Cyclist rant

"Doug Huffman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
: Finally! It is amazing! 'Asses' and 'enemies' because we
disagree with you
: and some are principled disagreements. Provincial,
parochial,
: self-righteous and ignorant. Over and out!

Don't give up yet, Doug!

You may quibble with Bob's last remark, but I'll stand shoulder-to-
shoulder with his basic sentiment.

By turning the argument to "Oh, yeah? But what about car
drivers? How about how rude they are, huh?" all we do is
expiate our own guilt. This is a forum by and for cyclists.
We owe it to ourselves to _start_ with ourselves.

Let's give Bob the benefit of the doubt and assume that 100%
of what his OP said was 100% accurate. Now it's a good
philosophical discussion.

IMHO, the cyclists were guilty of failing to honor a very
simple responsibility--one imposed by common courtesy, if
not by law: be aware of others that are using the roadway,
especially those with such easy power to kill you if we're
not careful.

If it were me on the outside bicycle,
a) I wouldn't have been weaving. Period.
b) Bob wouldn't have _seen_ me in the outside position.
I'm fairly sure I would have caught him in my (get
this) _mirror_ first. Then--quicker than you can say,
"I LIKE CAMPY BETTER THAN DURA-ACE," I would have
been back over, single file. Screw all the arguments
about 'practicable.' The other rider was to the
right; therefore, there was room for two, single-
file, on the right;
c) To the comment about "maybe they were turning:" there
would have been no maybe. If I were turning, Bob
would have seen my hand signal well in advance.

Telling Bob to 'relax, consider the time he's wasted, chill
out,' and the like only wastes more time, and verges on the
insulting. (Assuming his reaction was _anything_ but intellectual--
that it caused him _any_ heartburn at all), he _could_ take
the responsibility for "dealing with it." He also _could_
offer it as a discussion thread in a cycling forum, hoping
to spark awareness that cyclists _and_ motorists have a lot
to learn about cooperation and courtesy.

Ignoring ourselves and pointing the fickle finger of blame
solely at the other, is little more than adversarial and
inflammatory. It serves to widen the divide, not bridge it.

$0.02 from the cheap seats....

Rick Onanian said:

Frank Krygowski said:

Unless the cyclists were looking back at you and giving
you the finger,

...

Quoted message said:

Look, to put this in context: Have you never walked
through a mall and had people obstruct you for a few
seconds? Was this really that much worse?

Malls, high school halls, whatever; they clump rudely in
the middle, rather than standing to the side. Roads, bike
paths, blocking the travel lane when not traveling at the
other users' speed. That _is_ rude. It's not as rude as
giving you the finger, but it's rude nonetheless.

Yet I doubt there's a society on earth where it
doesn't happen.

One reaction to this universal fault is to gnash one's
teeth, increase the acid content of one's stomach, and
(perhaps) post rants on Usenet.

Another reaction is to say "Oh well."

I can't say I _always_ make the latter choice. But I think
it's a good thing to work towards.

I think the OP was shooting for something in between. I
think, in his mind, he was going to give a gentle but
valuable piece of advice to the rest of us. But in various
ways, he failed.

If nothing else, labeling one's post a "rant" certainly
shifts it toward teeth-gnashing!

--
--------------------+ Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove
rodent and vegetable dot com, replace with cc.ysu dot edu]

'Quibble with the last remark'? I 'quibble' with his failure
to open his eyes to engineering. He whines that a rude
cyclist inconvenienced him. I retorted with Ch. 8 of BT but
might as well have urinated to windward for the 'wetting' I
get from an anonymous fellow traveler.

Are you conversant with Ch. 8? Then -respectfully - bugger
off! Or argue with it but not with me. Can you make an
informed criticism? I doubt it. So much for peer review -
everything must be invented anew and nitpicked by idiots.

