Lane question

GaryG said:

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

Quoted message said:

What brand/model? Most cycling mirrors are not very good (I've tried most
of them), but I rarely go out anymore without my Take-a-Look mirror. If you
haven't tried this model, you really should. It's far and away the best
cycling mirror made today...clips onto your glasses, and provides a steady
view, with sufficient width of field. Much, much easier to monitor
overtaking traffic than the alternatives.

GG

I used a handlebar mount. It worked just fine as a mirror. The reason I
don't use a mirror is because I don't feel the need to monitor
overtaking traffic. When I did it made me more paranoid than any
benefits gained. When I want to turn left I do a look back. I don't need
the benefit of a mirror. I've been commuting during rush hour for many
years in a busy college town on a five lane road.

However, I ride with my wife everyday and she likes a mirror.

Wayne

gds said:

Wayne Pein wrote:
Well, regardless of how much you know,or think you know, we will never
get to compete. From the way in which you describe your riding I feel
you are patently unsafe and would never ride anwhere near you.

You haven't a clue how I ride. Again, you assume too much. The evidence
is against you too. I ride 7 days a week 52 weeks a year, for the last
20 years: commuting, solo training, group riding every Saturday, racing.
This in a busy college town. I've never been in a collision with a motor
vehicle. But I've written numerous reports describing the collisions
others have been in.

Wayne

Rich said:

Wayne Pein said:

In all liklihood, I know a lot more about cycling than you.

If only you knew a little about courtesy and sharing.

Rich

Rich,

You have no idea that I am not courteous and don't share. You simply
make wild inferences based on your misunderstanding of what I write.
Perhaps you shouldn't assume so much.

Regards,
Wayne

Wayne Pein said:

Quoted message said:

Rich,

You have no idea that I am not courteous and don't share. You simply
make wild inferences based on your misunderstanding of what I write.
Perhaps you shouldn't assume so much.

So if so many of us misunderstand what you write why don't you clarify
what you mean.
My reading of your posts is like Rich's, so if we are getting it wrong
please explain why rather than simply posting petulant responses.

Wayne Pein said:

GaryG said:

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

Quoted message said:

What brand/model? Most cycling mirrors are not very good (I've tried most
of them), but I rarely go out anymore without my Take-a-Look mirror. If you
haven't tried this model, you really should. It's far and away the best
cycling mirror made today...clips onto your glasses, and provides a steady
view, with sufficient width of field. Much, much easier to monitor
overtaking traffic than the alternatives.

GG

I used a handlebar mount. It worked just fine as a mirror. The reason I
don't use a mirror is because I don't feel the need to monitor
overtaking traffic. When I did it made me more paranoid than any
benefits gained.

Ah, this is revealing. The Pros don't use a mirror either, but it's not
because they're made paranoid by wearing one. It's hard to believe you've
conquered your paranoia simply by 'not looking'.

Quoted message said:

When I want to turn left I do a look back. I don't need
the benefit of a mirror. I've been commuting during rush hour for many
years in a busy college town on a five lane road.

This seems at odds to your 'paranoia' comments.

jj

Quoted message said:

However, I ride with my wife everyday and she likes a mirror.

Wayne

jj said:

On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 20:33:42 GMT, Wayne Pein <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I used a handlebar mount. It worked just fine as a mirror. The reason I
don't use a mirror is because I don't feel the need to monitor
overtaking traffic. When I did it made me more paranoid than any
benefits gained.

Ah, this is revealing. The Pros don't use a mirror either, but it's not
because they're made paranoid by wearing one. It's hard to believe you've
conquered your paranoia simply by 'not looking'.

By looking in a mirror and seeing overtaking vehicles, it made me worry
about overtaking vehicles. It wasn't a paralyzing paranoia, just a low
level.

I trust that I will be seen by overtaking motorists, in part because I
ride prominently.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

When I want to turn left I do a look back. I don't need
the benefit of a mirror. I've been commuting during rush hour for many
years in a busy college town on a five lane road.

This seems at odds to your 'paranoia' comments.

I don't see how.

Wayne

gds said:

Wayne Pein said:

Rich,

You have no idea that I am not courteous and don't share. You simply
make wild inferences based on your misunderstanding of what I write.
Perhaps you shouldn't assume so much.

