Fine, if you are writing polemic rather than facts.
1. My mainly carbon structure is a pretty good primary radar target, better than many Group A aircraft. Others have commented on being told by radar controllers of 'numerous targets, presumably gliders'.
2. We manage to see each other pretty well, the best indication of lift is the presence of another glider behaving appropriately. Of course, a good lookout is needed.
3. Then now you are aware that frequency will warn you of gliders in the cloud you are blundering through in the open FIR, why not have it on your COM2? 130.400 in case you have forgotten.
4. FLARM use is increasing in gliders, at present rates of growth it will be a majority of cross-country gliders by 2011. It is also widely used by light aircraft and helicopters (including IFR equipped ones) in continental Europe where a high densit of glider traffic is common.
5. See 3.
6. The clouds we use (because that's why we use them) have vertical air movements often over 1,000 f.p.m. How accurately can you maintain your quadrantal height in view of that? In any case, not required by gliders, see the ANO. (I don't mind how you spell quadrantal, I knew what you meant).
7. Yes, I wear a parachute - the seating is designed so it's the easiest way to be comfortable. I am not relying on it saving my life if several hundred horses chew through my airframe, and therefore taking excessive risk (in my own judgement).
However, once again, why has this thread degenerated into a power/glider slanging match about a minuscule risk when it started about a tragic, and by no means unique, collision between two powered aircraft in VMC in circuit for the same airfield?