"neil0502" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
|
| "Doug Huffman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
| "]news:[email hidden]...
| : Finally! It is amazing! 'Asses' and 'enemies' because we
| disagree with you
| : and some are principled disagreements. Provincial,
| parochial,
| : self-righteous and ignorant. Over and out!
|
| Don't give up yet, Doug!
|
| You may quibble with Bob's last remark, but I'll stand shoulder-to-
| shoulder with his basic sentiment.
|
| By turning the argument to "Oh, yeah? But what about car
| drivers? How about how rude they are, huh?" all we do is
| expiate our own guilt. This is a forum by and for
| cyclists. We owe it to ourselves to _start_ with
| ourselves.
|
| Let's give Bob the benefit of the doubt and assume that
| 100% of what his OP said was 100% accurate. Now it's a
| good philosophical discussion.
|
| IMHO, the cyclists were guilty of failing to honor a very
| simple responsibility--one imposed by common courtesy, if
| not by law: be aware of others that are using the roadway,
| especially those with such easy power to kill you if we're
| not careful.
|
| If it were me on the outside bicycle,
| a) I wouldn't have been weaving. Period.
| b) Bob wouldn't have _seen_ me in the outside
| position. I'm fairly sure I would have caught him
| in my (get this) _mirror_ first. Then--quicker than
| you can say, "I LIKE CAMPY BETTER THAN DURA-ACE," I
| would have been back over, single file. Screw all
| the arguments about 'practicable.' The other rider
| was to the right; therefore, there was room for
| two, single-file, on the right;
| c) To the comment about "maybe they were turning:"
| there would have been no maybe. If I were turning,
| Bob would have seen my hand signal well in advance.
|
| Telling Bob to 'relax, consider the time he's wasted,
| chill out,' and the like only wastes more time, and verges
| on the insulting. (Assuming his reaction was _anything_
| but intellectual--that it caused him _any_ heartburn at
| all), he _could_ take the responsibility for "dealing with
| it." He also _could_ offer it as a discussion thread in a
| cycling forum, hoping to spark awareness that cyclists
| _and_ motorists have a lot to learn about cooperation and
| courtesy.
|
| Ignoring ourselves and pointing the fickle finger of
| blame solely at the other, is little more than
| adversarial and inflammatory. It serves to widen the
| divide, not bridge it.
|
| $0.02 from the cheap seats....
|
|

R15757 said:

<< ...Why don't you just move entirely into the opposing
lane as if you were passing a slow moving 8 ft wide
tractor?

Wayne >>

Why doesn't the jackass just move over a few feet? What is
so f***ing precious about being on a bike that you can't
move over a few feet?

What is the advantage to the bicyclist for doing so?

Quoted message said:

We move over because we can. If there is enough space in
the lane for the passing car and a skinny-ass bike, make
it work. It's righteous to act as if there were other
people on the planet besides yourself. Cooperate and make
room, if possible, and if not, take your lane and most
drivers will understand.

Robert

I cooperate how I want and when I want and allow motorists
to use my lane the vast majority of the time. So if and when
I don't want motorists using my lane I don't have to justify
a reason and certainly do deserve to lambasted for it, by
anyone, including you.

And I don't think the bicyclist in question, who isn't part
of this thread and can't defend himself, has to justify his
actions either.

Wayne

psycholist said:

"Wayne Pein" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

psycholist said:

I live in a very rural area and I'm a high-mileage
roadie.

The other day I was driving down one of the main 2-
lane highways that

cuts

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

through our little area. There weren't any other cars
on the stretch of road I was traveling.

If there were no other cars, then why was it so hard for
you to pass?

You assume a priori that bicyclists must allow motorists
to pass within

THEIR

Quoted message said:

lane. Why don't you just move entirely into the opposing
lane as if you

were

Quoted message said:

passing a slow moving 8 ft wide tractor?

Wayne

Because AS I SAID, there was a crossroad ahead and I
couldn't be sure what the clown in the middle was going to
do. I didn't want to pass him in the opposite lane or
anywhere given that he was being so oblivious. I was
afraid he might turn right in front of me. (He didn't. He
went straight.)

