a tit in van overtake me and then immediately pull in in front of me to park. I'm not saying I'm a perfect cyclist (or motorcyclist or driver), but I don't get that shit on any other mode of transport.