So if so many of us misunderstand what you write why don't you clarify
what you mean.
My reading of your posts is like Rich's, so if we are getting it wrong
please explain why rather than simply posting petulant responses.

I am entitled to the full lane width. Most of the time I ride on the
right side of the lane. Typically my tire is tracking 3-5 ft from the
right edge of the lane. This marginally enhances motorist overtaking,
but compels them to be cautious. I do not feel obligated to assist
motorist overtaking. I do so out of generosity. Motorist convenience is
secondary to my comfort and safety. Sometimes I ride just left of center
of the lane when I absolutely do not want motorists encroaching into my
lane. I do not feel guilty about this. If I drove a front loader, lawn
equipment, or a frequently stopping bus I would similarly not feel guilty.

Wayne

Wayne Pein said:

I am entitled to the full lane width.

It is that sense of entitlement that creates problems. In some cases
you are so entitled- but not in all. Forget laws for a moment, think
about courtesy and reason. Not all situations are the same.

<snip>

I do not feel obligated to assist

Quoted message said:

motorist overtaking. I do so out of generosity.

And this attitude goes along with the one above- and to my mind is
wrong and rude.

Motorist convenience is

Quoted message said:

secondary to my comfort and safety.

Interesting view of the world. I certainly feel that your safety is
more important than motorist convenience. But why is your comfort more
important than their convenience? Pretty self centered view, don't you
think?

Sometimes I ride just left of center

Quoted message said:

of the lane when I absolutely do not want motorists encroaching into my
lane. I do not feel guilty about this. If I drove a front loader, lawn
equipment, or a frequently stopping bus I would similarly not feel guilty.

OK now you've made it clear. That's fine, but don't scream when folks
say they find your views rude, self centered, and yes-dangerous.

Funny thing about statistics. They focus on lager numbers and thus
provide little insight into individual outcomes. With all the riding
you say you do and with the attitude and behavior you espouse I think
you are very lucky to not have been in or have caused a major mishap.
I'm glad I don't live near you because I think you are the cause of
festering road rage that will be sadly be taken out on someone else.

gds said:

Wayne Pein said:

I am entitled to the full lane width.

It is that sense of entitlement that creates problems. In some cases
you are so entitled- but not in all. Forget laws for a moment, think
about courtesy and reason. Not all situations are the same.

It is your inferiority complex, or your inability to understand my
writing, that is the problem. It appears that we are at an impasse and
must agree to disagree.

Wayne

Wayne Pein said:

It is your inferiority complex, or your inability to understand my
writing, that is the problem. It appears that we are at an impasse and
must agree to disagree.

Wayne

We understand your writing, but you do not understand that you're
sharing the road poorly and are not being courteous.

Rich

Wayne Pein said:

gds said:

Well, regardless of how much you know,or think you know, we will never
get to compete. From the way in which you describe your riding I feel
you are patently unsafe and would never ride anwhere near you.

You haven't a clue how I ride....

Wayne

We have more then a clue, we have numerous posts from you explaining how
you ride. You're a menace, you lower the effeceincy use of the roads by
unnecessarily blocking traffic, and you've probably made more cagers
dislike bikers then anyone else on this group.

You may now mistake my courtesy and abilty to "share the road" for an
inferiority complex....

Rich

6 Oct 2005 16:15:29 -0700,
<[email hidden]>,

gds said:

I think you are the cause of
festering road rage that will be sadly be taken out on someone else.

Why do you idiots constantly drag out this myth?

Pound your paranoid assertion up your nose.

.. . .or cite a specific situation wherein a scumball scud jockey
admits they ran down a cyclist because another cyclist had angered
them.

Until then, go hide under your bed.
--
zk

Thu, 06 Oct 2005 18:44:09 -0600, <[email hidden]>,

Rich said:

Wayne Pein said:

It is your inferiority complex, or your inability to understand my
writing, that is the problem. It appears that we are at an impasse and
must agree to disagree.

Wayne

We understand your writing, but you do not understand that you're
sharing the road poorly and are not being courteous.

You haven't a clue how WP actually rides. To me, it sounds like he's
riding in a safe and predictable manner.

So what if a cager might have to wait? It's not like they don't ever
have to wait for their fellow scud jockeys too.

Look at grid locked cities and tell us that it's bicycles causing the
problem.

Get real.
--
zk

Zoot Katz said:

Quoted message said:

So what if a cager might have to wait? It's not like they don't ever
have to wait for their fellow scud jockeys too.