You sound all high and mighty in the posts you've made on
this thread. Had you been there, you'd have clearly seen
that there was no excuse for this riders behavior. He
wasn't riding as far to the right as pracitcable by ANY
stretch of anyone's imagination. And don't try to tell me
what I assume. I assume that sharing the road is supposed
to be just that ... sharing. I'm a cyclist and I try to
ride with consideration for the cars that also are
entitled to the road. This particular cyclist that I
encountered acted like the road was all his and screw
everybody else. I'm learning from some of the
unbelieveable posts on this thread that there are a whole
lot of you out there who apparently feel all people in
cars are evil and that people on bicycles can do no wrong.

The road IS all his. When overtaking, you are a guest if he
decides he wants a guest. If there was a cross road up ahead
and you can't pass for a few seconds, too bad.

Wayne

Per Elmsäter said:

Well done. I've enjoyed following this thread and I am also
surprised by the illiteracy shown.

--
Perre

Yeah, maybe. But at least -we- don't drop off the car and
try to ride the bike home with the wrong cycling shoes.

I mean, how -dumb- is that? ;-p

-Badger

"Doug Huffman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
: 'Quibble with the last remark'? I 'quibble' with his
failure to open his
: eyes to engineering. He whines that a rude cyclist
inconvenienced him. I
: retorted with Ch. 8 of BT but might as well have urinated
to windward for
: the 'wetting' I get from an anonymous fellow traveler.
:
: Are you conversant with Ch. 8? Then -respectfully -
bugger off! Or argue
: with it but not with me. Can you make an informed
criticism? I doubt it.
: So much for peer review - everything must be invented anew
and nitpicked by
: idiots.

Thank you for making this easy for me.....

1) I didn't mean to attack _you_. I apologize for any
ambiguity that made it seem that I was. I spoke to the
exceptionally partisan position of too many cyclists;

2) If there's something in this "Chapter 8" that adds value
to this thread, please post a link. I'm eager to learn.
If it's been posted, then I apologize for having missed
it, but would ask you to re-post. I actually stand a
better chance of making an "informed criticism" once
informed. I'm always open to being informed;

3) I argued neither with "it" nor with you. The point I'm
trying to make is that we cyclists gain little by blindly
defending that actions of cyclists that most of us
realize used questionable judgment and represented our
sport unfavorably.

In the long run, aren't we all a bit safer if we 'close
ranks' around the idea that sharing the road is a two-way
street? Common courtesy, and awareness of other vehicular
traffic--two wheels or four--benefits us all.

IMHO, in this case, one of the guys on the bikes screwed up--
call it an error of _omission_ or an error of _commission_--
something that they _did_ or that they _didn't_ do but
should have done.

After that, we're really just arguing about the
appropriateness of any motorists reaction. I believe that's
_way_ beyond our ability to influence....

Respectfully,

Neil

: "neil0502" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
: "]news:[email hidden]...
: |
: | "Doug Huffman" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message
: | "]news:[email hidden]...
: | : Finally! It is amazing! 'Asses' and 'enemies'
because we
: | disagree with you
: | : and some are principled disagreements. Provincial,
: | parochial,
: | : self-righteous and ignorant. Over and out!
: |
: | Don't give up yet, Doug!
: |
: | You may quibble with Bob's last remark, but I'll stand
: | shoulder-to-shoulder with his basic sentiment.
: |
: | By turning the argument to "Oh, yeah? But what about
car
: | drivers? How about how rude they are, huh?" all we do
is
: | expiate our own guilt. This is a forum by and for
cyclists.
: | We owe it to ourselves to _start_ with ourselves.
: |
: | Let's give Bob the benefit of the doubt and assume that
100%
: | of what his OP said was 100% accurate. Now it's a good
: | philosophical discussion.
: |
: | IMHO, the cyclists were guilty of failing to honor a
very
: | simple responsibility--one imposed by common courtesy,
if
: | not by law: be aware of others that are using the
roadway,
: | especially those with such easy power to kill you if
we're
: | not careful.
: |
: | If it were me on the outside bicycle,
: | a) I wouldn't have been weaving. Period.
: | b) Bob wouldn't have _seen_ me in the outside
position.
: | I'm fairly sure I would have caught him in my (get this)
: | _mirror_ first. Then--quicker than you can say, "I LIKE
: | CAMPY BETTER THAN DURA-ACE," I would have been back
over,
: | single file. Screw all the arguments about
'practicable.'
: | The other rider was to the right; therefore, there was
room
: | for two, single-file, on the right;
: | c) To the comment about "maybe they were turning:"
there
: | would have been no maybe. If I were turning, Bob would
have
: | seen my hand signal well in advance.
: |
: | Telling Bob to 'relax, consider the time he's wasted,
chill
: | out,' and the like only wastes more time, and verges on
the
: | insulting. (Assuming his reaction was _anything_ but intellectual--
: | that it caused him _any_ heartburn at
all), he
: | _could_ take the responsibility for "dealing with it."
He
: | also _could_ offer it as a discussion thread in a
cycling
: | forum, hoping to spark awareness that cyclists _and_
: | motorists have a lot to learn about cooperation and
: | courtesy.
: |
: | Ignoring ourselves and pointing the fickle finger of
blame
: | solely at the other, is little more than adversarial and
: | inflammatory. It serves to widen the divide, not bridge
it.
: |
: | $0.02 from the cheap seats....
: |
: |
:
:

neil0502 said:

The point I'm trying to make is that we cyclists gain
little by blindly defending that actions of cyclists that
most of us realize used questionable judgment and
represented our sport unfavorably.

In the long run, aren't we all a bit safer if we 'close
ranks' around the idea that sharing the road is a two-way
street? Common courtesy, and awareness of other vehicular
traffic--two wheels or four--benefits us all.

I absolutely agree. And it doesn't seem reasonable to
blindly defend cyclists who do things that are clearly
foolish and against the law. Here, I'm thinking of things
like running red lights, riding facing traffic, riding
without lights at night, blasting along crowded
sidewalks, etc.

But the situation described by the OP has too many shades
of grey. We have one person's statement that the cyclists
were being rude or careless by riding two abreast. Yet we
know that riding two abreast is generally not illegal, and
is sometimes advisable. We are told one cyclist was
weaving, yet we know that it's impossible to ride a
_perfectly_ straight line, and that weaving may be in the
eye of the beholder.

I've got no problem telling a cyclist when he's made a
mistake. But I prefer to reserve that for definite mistakes,
not actions that are possibly minor miscommunication, or
differences in judgement.

--
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot
com. Substitute cc dot ysu dot edu]

Tom Keats said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Craig

Brossman said:

psycholist said:

I live in a very rural area and I'm a high-mileage
roadie.

<snip all to typical experience>

Quoted message said:

Bob C.

As a roadie, mountain biker, and driver, I see this all
too often as well, and it pisses me off. I had a "local"
driving against me in the opposite lane last evening, as I
was riding alone, up against the side of the road, beep 3
times so that I would not miss his salute. I can

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

only imagine this was from experience with the likes of
guys you

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^-
^^^^^^^^^

Quoted message said:

describe above,

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Not necessarily. Some drivers just plain don't like
bikes, period.

You are correct, I really have no way of knowing, but my
scenario is just as possible.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

or he is just a [censored]-head.

Then again, what group doesn't have bad eggs which end up
being our own worst enemies? Unfortunately with our group,
someone often pays with a car/bike altercation, and the
bike loses.

Fortunately, instances of drivers deliberately running
down cyclists are relatively rare (although apparently it
does occasionally happen.) I doubt the antics of a few
riders has much effect on the chances of any cyclist being
randomly selected as a target by a murderous driver.

Also seems true, but those drivers may be less inclined to
give plenty of room when passing.

Quoted message said:

cheers, Tom

IMHO, it is better to leave auto drivers without any excuses
to crowd, harass, or otherwise intimidate bike riders, but I
can't argue that some will drivers will dislike bikers no
matter what. In my mind, this is similar to the issues with
mountain bike access, and as an avid mountain biker, I feel
compelled to always treat hikers and horse folks as nicely
as possible. It just can't hurt the cause.

--
Craig Brossman, Durango Colorado (remove ".nospam" to reply)

Badger_South said:

Per Elmsäter said:

Well done. I've enjoyed following this thread and I am
also surprised by the illiteracy shown.

--
Perre

Yeah, maybe. But at least -we- don't drop off the car and
try to ride the bike home with the wrong cycling shoes.

I mean, how -dumb- is that? ;-p

I knew it. I should never have let that out for the whole
internet to know. Especially not you 😉 Wonder if there is a
way to use killfiles the other way around. Like this post
may not be read by certain recipients.
Hmmmmm...................................

--
Perre

You have to be smarter than a robot to reply.

Bicycle Transportation: A Handbook of Cycling
Transportation Engineers by John Forester (Cambridge, MIT,
1994 ISBN 0-262-56079-8)

Chapter 8, The Effect of Cyclists on Traffic, p 89 - Delays
in Next-Lane Overtaking.

Equation 8.1 Dind = K1 m c (but I'm not going to transcribe
a textbook, go to the library.)

p 95 Conclusions ...

"... It is safe to say that traffic delays due to moderate
amounts of cycle traffic in metropolitan areas occur only on
those roads that are of substandard width, and generally
only on two-lane roads that are both narrow and almost
overloaded with motor traffic..."

There is a universe beyond the internet with which you
must be familiar. The 'internet is a parochial view just
as is 'cycling'. A cyclist cannot delay a motorist's
arrival. A cyclist may momentarily delay a motorist - get
freekin' over it.

Chill. Ride

"neil0502" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
|
|
| 2) If there's something in this "Chapter 8" that adds
| value to this thread, please post a link. I'm eager to
| learn. If it's been posted, then I apologize for having
| missed it, but would ask you to re-post. I actually
| stand a better chance of making an "informed criticism"
| once informed. I'm always open to being informed;
|
|

"Doug Huffman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
:
: There is a universe beyond the internet with which you
must be familiar.
: The 'internet is a parochial view just as is 'cycling'. A
cyclist cannot
: delay a motorist's arrival. A cyclist may momentarily
delay a motorist -
: get freekin' over it.
:

...and there is a universe beyond engineering, and beyond
law, that includes such concepts as common courtesy,
cooperation, and mutual respect.

Doug, I hope it's just my misreading of the words that you
choose when you post, but a hugely condescending tone
('parochial,' 'universe beyond the internet with which you
must be familiar,' 'idiots,' 'respectfully: bugger off!'😉
keeps peering through. I'm not sure with whom you're engaged
in a street-brawl, but it isn't me.

I was hoping that you could post the salient chapter from
the book that you referenced so that I might learn by
reading it. A simple, "I don't have a link to it," or, "I'm
not sure it's available electronically" would have sufficed.

Perphaps your points would get better traction if this
condescension were left out.

Neil

Rick Onanian said:

Malls, high school halls, whatever; they clump rudely in
the middle, rather than standing to the side. Roads, bike
paths, blocking the travel lane when not traveling at the
other users' speed. That _is_ rude. It's not as rude as
giving you the finger, but it's rude nonetheless.

One thing I like about cities is that people know how to
move in crowds, how to stand out of the way, etc. Crowded
cities like London can still be a joy to walk in, while
nothing's worse than a mall in small-town America on a
Sunday afternoon.

Matt O.

Thu, 03 Jun 2004 10:34:41 -0400,
<[email hidden]>,

Rick Onanian said:

You, of all people, drive?

Occasionaly, for cash, yes.
--
zk

Per Elmsäter said:

Badger_South said:

Per Elmsäter said:

Well done. I've enjoyed following this thread and I am
also surprised by the illiteracy shown.

--
Perre

Yeah, maybe. But at least -we- don't drop off the car and
try to ride the bike home with the wrong cycling shoes.

I mean, how -dumb- is that? ;-p

I knew it. I should never have let that out for the whole
internet to know. Especially not you 😉 Wonder if there is
a way to use killfiles the other way around. Like this post
may not be read by certain recipients.
Hmmmmm...................................

Dear Per "wrong shoes" Elmsäter It sounds like you live a
real-life version of:

imdb.comtt0108598Open ↗

;-p

-Badger (All gentle ribbing and backstabbing is done with
wet noodles.)

Thu, 03 Jun 2004 13:21:12 -0400, <[email hidden]>,

Frank Krygowski said:

Yet we know that riding two abreast is generally not
illegal, and is sometimes advisable

AFAIK, overtaking whilst approaching an intersection or
railway crossing at grade is ill-advised and most likely
even illegal. Therefore the OP had no business passing the
cyclists until after they'd cleared the intersection and so
further diminishing his claim of having been delayed.
--
zk

Badger_South said:

Per Elmsäter said:

Badger_South said:

On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 13:25:46 GMT, "Per Elmsäter"
<[email hidden]> wrote:

>
> Well done. I've enjoyed following this thread and I am
> also surprised by the illiteracy shown.
>
> --
> Perre

Yeah, maybe. But at least -we- don't drop off the car
and try to ride the bike home with the wrong cycling
shoes.

I mean, how -dumb- is that? ;-p

I knew it. I should never have let that out for the whole
internet to know. Especially not you 😉 Wonder if there
is a way to use killfiles the other way around. Like this
post may not be read by certain recipients.
Hmmmmm...................................

Dear Per "wrong shoes" Elmsäter It sounds like you live a
real-life version of:

imdb.comtt0108598Open ↗

The nerve. Comparing me with a criminal penguin.

--
Perre
"Just wait till you fall into the hole you have just dug"

neil0502 said:

Perphaps your points would get better traction if this
condescension were left out.

Perhaps. Courtesy is good.

But traction or not, the point was a good one. Cyclists are
not a significant source of delay for motorists.

In fact, I'm quite sure I'm delayed by motorists FAR more
than they are delayed by me!

--
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot
com. Substitute cc dot ysu dot edu]

Quoted message said:

Anyone else notice that toward the end of a ride --
especially a long and/or hard ride -- the "startle
response" is greatly suppressed? More than a few times
I've had yahoos yell, honk, pass too close or whatever
and I just sort of look at them as they pull away without
even a hint of a flinch or emotion. Guess it's survival
mode time...

I've seen this on pistol ranges and in industrial settings.
The person will flinch at first but will usually become
inured to what would be normally startling events.

I had a dog once, not of a nervous temperament, generally,
who absolutely freaked out during thunderstorms.

As far as car horns, well, I've had mixed results. I pretty
much ignore them unless they're super aggressive and I'm in
a bad mood.

Which isn't that often.

I sometimes wonder if they know how loud they are.

--

_______________________ALL AMIGA IN MY
MIND_______________________ ------------------"Buddy Holly,
the Texas Elvis"------------------ __________306.350.357.38-

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

[email hidden]__________

In article said:

Rick Onanian said:

Spoken "beep beep" is often enjoyed as humor.

well if you're gonna be oral, why such a crappy horn 😉

Why not something mighty like:

"baROOOOOgahh, BAROOgaaah"

I go for the cheerful "ding ding!" which works pretty well.
Maybe if I were mightier...

-- Dan

--
Dan Cosley ([email hidden] *
cs.umn.edu~cosleyOpen ↗) GroupLens Research Lab, Univ
of MN (movielens.umn.edumovielens.umn.eduOpen ↗ * 612.624.8372) *** Just a
foot soldier in the Army of Truth ***