See, this is the root of the argument. Folks that think that this is a
good way to ride constantly use phrases like the one above. WP
expressed a similar sentiment ot the effect that his safety and COMFORT
always came before the convenience to others.

What I see being expressed has little to do with cycling. Rather it is
a hostility to motor vehicles and to those that are driving them. This
hostility is clear in phrases like "so what if a cager must wait."

If you can't see that the position is very self centered and probably
in the long run self defeating that is where the lack of understanding
occurrs.

Zealots ususally cannot see others point of view so this is not
surprising.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Zoot Katz said:

Quoted message said:

We understand your writing, but you do not understand that you're
sharing the road poorly and are not being courteous.

You haven't a clue how WP actually rides.

For anyone who's interested, here /is/ a clue:

http://www.humantransport.org/bicycledriving/roadvogue/

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

7 Oct 2005 08:31:31 -0700,
<[email hidden]>, "gds"

Quoted message said:

Zealots ususally cannot see others point of view so this is not
surprising.

Scum sucking cagers and their bike bum-boys are zealous in their
self-righteous attacks on anyone who challenges the motor-vehicle
operators' percieved exclusive rights.

Go fill your tank.
--
zk

Fri, 7 Oct 2005 08:43:13 -0700, <[email hidden]>,

(Tom Keats) said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Zoot Katz said:

Quoted message said:

We understand your writing, but you do not understand that you're
sharing the road poorly and are not being courteous.

You haven't a clue how WP actually rides.

For anyone who's interested, here /is/ a clue:

http://www.humantransport.org/bicycledriving/roadvogue/

Nothing too out of the ordinary AFAICT.

This one jives with my experience:
--------
"A LOOK BACK also a potent tactic for deterring aggressive passing.
It humanizes the faceless bicyclist, and tells the driver he's being
watched."

And, this one sounds right-on too:
---------
"Use the full lane to prevent passing if you're moving quite fast, the
lane is too narrow for safe overtaking, when preparing to make a left
turn, when approaching a busy intersection, when there is limited
sight distance, to avoid parked car doors or other roadside risks, or
anytime it increases your safety."

He's not advocating prominent lane positioning just to be a [censored]. We
all know that there are places where it's safer to be out in the lane
where crossing traffic is expecting to see vehicles than glibly riding
along in the bike lane.
--
zk

Zoot Katz said:

7 Oct 2005 08:31:31 -0700,
<[email hidden]>, "gds"

Quoted message said:

Zealots ususally cannot see others point of view so this is not
surprising.

Scum sucking cagers and their bike bum-boys are zealous in their
self-righteous attacks on anyone who challenges the motor-vehicle
operators' percieved exclusive rights.

Go fill your tank.

I rest my case!
Do you have an idea what point it is that you are trying to make? I
don't. Other than some deep seated hatred of motor vehicles and their
drivers.
Get real, we live in an industrial, mechanized society. Vehicles are
here to stay. That doesn't mean they shouldn't be made to be as
efficient as possible and it doesn't mean that drivers shouldn't drive
in safe manner. But railing at vehicles just for the sake that they
exist. Do you really think that is going to work to the benefit of
anyone?

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

Quoted message said:

Get real, we live in an industrial, mechanized society. Vehicles are
here to stay.

You are pissing up a rope.

Zoot doesn't live in our society. He's at the fringes of it, at best.
Hopefully, he's more sane on the road than his alter ego is here on rbm.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Zoot Katz said:

Quoted message said:

For anyone who's interested, here /is/ a clue:

http://www.humantransport.org/bicycledriving/roadvogue/

Nothing too out of the ordinary AFAICT.

Quite reasonable, in fact.

....

Quoted message said:

He's not advocating prominent lane positioning just to be a [censored].

Of course not. No sane rider actually wants a train of
irate, horn-honking drivers stuck behind them.

As for courtesy, I figure in traffic there's really only
one courtesy that counts: that of being predictable (not
making suprising manoeuvers that screw up the flow.)
Since the law -- particularly the principle of first come,
first served provides a framework to do just that, might
as well put the law to use. But apparently some feel a
difficulty in doing so from a cyclist's, rather than a
driver's POV. Other so-called "courtesies", like
inappropriately yielding one's ROW have no real place in
the business of co-operating with other people getting
from A to B.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca