Cyclist at war!

[Fill Lea]

ComandanteBanana wrote:
> On Oct 15, 3:06 pm, "Road Glidin' Don" > wrote:
>> On Oct 15, 12:59 pm, ComandanteBanana >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Oct 15, 2:10 pm, Lew > wrote:
>>>> On 15 Oct 2008, ComandanteBanana wrote in news:9ea7ca05-62f5-472a-b948-
>>>>
>>>>> Just wanted to share my latest email with you guys to show what is
>>>>> going on in Georgia:
>>>> Not sure why this was posted to Reeky; this guy was on a bicycle. I
>>>> live in Georgia and haven't heard of or experienced much cage vs
>>>> motorcycle road rage.
>>> I think this is pretty common all over the land, but MOTORCYCLES DON'T
>>> SLOW DOWN CARS, and that may account for the rage against bicycles.
>> Then trim motorcycle newsgroups from your posts, you stupid, ****ing
>> idiot.
>
> You have to see the whole picture. It's like been in Iraq and ignoring
> Afghanistan...
>
> There's only one side you can be on, if you know what I mean.

Yeah, the side that thinks bike riders are 'tards :)

[ComandanteBanana]

Well guys, this story happened in Georgia, but I just omitted the rest
of the title (link below) because it could have happened where I live.
And indeed it has happened to me even more scary.

Anyway, after his own account of the facts, it's my reply, which, of
course, advises him, among other things, not to move to my state.

Get ready for this horror story and grab some popcorn (just
kidding)... ;)


Just wanted to share my latest email with you guys to show what is
going on in Georgia:


Hi, guys...

I have been reading a lot lately and have been surprised that in this
day and time, road rage against cyclists is still alive. I have not
ridden a road bike in 20 years but recently started back for health
reasons.

The past 30 days have been a revelation to my outlook on life and
health since picking up my new road bike. But now, I am beginning to
get a glimpse of the dark world painted by posters in the Bike Forums
on the internet. Road rage is there! It really is!

Just this morning, I pumped up the tires on my Madone for a 15-mile
ride through Summergrove just as I have been doing for 4 weeks now.
After spending the last two days with the grandchildren, it was time
for a little off-time for my own sanity and health. Except, there
appear to be people who do not care about your health, or your rights,
or your even your life...and they are your/our neighbors! Yes, they
live... among us...

At 9:00am, I headed out of my little house onto the streets of
Summergrove and made it all of a single block to the park when I
noticed a red imported car (Toyota? Acura?) almost not stop at the
stop sign but grudgingly did so since I was closing in on the
intersection. I continued downhill to the next stop sign and "took the
lane" because my left turn would put me down a short 8% grade to the
next stop sign. I turned left and took the downhill lane again for
safety reasons because the intersection visibility is blocked on the
right at the bottom of the hill at the stop sign.

Halfway down the hill, a LOUD horn almost caused me to wreck! My knee-
jerk reaction was to raise a fist and turn my head. The rude driver
sped around me going down the 8% hill and started yelling out the
window! He stopped quickly at the stop sign causing me to go to the
left so I didn't rear end him and I yelled out something to the
effect, "What the heck is your problem?!!!"

With my feet clipped going through the intersection I was trying to
move on but he turned left with me (he didn't stop, the coward) and,
driving side-by-side, was yelling at me again! Telling me to stay out
of the road and give room for vehicles. By this time, I lost it! I
yelled back that I WAS a vehicle by law and he should look it up! I
repeated that several times!

He kept yelling and I yelled back. I held nothing back as it was a
very dangerous situation and I was not happy!

He yelled again about my language with kids in his car and wanted to
know what church I went to! I let him know what he could do with THAT
bit of information. He never stopped but continued on to church.

After he disappeared, I decided to keep riding and contemplate what
had just happened.

So, I rode half of my route and called 911 to meet with an officer. I
gave the officer my ID, explained the situation and showed him where
the driver lived and asked his recommendation. He said I was fine but
he suggested that he should stop by and explain to the driver what the
law really is and I should not contact him myself.

As if to underscore the issues at hand, while I was talking to the
officer at the scene of the incident, a nice couple passed us and
headed up the same 8% grade on a tandem in the middle of the road!

So, I will leave it at that until next time. But, this afternoon, I
will do another circuit of Summergrove and everyday after that, I will
be on the streets. It is a matter of time before we cross paths again.

911 is only four button-presses on my cell phone but it will be
entertaining to see what transpires in the moments between the next
altercation and the arrival of the police. That is, if I am not
injured or killed.

It is unbelievable that I cannot even ride a block from my house on a
Sunday morning without an altercation with a motorist. One going to
church at that.

Is our cycling community doing anything to promote education about
cycling? If not for the sake of the "old" folks like myself, how about
the youngsters riding bicycles in our neighborhoods? I have already
sent a request to the HOA to email a safety note to all residents but
there has to be much more that we can do.

If you have any suggestions (outside of telling me to keep my mouth
shut), please let me know. It would be greatly appreciated.

Best regards

What is the cycling community been doing about education over the last
20 years? Obviously not enough. So, I guess we really are at war, huh?
Strange when the motorists cannot even find enough gas to run around
every day. Maybe that's it. They are ****ed off because we DO NOT use
gas.

Did they ever think we are doing them a favor?

If I survive this, what altercation is next? Is there a car or a
bullet with my name on it?

dave

***

Yes, we are at war, and you are another hero of it. Maybe more so than
those coming back for Iraq, where they fight for Big Oil, and you are
fighting to save it.

The real war is between Big Fish and Little Fish, where you in the
bike are easy lunch.

I don't know what to recommend you, but whatever you do, don't move to
the state immediate to the south (Florida). The little fish here have
even less space.

One place you can check, though, is Athens, Georgia, where I hear the
cyclists earned some respect by way of bike lanes. Good luck in the
jungle!

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=470893


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHY THE BANANA REVOLUTION?
(reason #103: because bananas will never be biofuel for cars!)

http://webspawner.com/users/bananarevolution

[Lew[_2_]]

On 15 Oct 2008, ComandanteBanana wrote in news:9ea7ca05-62f5-472a-b948-


> Just wanted to share my latest email with you guys to show what is
> going on in Georgia:
>

Not sure why this was posted to Reeky; this guy was on a bicycle. I
live in Georgia and haven't heard of or experienced much cage vs
motorcycle road rage.

--
Lew

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 15, 2:10 pm, Lew > wrote:
> On 15 Oct 2008, ComandanteBanana wrote in news:9ea7ca05-62f5-472a-b948-
>
>
> > Just wanted to share my latest email with you guys to show what is
> > going on in Georgia:
>
> Not sure why this was posted to Reeky; this guy was on a bicycle. I
> live in Georgia and haven't heard of or experienced much cage vs
> motorcycle road rage.
>
> --
> Lew

I think this is pretty common all over the land, but MOTORCYCLES DON'T
SLOW DOWN CARS, and that may account for the rage against bicycles.

[Road Glidin' Don[_2_]]

On Oct 15, 12:59*pm, ComandanteBanana >
wrote:
> On Oct 15, 2:10 pm, Lew > wrote:
>
> > On 15 Oct 2008, ComandanteBanana wrote in news:9ea7ca05-62f5-472a-b948-
> >
>
> > > Just wanted to share my latest email with you guys to show what is
> > > going on in Georgia:
>
> > Not sure why this was posted to Reeky; this guy was on a bicycle. *I
> > live in Georgia and haven't heard of or experienced much cage vs
> > motorcycle road rage.
>
> I think this is pretty common all over the land, but MOTORCYCLES DON'T
> SLOW DOWN CARS, and that may account for the rage against bicycles.

Then trim motorcycle newsgroups from your posts, you stupid, ****ing
idiot.

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 15, 3:06*pm, "Road Glidin' Don" > wrote:
> On Oct 15, 12:59*pm, ComandanteBanana >
> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 15, 2:10 pm, Lew > wrote:
>
> > > On 15 Oct 2008, ComandanteBanana wrote in news:9ea7ca05-62f5-472a-b948-
> > >
>
> > > > Just wanted to share my latest email with you guys to show what is
> > > > going on in Georgia:
>
> > > Not sure why this was posted to Reeky; this guy was on a bicycle. *I
> > > live in Georgia and haven't heard of or experienced much cage vs
> > > motorcycle road rage.
>
> > I think this is pretty common all over the land, but MOTORCYCLES DON'T
> > SLOW DOWN CARS, and that may account for the rage against bicycles.
>
> Then trim motorcycle newsgroups from your posts, you stupid, ****ing
> idiot.

You have to see the whole picture. It's like been in Iraq and ignoring
Afghanistan...

There's only one side you can be on, if you know what I mean.

[Road Glidin' Don[_2_]]

On Oct 15, 1:19*pm, ComandanteBanana >
wrote:
> On Oct 15, 3:06*pm, "Road Glidin' Don" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 15, 12:59*pm, ComandanteBanana >
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 15, 2:10 pm, Lew > wrote:
>
> > > > On 15 Oct 2008, ComandanteBanana wrote in news:9ea7ca05-62f5-472a-b948-
> > > >
>
> > > > > Just wanted to share my latest email with you guys to show what is
> > > > > going on in Georgia:
>
> > > > Not sure why this was posted to Reeky; this guy was on a bicycle. *I
> > > > live in Georgia and haven't heard of or experienced much cage vs
> > > > motorcycle road rage.
>
> > > I think this is pretty common all over the land, but MOTORCYCLES DON'T
> > > SLOW DOWN CARS, and that may account for the rage against bicycles.
>
> > Then trim motorcycle newsgroups from your posts, you stupid, ****ing
> > idiot.
>
> You have to see the whole picture. It's like been in Iraq and ignoring
> Afghanistan...
>
> There's only one side you can be on, if you know what I mean.

**** off, moron.

[MikeWhy]

"ComandanteBanana" > wrote in message
...
On Oct 15, 3:06 pm, "Road Glidin' Don" > wrote:
> On Oct 15, 12:59 pm, ComandanteBanana >
> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 15, 2:10 pm, Lew > wrote:
>
> > > On 15 Oct 2008, ComandanteBanana wrote in
> > > news:9ea7ca05-62f5-472a-b948-
> > >
>
> > > > Just wanted to share my latest email with you guys to show what is
> > > > going on in Georgia:
>
> > > Not sure why this was posted to Reeky; this guy was on a bicycle. I
> > > live in Georgia and haven't heard of or experienced much cage vs
> > > motorcycle road rage.
>
> > I think this is pretty common all over the land, but MOTORCYCLES DON'T
> > SLOW DOWN CARS, and that may account for the rage against bicycles.
>
> Then trim motorcycle newsgroups from your posts, you stupid, ****ing
> idiot.

You have to see the whole picture. It's like been in Iraq and ignoring
Afghanistan...

There's only one side you can be on, if you know what I mean.
---
Yeah, I know what you mean. I'm for smooth flowing traffic. The terrorists
in leotards have to go.

[Bob Myers]

"ComandanteBanana" > wrote in message
...

>> Not sure why this was posted to Reeky; this guy was on a bicycle. I
>> live in Georgia and haven't heard of or experienced much cage vs
>> motorcycle road rage.

> I think this is pretty common all over the land, but MOTORCYCLES DON'T
> SLOW DOWN CARS, and that may account for the rage against bicycles.

In that case, the solution is obvious.

You guys need to get engines.


Bob M.

[Vito]

"ComandanteBanana" > wrote
> Halfway down the hill, a LOUD horn almost caused me to wreck! ....

Of course you were going as fast as cars on the same road do, right?

[Vito]

"ComandanteBanana" > wrote
> I think this is pretty common all over the land, but MOTORCYCLES DON'T
> SLOW DOWN CARS, and that may account for the rage against bicycles.
>
Duh-Oh!

[Vito]

"Bob Myers" > wrote
>
> In that case, the solution is obvious.
>
> You guys need to get engines.
>
>
Yup. Major difference between bicycles and motorcycles is that one runs on
muscle and the other on brains.

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 15, 4:06*pm, "MikeWhy" > wrote:
> "ComandanteBanana" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On Oct 15, 3:06 pm, "Road Glidin' Don" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 15, 12:59 pm, ComandanteBanana >
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 15, 2:10 pm, Lew > wrote:
>
> > > > On 15 Oct 2008, ComandanteBanana wrote in
> > > > news:9ea7ca05-62f5-472a-b948-
> > > >
>
> > > > > Just wanted to share my latest email with you guys to show what is
> > > > > going on in Georgia:
>
> > > > Not sure why this was posted to Reeky; this guy was on a bicycle. I
> > > > live in Georgia and haven't heard of or experienced much cage vs
> > > > motorcycle road rage.
>
> > > I think this is pretty common all over the land, but MOTORCYCLES DON'T
> > > SLOW DOWN CARS, and that may account for the rage against bicycles.
>
> > Then trim motorcycle newsgroups from your posts, you stupid, ****ing
> > idiot.
>
> You have to see the whole picture. It's like been in Iraq and ignoring
> Afghanistan...
>
> There's only one side you can be on, if you know what I mean.
> ---
> Yeah, I know what you mean. I'm for smooth flowing traffic. The terrorists
> in leotards have to go.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Wow, I thought the terrorists drove SUVs and hid behind tinted windows.

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 15, 4:33*pm, "Bob Myers" > wrote:
> "ComandanteBanana" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> >> Not sure why this was posted to Reeky; this guy was on a bicycle. *I
> >> live in Georgia and haven't heard of or experienced much cage vs
> >> motorcycle road rage.
> > I think this is pretty common all over the land, but MOTORCYCLES DON'T
> > SLOW DOWN CARS, and that may account for the rage against bicycles.
>
> In that case, the solution is obvious.
>
> You guys need to get engines.
>
> Bob M.

I think most American drivers are too slow for motorcycles.

Slow but dangerous.

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 15, 5:40*pm, "Vito" > wrote:
> "ComandanteBanana" > wrote
>
> > Halfway down the hill, a LOUD horn almost caused me to wreck! ....
>
> Of course you were going as fast as cars on the same road do, right?

Well, I only relay the story. The point is that never, ever a car
should be pick up on a cyclist or motorcyclist without the risk of
being tried for terrorism.

It happened to me where the guy wanted to play vigilante to enforce a
"walk your bike on sidewalk" on a bridge whose sidewalk is barely wide
enough to walk. It's only 2 1/2 ' wide while he enjoyed two lanes all
to himself. He blasted the horn to scare me away, and I gave him the
finger.

Bad move where the big fish felt the need to do justice. Better
strategy for me is NEVER to go where the terrorists feel the right to
kill, and stay away from the jungle.

[BrianNZ]

KingOfTheApes wrote:
> On Oct 15, 5:40 pm, "Vito" > wrote:
>> "ComandanteBanana" > wrote
>>
>>> Halfway down the hill, a LOUD horn almost caused me to wreck! ....
>> Of course you were going as fast as cars on the same road do, right?
>
> Well, I only relay the story. The point is that never, ever a car
> should be pick up on a cyclist or motorcyclist without the risk of
> being tried for terrorism.
>
> It happened to me where the guy wanted to play vigilante to enforce a
> "walk your bike on sidewalk" on a bridge whose sidewalk is barely wide
> enough to walk. It's only 2 1/2 ' wide while he enjoyed two lanes all
> to himself. He blasted the horn to scare me away, and I gave him the
> finger.
>
> Bad move where the big fish felt the need to do justice. Better
> strategy for me is NEVER to go where the terrorists feel the right to
> kill, and stay away from the jungle.


No, get off the road and go ride in the jungle. You expect motorists to
obey the rules, yet pick and choose which ones you want to obey.

As long as a cyclist isn't impeding the flow of traffic, there is no
problem. The problem is when some lycra clad tour de france wannabe
abuses his 'right' to be on the road by not keeping out of the traffic
flow.....figuring his right is more important than the hundreds of
motorists who get the trickle down stop start ripple.

If I see a cyclists on the open road I will treat them as a car if there
is no oncoming traffic and move over the centreline. If there is
oncoming traffic and the group stay at the legal but inconsiderate two
abrest, I will move as wide as the oncoming vehicle allows me (Often the
oncoming cars will pull right over to make room, why can't cyclists in a
group show the same consideration?). If it hugs the centreline, so will
I and the cyclists get a wind blast.

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 15, 5:44*pm, "Vito" > wrote:
> "Bob Myers" > wrote
>
> > In that case, the solution is obvious.
>
> > You guys need to get engines.
>
> Yup. *Major difference between bicycles and motorcycles is that one runs on
> muscle and the other on brains.

I think the survival strategy of a cyclist requires more brain. You
worry about the cars hitting you from behind, while on a motorcycle
you just worry about not rear-ending some driver talking on the phone.

Prove of that is that many motorcyclists drink and drive. I did
anyway. It doesn't get any more stupid than that.

[KingOfTheApes]

I propose here that those killed in the line of duty riding a bicycle,
get condecorated with a Bicycle Medal of Honor, and get full pension
for their family.

Of course, the latter is more important. ;)

[Road Glidin' Don[_2_]]

On Oct 15, 4:55*pm, KingOfTheApes > wrote:
> On Oct 15, 5:44*pm, "Vito" > wrote:
>
> > "Bob Myers" > wrote
>
> > > In that case, the solution is obvious.
>
> > > You guys need to get engines.
>
> > Yup. *Major difference between bicycles and motorcycles is that one runs on
> > muscle and the other on brains.
>
> I think the survival strategy of a cyclist requires more brain. You
> worry about the cars hitting you from behind, while on a motorcycle
> you just worry about not rear-ending some driver talking on the phone.
>
> Prove of that is that many motorcyclists drink and drive. I did
> anyway. It doesn't get any more stupid than that.

Yeah, and you're on a mission to prove *other* people are stupid...

Guess that proves Vito's point.

[BrianNZ]

KingOfTheApes wrote:
> I propose here that those killed in the line of duty riding a bicycle,
> get condecorated with a Bicycle Medal of Honor, and get full pension
> for their family.
>
> Of course, the latter is more important. ;)


Of course!! $$$ is more important than honor......and why is it a duty
to ride a push bike?

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 15, 7:00*pm, "Road Glidin' Don" > wrote:
> On Oct 15, 4:55*pm, KingOfTheApes > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 15, 5:44*pm, "Vito" > wrote:
>
> > > "Bob Myers" > wrote
>
> > > > In that case, the solution is obvious.
>
> > > > You guys need to get engines.
>
> > > Yup. *Major difference between bicycles and motorcycles is that one runs on
> > > muscle and the other on brains.
>
> > I think the survival strategy of a cyclist requires more brain. You
> > worry about the cars hitting you from behind, while on a motorcycle
> > you just worry about not rear-ending some driver talking on the phone.
>
> > Prove of that is that many motorcyclists drink and drive. I did
> > anyway. It doesn't get any more stupid than that.
>
> Yeah, and you're on a mission to prove *other* people are stupid...
>
> Guess that proves Vito's point.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I can afford to be stupid, but not be stupid toward others.

Only the latter is considered TERRORISM.

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 15, 7:02*pm, BrianNZ > wrote:
> KingOfTheApes wrote:
> > I propose here that those killed in the line of duty riding a bicycle,
> > get condecorated with a Bicycle Medal of Honor, and get full pension
> > for their family.
>
> > Of course, the latter is more important. ;)
>
> Of course!! $$$ is more important than honor......and why is it a duty
> to ride a push bike?

If you want your family to survive in this jungle when you are killed,
you better leave them $$$.

I don't want any more or any less than the military honors and
benefits given to those killed on the line of duty.

What are those benefits?

[BrianNZ]

ComandanteBanana wrote:
> On Oct 15, 7:02 pm, BrianNZ > wrote:
>> KingOfTheApes wrote:
>>> I propose here that those killed in the line of duty riding a bicycle,
>>> get condecorated with a Bicycle Medal of Honor, and get full pension
>>> for their family.
>>> Of course, the latter is more important. ;)
>> Of course!! $$$ is more important than honor......and why is it a duty
>> to ride a push bike?
>
> If you want your family to survive in this jungle when you are killed,
> you better leave them $$$.
>
> I don't want any more or any less than the military honors and
> benefits given to those killed on the line of duty.
>
> What are those benefits?


Again, why is it your duty to ride a push bike? No-one has ordered you
to, so why do you expect honors if you die pursuing a chosen hobby?

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 15, 6:55*pm, BrianNZ > wrote:
> KingOfTheApes wrote:
> > On Oct 15, 5:40 pm, "Vito" > wrote:
> >> "ComandanteBanana" > wrote
>
> >>> Halfway down the hill, a LOUD horn almost caused me to wreck! ....
> >> Of course you were going as fast as cars on the same road do, right?
>
> > Well, I only relay the story. The point is that never, ever a car
> > should be pick up on a cyclist or motorcyclist without the risk of
> > being tried for terrorism.
>
> > It happened to me where the guy wanted to play vigilante to enforce a
> > "walk your bike on sidewalk" on a bridge whose sidewalk is barely wide
> > enough to walk. It's only 2 1/2 ' wide while he enjoyed two lanes all
> > to himself. He blasted the horn to scare me away, and I gave him the
> > finger.
>
> > Bad move where the big fish felt the need to do justice. Better
> > strategy for me is NEVER to go where the terrorists feel the right to
> > kill, and stay away from the jungle.
>
> No, get off the road and go ride in the jungle. You expect motorists to
> obey the rules, yet pick and choose which ones you want to obey.
>
> As long as a cyclist isn't impeding the flow of traffic, there is no
> problem. The problem is when some lycra clad tour de france wannabe
> abuses his 'right' to be on the road by not keeping out of the traffic
> flow.....figuring his right is more important than the hundreds of
> motorists who get the trickle down stop start ripple.
>
> If I see a cyclists on the open road I will treat them as a car if there
> is no oncoming traffic and move over the centreline. If there is
> oncoming traffic and the group stay at the legal but inconsiderate two
> abrest, I will move as wide as the oncoming vehicle allows me (Often the
> oncoming cars will pull right over to make room, why can't cyclists in a
> group show the same consideration?). If it hugs the centreline, so will
> I and the cyclists get a wind blast.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

The commuters and other practical cyclists and the elite cyclists are
two different animal species.

I'm afraid is the latter that want to block any effort to make bike
lanes and other bike facilities. They ride fairly fast and almost go
as fast as slow traffic, so they feel safer. But once in a while are
wiped out too by reckless drivers too.

Of course, everyone is at risk, including motorcyclists. Different
medal for them, though. ;)

[BryanUT]

"ComandanteBanana" > wrote in message
...
> Well guys, this story happened in Georgia, but I just omitted the rest
> of the title (link below) because it could have happened where I live.
> And indeed it has happened to me even more scary.
>

<snip>

As both a bicyclist and a motorcyclist, I am really shocked (not really) at
the hate directed at bike riders in the above posts.

We, as motorcyclists, have more in common with bicyclists than cagers. Like
it or not, we are on the same team.

Share the road.

Those of you complaining about riders two abreast, I hope you understand why
some of us don't tolerate Harley parades. Self righteous pricks I say. Both
of 'em.

Yeah, make fun of spandex, and I reserve the right to laugh at chaps and
leather vests. You are all a bunch of selfish people. Me, Me, Me!

Share the road with our 2 wheeled friends. Get off you ass and ride a bike
in traffic, I double dog dare you, are you man (or women) ennough?

All you loud pipes folks talk of freedom and rights, well, put up or shut
up. Let the pedalers be free. The roads belong to the people.

Share the road. Don't be a selfish ass.

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 15, 7:00*pm, "Road Glidin' Don" > wrote:
> On Oct 15, 4:55*pm, KingOfTheApes > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 15, 5:44*pm, "Vito" > wrote:
>
> > > "Bob Myers" > wrote
>
> > > > In that case, the solution is obvious.
>
> > > > You guys need to get engines.
>
> > > Yup. *Major difference between bicycles and motorcycles is that one runs on
> > > muscle and the other on brains.
>
> > I think the survival strategy of a cyclist requires more brain. You
> > worry about the cars hitting you from behind, while on a motorcycle
> > you just worry about not rear-ending some driver talking on the phone.
>
> > Prove of that is that many motorcyclists drink and drive. I did
> > anyway. It doesn't get any more stupid than that.
>
> Yeah, and you're on a mission to prove *other* people are stupid...
>
> Guess that proves Vito's point.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I quit drinking after I stopped motorcycling. Just coincidence, of
course. ;)

[Rob Morley]

On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 17:44:33 -0400
"Vito" > wrote:

> "Bob Myers" > wrote
> >
> > In that case, the solution is obvious.
> >
> > You guys need to get engines.
> >
> >
> Yup. Major difference between bicycles and motorcycles is that one
> runs on muscle and the other on brains.
>
ITYM one runs on legs and the other on the right wrist - both require a
modicum of grey matter if one is to survive long.

[Road Glidin' Don]

On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 17:12:45 -0700 (PDT), ComandanteBanana
> wrote:

>On Oct 15, 7:00*pm, "Road Glidin' Don" > wrote:
>> On Oct 15, 4:55*pm, KingOfTheApes > wrote:
>>
>> > On Oct 15, 5:44*pm, "Vito" > wrote:
>>
>> > > "Bob Myers" > wrote
>>
>> > > > In that case, the solution is obvious.
>>
>> > > > You guys need to get engines.
>>
>> > > Yup. *Major difference between bicycles and motorcycles is that one runs on
>> > > muscle and the other on brains.
>>
>> > I think the survival strategy of a cyclist requires more brain. You
>> > worry about the cars hitting you from behind, while on a motorcycle
>> > you just worry about not rear-ending some driver talking on the phone.
>>
>> > Prove of that is that many motorcyclists drink and drive. I did
>> > anyway. It doesn't get any more stupid than that.
>>
>> Yeah, and you're on a mission to prove *other* people are stupid...
>>
>> Guess that proves Vito's point.
>
>I quit drinking after I stopped motorcycling.

Stupid is something you won't be able to change.

[Road Glidin' Don]

On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 16:18:33 -0700 (PDT), ComandanteBanana
> wrote:

>I can afford to be stupid, but not be stupid toward others.

With you, "afford" has nothing to do with it.

[Outback Jon]

BryanUT wrote:
> Yeah, make fun of spandex, and I reserve the right to laugh at chaps and
> leather vests. You are all a bunch of selfish people. Me, Me, Me!

But would you laugh at a motorcyclist if they were wearing spandex?

--
"Outback" Jon - KC2BNE

AMD Opteron 165 ) and 6.1 GHz of other AMD power...
http://folding.stanford.edu - got folding? Team 53560

2006 ZG1000A Concours "Blueline" COG# 7385 CDA# 0157

[BrianNZ]

Outback Jon wrote:
> BryanUT wrote:
>> Yeah, make fun of spandex, and I reserve the right to laugh at chaps
>> and leather vests. You are all a bunch of selfish people. Me, Me, Me!
>
> But would you laugh at a motorcyclist if they were wearing spandex?
>


Only if they hadn't shaved their legs......

[S'mee]

On Oct 15, 8:42*pm, Outback Jon > wrote:
> BryanUT wrote:
> > Yeah, make fun of spandex, and I reserve the right to laugh at chaps and
> > leather vests. You are all a bunch of selfish people. *Me, Me, Me!
>
> But would you laugh at a motorcyclist if they were wearing spandex?
>

Depends on how big her tits are...

I never laugh at a nice ass...no matter what is or is not covering it.
--
Keith
I like big butts and I can not lie!

[S'mee]

On Oct 15, 6:56*pm, Rob Morley > wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 17:44:33 -0400
>
> "Vito" > wrote:
> > "Bob Myers" > wrote
>
> > > In that case, the solution is obvious.
>
> > > You guys need to get engines.
>
> > Yup. *Major difference between bicycles and motorcycles is that one
> > runs on muscle and the other on brains.
>
> ITYM one runs on legs and the other on the right wrist - both require a
> modicum of grey matter if one is to survive long.

uh-huh...I ride both. It takes more brains to ride a motorcycle,
period, end of discussion.
--
Keith

[Road Glidin' Don]

On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 01:56:56 +0100, Rob Morley >
wrote:

>On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 17:44:33 -0400
>"Vito" > wrote:
>
>> "Bob Myers" > wrote
>> >
>> > In that case, the solution is obvious.
>> >
>> > You guys need to get engines.
>> >
>> >
>> Yup. Major difference between bicycles and motorcycles is that one
>> runs on muscle and the other on brains.
>>
>ITYM one runs on legs and the other on the right wrist - both require a
>modicum of grey matter if one is to survive long.

But only one of the two requires enough skill that a test must be
passed to acquire a license to operate one, while we deem 6 year olds
sufficiently developed for riding the other on city streets.

[bugbear]

ComandanteBanana wrote:
> There's only one side you can be on, if you know what I mean.

The concept of "you're either with us or against us"
does not have a noble history.

BugBear

[bugbear]

S'mee wrote:
> uh-huh...I ride both. It takes more brains to ride a motorcycle,
> period, end of discussion.

http://creationwiki.org/Logical_fallacy#Proof_by_assertion

BugBear

[Dave Larrington]

In et,
bugbear > tweaked the Babbage-Engine to
tell us:
> ComandanteBanana wrote:
>> There's only one side you can be on, if you know what I mean.
>
> The concept of "you're either with us or against us"
> does not have a noble history.

If it comes to a choice between being pro- or anti- clueless chumps like
BananaBoy, though, I know which side my shovel and I will be on.

--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
Ernesto, give me that Kit-Kat, or I will kill you.

[Paul Weaver]

On 15 Oct, 18:27, ComandanteBanana > wrote:
> Well guys, this story happened in Georgia, but I just omitted the rest
> of the title (link below) because it could have happened where I live.

If my country was recovering from a Russian invasion the last thing on
my mind would be road-rage.

Although I did have a nice picture of cyclists with rocket launchers
slung over their shoulders -- tanks aren't manuverable enough?

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 15, 7:31*pm, BrianNZ > wrote:
> ComandanteBanana wrote:
> > On Oct 15, 7:02 pm, BrianNZ > wrote:
> >> KingOfTheApes wrote:
> >>> I propose here that those killed in the line of duty riding a bicycle,
> >>> get condecorated with a Bicycle Medal of Honor, and get full pension
> >>> for their family.
> >>> Of course, the latter is more important. ;)
> >> Of course!! $$$ is more important than honor......and why is it a duty
> >> to ride a push bike?
>
> > If you want your family to survive in this jungle when you are killed,
> > you better leave them $$$.
>
> > I don't want any more or any less than the military honors and
> > benefits given to those killed on the line of duty.
>
> > What are those benefits?
>
> Again, why is it your duty to ride a push bike? No-one has ordered you
> to, so why do you expect honors if you die pursuing a chosen hobby?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

That's the problem with Americans: Bicycling is NOT a hobby, at least
for those who use it for practical reasons.

Besides it saves gas, and that't VERY PATRIOTIC.

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 15, 8:09 pm, "BryanUT" > wrote:
> "ComandanteBanana" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > Well guys, this story happened in Georgia, but I just omitted the rest
> > of the title (link below) because it could have happened where I live.
> > And indeed it has happened to me even more scary.
>
> <snip>
>
> As both a bicyclist and a motorcyclist, I am really shocked (not really) at
> the hate directed at bike riders in the above posts.
>
> We, as motorcyclists, have more in common with bicyclists than cagers. Like
> it or not, we are on the same team.
>
> Share the road.
>
> Those of you complaining about riders two abreast, I hope you understand why
> some of us don't tolerate Harley parades. Self righteous pricks I say. Both
> of 'em.
>
> Yeah, make fun of spandex, and I reserve the right to laugh at chaps and
> leather vests. You are all a bunch of selfish people. Me, Me, Me!
>
> Share the road with our 2 wheeled friends. Get off you ass and ride a bike
> in traffic, I double dog dare you, are you man (or women) ennough?
>
> All you loud pipes folks talk of freedom and rights, well, put up or shut
> up. Let the pedalers be free. The roads belong to the people.
>
> Share the road. Don't be a selfish ass.

You must have reading comprehension problems. It doesn't say anywhere
what you claim, but illiteracy in America is NOT the subject here.

Bicycles and Motorcycles do have a lot of common. To begin with the
both ride on two wheels (two wheels good, four wheels bad) and they
are both at the bottom of the food chain. Well, at least the latter
can outrun the predators, but sometimes they just come out of nowhere.

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 15, 10:42*pm, Outback Jon >
wrote:
> BryanUT wrote:
> > Yeah, make fun of spandex, and I reserve the right to laugh at chaps and
> > leather vests. You are all a bunch of selfish people. *Me, Me, Me!
>
> But would you laugh at a motorcyclist if they were wearing spandex?
>

They are only to be laughed at when the wear black leather. ;)

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 15, 11:01*pm, "S'mee" > wrote:
> On Oct 15, 6:56*pm, Rob Morley > wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 17:44:33 -0400
>
> > "Vito" > wrote:
> > > "Bob Myers" > wrote
>
> > > > In that case, the solution is obvious.
>
> > > > You guys need to get engines.
>
> > > Yup. *Major difference between bicycles and motorcycles is that one
> > > runs on muscle and the other on brains.
>
> > ITYM one runs on legs and the other on the right wrist - both require a
> > modicum of grey matter if one is to survive long.
>
> uh-huh...I ride both. It takes more brains to ride a motorcycle,
> period, end of discussion.
> --
> Keith

I think it takes more money, and making money takes more brain, or
more time working.

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 15, 11:38*pm, (Road Glidin' Don) wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 01:56:56 +0100, Rob Morley >
> wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 17:44:33 -0400
> >"Vito" > wrote:
>
> >> "Bob Myers" > wrote
>
> >> > In that case, the solution is obvious.
>
> >> > You guys need to get engines.
>
> >> Yup. *Major difference between bicycles and motorcycles is that one
> >> runs on muscle and the other on brains.
>
> >ITYM one runs on legs and the other on the right wrist - both require a
> >modicum of grey matter if one is to survive long.
>
> But only one of the two requires enough skill that a test must be
> passed to acquire a license to operate one, while we deem 6 year olds
> sufficiently developed for riding the other on city streets.

I've never seen one on city streets. Just parks.

There are kids competing with motorcycles though.

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 16, 3:21*am, Jym Dyer > wrote:
> >> You guys need to get engines.
> > Yup. *Major difference between bicycles and motorcycles
> > is that one runs on muscle and the other on brains.
>
> =v= Hey, we've got it all: *brains *and* beauty.
>
> =v= Please don't make the mistake of confusing Comandante
> Dip**** with "us guys." *We don't like him either. *He's
> just trying to increase his audience because nobody in the
> bicycles newsgroups (including the U.K. one) likes him.
> * * <_Jym_>

You are a loser. I don't think you ride either a bicycle or
motorcycle.

Maybe an SUV.

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 16, 6:01*am, bugbear > wrote:
> ComandanteBanana wrote:
> > There's only one side you can be on, if you know what I mean.
>
> The concept of "you're either with us or against us"
> does not have a noble history.
>
> * *BugBear

I know, so obviously with are not with him. I mean, we are fighting
other terrorists. (Those with the license to kill.)

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 16, 6:02*am, bugbear > wrote:
> S'mee wrote:
> > uh-huh...I ride both. It takes more brains to ride a motorcycle,
> > period, end of discussion.
>
> http://creationwiki.org/Logical_fallacy#Proof_by_assertion
>
> * *BugBear

Whatever. But I do think that riding a biking takes more balls.

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 16, 8:15*am, Paul Weaver > wrote:
> On 15 Oct, 18:27, ComandanteBanana > wrote:
>
> > Well guys, this story happened in Georgia, but I just omitted the rest
> > of the title (link below) because it could have happened where I live.
>
> If my country was recovering from a Russian invasion the last thing on
> my mind would be road-rage.
>
> Although I did have a nice picture of cyclists with rocket launchers
> slung over their shoulders -- tanks aren't manuverable enough?

Oh this is Georgia USA, the home of Coca-Cola, and road rage,
according to the post.

I guess this is more a civil war than an invasion.

[KingOfTheApes]

I think what really move the American electorate is not bicycles or
motorcycles (they weren't mentioned in the debate last night), but
oil, and as such we can almost conclude that...

Would Chavez make the American people happy? Yes!!!

See, Americans don't care much about politics. Democracy has been
eroded beyond recognition in the last 8 years, and there hasn't been
many voices with weight that denounce it, a reality that has been
popularly endorsed by Bush's re-election in 2004...

In reality Americans only care about the economy. The invasion of Iraq
better gets results, ie. oil to fill the gas tanks of their SUVs. And
when you think about it, Chavez would fit the bill. He got the economy
working through petrodollars and the gallon of gas fetches 12 cents a
gallon.

So forget about Obama and McCain, what we need here is a Chavez. And
perhaps President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad too... How much is the gallon of
gas in Iran?

POLL TAKEN AT...

http://engforum.pravda.ru/showthread.php?t=229502

[S'mee]

On Oct 16, 9:38*am, ComandanteBanana >
wrote:
> On Oct 16, 6:02*am, bugbear > wrote:
>
> > S'mee wrote:
> > > uh-huh...I ride both. It takes more brains to ride a motorcycle,
> > > period, end of discussion.
>
> >http://creationwiki.org/Logical_fallacy#Proof_by_assertion
>
> > * *BugBear
>
> Whatever. But I do think that riding a biking takes more balls.

Not really. Grew up riding in the traffic (5lanes rush hour on a
Schiwwn Collegiate) Compared to riding on I5 during rush hour in
Seattle? The bicycle was EASY, no brainer, no need to think except for
obeying the traffic laws then demanding and taking my place in
traffic. Works the same out of town...only change is "slow traffic
keep right" Other than that...you don't have to think nearly as much
on the bicycle.
--
Keith

[S'mee]

On Oct 16, 9:23*am, ComandanteBanana >
wrote:
> On Oct 15, 10:42*pm, Outback Jon >
> wrote:
>
> > BryanUT wrote:
> > > Yeah, make fun of spandex, and I reserve the right to laugh at chaps and
> > > leather vests. You are all a bunch of selfish people. *Me, Me, Me!
>
> > But would you laugh at a motorcyclist if they were wearing spandex?
>
> They are only to be laughed at when the wear black leather. ;)

actually you'd be bassackwards. Spandex is useless if one ends up
sliding on asphalt. The leather otoh WILL protect you from getting
gravel picked out of your skin or getting skin grafts. Can spandex do
that?
--
Keith

[S'mee]

On Oct 16, 9:21*am, ComandanteBanana >
wrote:
> On Oct 15, 8:09 pm, "BryanUT" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "ComandanteBanana" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > > Well guys, this story happened in Georgia, but I just omitted the rest
> > > of the title (link below) because it could have happened where I live..
> > > And indeed it has happened to me even more scary.
>
> > <snip>
>
> > As both a bicyclist and a motorcyclist, I am really shocked (not really) at
> > the hate directed at bike riders in the above posts.
>
> > We, as motorcyclists, have more in common with bicyclists than cagers. *Like
> > it or not, we are on the same team.
>
> > Share the road.
>
> > Those of you complaining about riders two abreast, I hope you understand why
> > some of us don't tolerate Harley parades. Self righteous pricks I say. Both
> > of 'em.
>
> > Yeah, make fun of spandex, and I reserve the right to laugh at chaps and
> > leather vests. You are all a bunch of selfish people. *Me, Me, Me!
>
> > Share the road with our 2 wheeled friends. *Get off you ass and ride a bike
> > in traffic, I double dog dare you, are you man (or women) ennough?
>
> > All you loud pipes folks talk of freedom and rights, well, put up or shut
> > up. *Let the pedalers be free. *The roads belong to the people.
>
> > Share the road. *Don't be a selfish ass.
>
> You must have reading comprehension problems. It doesn't say anywhere
> what you claim, but illiteracy in America is NOT the subject here.
>
> Bicycles and Motorcycles do have a lot of common. To begin with the
> both ride on two wheels (two wheels good, four wheels bad) and they
> are both at the bottom of the food chain. Well, at least the latter
> can outrun the predators, but sometimes they just come out of nowhere.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Uh you are patently WRONG that motorcycles are on the bottom of the
food chain. That place is occupied by pedestrians. Motorcycles when
ridden by a experienced rider actually is an apex predator with the
resultant problems. 8^) Well that's my personal experience.
--
Keith

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 16, 3:02*pm, "S'mee" > wrote:
> On Oct 16, 9:21*am, ComandanteBanana >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 15, 8:09 pm, "BryanUT" > wrote:
>
> > > "ComandanteBanana" > wrote in message
>
> > ....
>
> > > > Well guys, this story happened in Georgia, but I just omitted the rest
> > > > of the title (link below) because it could have happened where I live.
> > > > And indeed it has happened to me even more scary.
>
> > > <snip>
>
> > > As both a bicyclist and a motorcyclist, I am really shocked (not really) at
> > > the hate directed at bike riders in the above posts.
>
> > > We, as motorcyclists, have more in common with bicyclists than cagers.. *Like
> > > it or not, we are on the same team.
>
> > > Share the road.
>
> > > Those of you complaining about riders two abreast, I hope you understand why
> > > some of us don't tolerate Harley parades. Self righteous pricks I say.. Both
> > > of 'em.
>
> > > Yeah, make fun of spandex, and I reserve the right to laugh at chaps and
> > > leather vests. You are all a bunch of selfish people. *Me, Me, Me!
>
> > > Share the road with our 2 wheeled friends. *Get off you ass and ride a bike
> > > in traffic, I double dog dare you, are you man (or women) ennough?
>
> > > All you loud pipes folks talk of freedom and rights, well, put up or shut
> > > up. *Let the pedalers be free. *The roads belong to the people.
>
> > > Share the road. *Don't be a selfish ass.
>
> > You must have reading comprehension problems. It doesn't say anywhere
> > what you claim, but illiteracy in America is NOT the subject here.
>
> > Bicycles and Motorcycles do have a lot of common. To begin with the
> > both ride on two wheels (two wheels good, four wheels bad) and they
> > are both at the bottom of the food chain. Well, at least the latter
> > can outrun the predators, but sometimes they just come out of nowhere.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Uh you are patently WRONG that motorcycles *are on the bottom of the
> food chain. That place is occupied by pedestrians. Motorcycles when
> ridden by a experienced rider actually is an apex predator with the
> resultant problems. 8^) Well that's my personal experience.
> --
> Keith- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I've said motorcycles are at the very bottom, but near the bottom. At
least you can run away from bigger predators. But make no mistake
WHO'S KING OF THE JUNGLE... SUVs. ;)

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 16, 3:00*pm, "S'mee" > wrote:
> On Oct 16, 9:23*am, ComandanteBanana >
> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 15, 10:42*pm, Outback Jon >
> > wrote:
>
> > > BryanUT wrote:
> > > > Yeah, make fun of spandex, and I reserve the right to laugh at chaps and
> > > > leather vests. You are all a bunch of selfish people. *Me, Me, Me!
>
> > > But would you laugh at a motorcyclist if they were wearing spandex?
>
> > They are only to be laughed at when the wear black leather. ;)
>
> actually you'd be bassackwards. Spandex is useless if one ends up
> sliding on asphalt. The leather otoh WILL protect you from getting
> gravel picked out of your skin or getting skin grafts. Can spandex do
> that?
> --
> Keith

Maybe motorcyclists do it for looks when they refuse to wear a helmet.

It looks cool though, except in hot summer.

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 16, 6:02*am, bugbear > wrote:
> S'mee wrote:
> > uh-huh...I ride both. It takes more brains to ride a motorcycle,
> > period, end of discussion.
>
> http://creationwiki.org/Logical_fallacy#Proof_by_assertion
>
> * *BugBear

So there's evolution or not? Not with McCain at least.

[BrianNZ]

KingOfTheApes wrote:
<snip>
>
> I've said motorcycles are at the very bottom, but near the bottom. At
> least you can run away from bigger predators. But make no mistake
> WHO'S KING OF THE JUNGLE... SUVs. ;)


Those underpowered, overweight ill handling pieces of **** are nowhere
near the top......they are the hippos of the motoring world. half blind
and only dangerous if they charge you from the blindside, otherwise a
quick sidestep sees them blundering past. A half decent car can PIT an
SUV, yet an SUV can't keep up with a half decent car.....

[S'mee]

On Oct 16, 1:58*pm, KingOfTheApes

SNIP
> Maybe motorcyclists do it for looks when they refuse to wear a helmet.

No it looks stupid to not wear a helmet. Regardless of whether you
ride a bicycle or a motorcycle. If you choose not to...let the
consequences be on your head. Me I'm wearing a helmet.

> It looks cool though, except in hot summer.

Not really...it's suicide to not wear a helmet. Look up a wind chill
table some time. 70mph @ 40 F. That's hypothermia right there... No
thanks that stuff is a killer. If it's 90 F even and you ride 75 mph
all that sweat just evaporates off and you are a potential
dehydration/heat injury victim. Unlike if you wear a proper helmet
( full face is best) they insulate you from the heat AND cold.

--
Keith

[S'mee]

On Oct 16, 1:17*pm, KingOfTheApes > wrote:
> On Oct 16, 3:02*pm, "S'mee" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 16, 9:21*am, ComandanteBanana >
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 15, 8:09 pm, "BryanUT" > wrote:
>
> > > > "ComandanteBanana" > wrote in message
>
> > > ...
>
> > > > > Well guys, this story happened in Georgia, but I just omitted the rest
> > > > > of the title (link below) because it could have happened where I live.
> > > > > And indeed it has happened to me even more scary.
>
> > > > <snip>
>
> > > > As both a bicyclist and a motorcyclist, I am really shocked (not really) at
> > > > the hate directed at bike riders in the above posts.
>
> > > > We, as motorcyclists, have more in common with bicyclists than cagers. *Like
> > > > it or not, we are on the same team.
>
> > > > Share the road.
>
> > > > Those of you complaining about riders two abreast, I hope you understand why
> > > > some of us don't tolerate Harley parades. Self righteous pricks I say. Both
> > > > of 'em.
>
> > > > Yeah, make fun of spandex, and I reserve the right to laugh at chaps and
> > > > leather vests. You are all a bunch of selfish people. *Me, Me, Me!
>
> > > > Share the road with our 2 wheeled friends. *Get off you ass and ride a bike
> > > > in traffic, I double dog dare you, are you man (or women) ennough?
>
> > > > All you loud pipes folks talk of freedom and rights, well, put up or shut
> > > > up. *Let the pedalers be free. *The roads belong to the people.
>
> > > > Share the road. *Don't be a selfish ass.
>
> > > You must have reading comprehension problems. It doesn't say anywhere
> > > what you claim, but illiteracy in America is NOT the subject here.
>
> > > Bicycles and Motorcycles do have a lot of common. To begin with the
> > > both ride on two wheels (two wheels good, four wheels bad) and they
> > > are both at the bottom of the food chain. Well, at least the latter
> > > can outrun the predators, but sometimes they just come out of nowhere..- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Uh you are patently WRONG that motorcycles *are on the bottom of the
> > food chain. That place is occupied by pedestrians. Motorcycles when
> > ridden by a experienced rider actually is an apex predator with the
> > resultant problems. 8^) Well that's my personal experience.
> > --
> > Keith- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> I've said motorcycles are at the very bottom, but near the bottom. At
> least you can run away from bigger predators. But make no mistake
> WHO'S KING OF THE JUNGLE... SUVs. ;)

When I could ride more regularly I wasn't anywhere near the bottom. Go
ride in Boston, say Kenmore square to Boston Commons during rush hour.
It's easy, peasy. Pretty safe to if you're willing to TAKE what is
yours. 8^) As for SUV? The might be King of guzzling but that's it.
They aren't much more than prey imo. You have to learn to manipulate
their fear. What they are more like is elephants...only dangerous if
you stand still.
--
Keith

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 16, 5:19*pm, "S'mee" > wrote:
> On Oct 16, 1:17*pm, KingOfTheApes > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 16, 3:02*pm, "S'mee" > wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 16, 9:21*am, ComandanteBanana >
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > On Oct 15, 8:09 pm, "BryanUT" > wrote:
>
> > > > > "ComandanteBanana" > wrote in message
>
> > > > ...
>
> > > > > > Well guys, this story happened in Georgia, but I just omitted the rest
> > > > > > of the title (link below) because it could have happened where I live.
> > > > > > And indeed it has happened to me even more scary.
>
> > > > > <snip>
>
> > > > > As both a bicyclist and a motorcyclist, I am really shocked (not really) at
> > > > > the hate directed at bike riders in the above posts.
>
> > > > > We, as motorcyclists, have more in common with bicyclists than cagers. *Like
> > > > > it or not, we are on the same team.
>
> > > > > Share the road.
>
> > > > > Those of you complaining about riders two abreast, I hope you understand why
> > > > > some of us don't tolerate Harley parades. Self righteous pricks I say. Both
> > > > > of 'em.
>
> > > > > Yeah, make fun of spandex, and I reserve the right to laugh at chaps and
> > > > > leather vests. You are all a bunch of selfish people. *Me, Me, Me!
>
> > > > > Share the road with our 2 wheeled friends. *Get off you ass and ride a bike
> > > > > in traffic, I double dog dare you, are you man (or women) ennough?
>
> > > > > All you loud pipes folks talk of freedom and rights, well, put up or shut
> > > > > up. *Let the pedalers be free. *The roads belong to the people.
>
> > > > > Share the road. *Don't be a selfish ass.
>
> > > > You must have reading comprehension problems. It doesn't say anywhere
> > > > what you claim, but illiteracy in America is NOT the subject here.
>
> > > > Bicycles and Motorcycles do have a lot of common. To begin with the
> > > > both ride on two wheels (two wheels good, four wheels bad) and they
> > > > are both at the bottom of the food chain. Well, at least the latter
> > > > can outrun the predators, but sometimes they just come out of nowhere.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > Uh you are patently WRONG that motorcycles *are on the bottom of the
> > > food chain. That place is occupied by pedestrians. Motorcycles when
> > > ridden by a experienced rider actually is an apex predator with the
> > > resultant problems. 8^) Well that's my personal experience.
> > > --
> > > Keith- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > I've said motorcycles are at the very bottom, but near the bottom. At
> > least you can run away from bigger predators. But make no mistake
> > WHO'S KING OF THE JUNGLE... SUVs. ;)
>
> When I could ride more regularly I wasn't anywhere near the bottom. Go
> ride in Boston, say Kenmore square to Boston Commons during rush hour.
> It's easy, peasy. Pretty safe to if you're willing to TAKE what is
> yours. 8^) As for SUV? The might be King of guzzling but that's it.
> They aren't much more than prey imo. You have to learn to manipulate
> their fear. What they are more like is elephants...only dangerous if
> you stand still.
> --
> Keith- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

That sounds like the cyclists. Sitting ducks waiting for soccer mom to
be on the phone while driving her SUV. "Never saw him!"

[Tim McNamara]

In article
>,
"S'mee" > wrote:

> On Oct 15, 6:56*pm, Rob Morley > wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 17:44:33 -0400
> >
> > "Vito" > wrote:
> > > "Bob Myers" > wrote
> >
> > > > In that case, the solution is obvious.
> >
> > > > You guys need to get engines.
> >
> > > Yup. *Major difference between bicycles and motorcycles is that
> > > one runs on muscle and the other on brains.
> >
> > ITYM one runs on legs and the other on the right wrist - both
> > require a modicum of grey matter if one is to survive long.
>
> uh-huh...I ride both. It takes more brains to ride a motorcycle,
> period, end of discussion.

Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than riding
motorcycles? I think you'd need to find some way to back up your claim
besides "period, end of discussion." Your statement is less than
convincing.

[Tim McNamara]

In article >,
bugbear > wrote:

> ComandanteBanana wrote:
> > There's only one side you can be on, if you know what I mean.
>
> The concept of "you're either with us or against us" does not have a
> noble history.

Nice summation.

[Tim McNamara]

In article
>,
"S'mee" > wrote:

> On Oct 16, 1:58*pm, KingOfTheApes
>
> SNIP
> > Maybe motorcyclists do it for looks when they refuse to wear a
> > helmet.
>
> No it looks stupid to not wear a helmet. Regardless of whether you
> ride a bicycle or a motorcycle. If you choose not to...let the
> consequences be on your head. Me I'm wearing a helmet.
>
> > It looks cool though, except in hot summer.
>
> Not really...it's suicide to not wear a helmet.

That's a little extreme, especially if you are talking about the
styrofoam hats that bicyclists wear.

http://www.cyclehelmets.org/

[WR69]

"Road Glidin' Don" > wrote in message
...
On Oct 15, 12:59 pm, ComandanteBanana >
wrote:
> On Oct 15, 2:10 pm, Lew > wrote:
>
> > On 15 Oct 2008, ComandanteBanana wrote in news:9ea7ca05-62f5-472a-b948-
> >
>
> > > Just wanted to share my latest email with you guys to show what is
> > > going on in Georgia:
>
> > Not sure why this was posted to Reeky; this guy was on a bicycle. I
> > live in Georgia and haven't heard of or experienced much cage vs
> > motorcycle road rage.
>
> I think this is pretty common all over the land, but MOTORCYCLES DON'T
> SLOW DOWN CARS, and that may account for the rage against bicycles.

Then trim motorcycle newsgroups from your posts, you stupid, ****ing
idiot.



You got that right you tell him! ..... I'll bet he's even stupid enough to
ride children on the back of his "bicycle" without a helmet. It's not like
any real motorcycle rider with any common ****ing sense or born outside of
Hooterville would ever think of doing something ****ing retarded like that.
Right?

[Vito]

"Tim McNamara" > wrote
> Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than riding
> motorcycles? I think you'd need to find some way to back up your claim.

It only seems that way to you because they think like you. People commonly
believe those more intellegent than they are stupid simply because their
higher logic is beyond them. Your demand that I "back up" what should be
obvious to even the most casual observer is an excellent example of that.

[Vito]

> > > > > Share the road. Don't be a selfish ass.
>
Hard to imagine any more selfish than a group of cyclists riding 3 & 4
abreast at 12 mph on a 2-lane public highway with a 55 mph speed limit. And
no, it's not a fantasy - I used to see it every Saturday morning. That's
one reason "jousting" became popular.

[S'mee]

On Oct 16, 8:28*pm, "Vito" > wrote:
> > > > > > Share the road. Don't be a selfish ass.
>
> Hard to imagine any more selfish than a group of cyclists riding 3 & 4
> abreast at 12 mph on a 2-lane public highway with a 55 mph speed limit. *And
> no, it's not a fantasy - I used to see it every Saturday morning. *That's
> one reason "jousting" became popular.

oh ****.

Who'd a thought I'd agree with you. ;^)

[S'mee]

On Oct 16, 6:35*pm, "WR69" > wrote:

SNIP

> Then trim motorcycle newsgroups from your posts, you stupid, ****ing
> idiot.

Unclench your sphincter punk.

> You got that right you tell him! ..... I'll bet he's even stupid enough to
> ride children on the back of his "bicycle" without a helmet. It's not like
> any real motorcycle rider with any common ****ing sense or born outside of
> Hooterville would ever think of doing something ****ing retarded like that.

[WR69]

"S'mee" > wrote in message
...
On Oct 16, 6:35 pm, "WR69" > wrote:

SNIP

> Then trim motorcycle newsgroups from your posts, you stupid, ****ing
> idiot.

Unclench your sphincter punk.

What is a sphincter punk?

Btw I didn't post that remark ...it was the road glidin' moron ya dolt.


> You got that right you tell him! ..... I'll bet he's even stupid enough to
> ride children on the back of his "bicycle" without a helmet. It's not like
> any real motorcycle rider with any common ****ing sense or born outside of
> Hooterville would ever think of doing something ****ing retarded like
> that.
> Right?

That is correct. But just like bicyclist motorcyclest have our share
of idiots who claim "It's my right!!!". They are only partially
correct they do have the right to be idiots...just like you.
--
Keith


Judging by your attempt to respond intelligently............oh wait never
mind.


Dave

[S'mee]

On Oct 17, 6:51*am, "WR69" > wrote:
> "S'mee" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On Oct 16, 6:35 pm, "WR69" > wrote:
>
> SNIP
>
> > Then trim motorcycle newsgroups from your posts, you stupid, ****ing
> > idiot.
>
> Unclench your sphincter punk.
>
> What is a sphincter punk?
>
> Btw I didn't post that remark ...it was the road glidin' moron ya dolt.
>
> > You got that right you tell him! ..... I'll bet he's even stupid enough to
> > ride children on the back of his "bicycle" without a helmet. It's not like
> > any real motorcycle rider with any common ****ing sense or born outside of
> > Hooterville would ever think of doing something ****ing retarded like
> > that.
> > Right?
>
> That is correct. But just like bicyclist motorcyclest have our share
> of idiots who claim "It's my right!!!". They are only partially
> correct they do have the right to be idiots...just like you.
> --
> Keith
>
> Judging by your attempt to respond intelligently............oh wait never
> mind.
>
> Dave

You apparently have never done a three threaded, pentagonal crosspost.
Tricky thinks they are, eat all the punctuation marks...scrambles
letters radonly. All sort of things. I once saw such an attempt change
a man into a female luchiador midget with a hook for a hand...on the
plus side she doesn't post with a LISP anymore.

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 16, 8:10*pm, Tim McNamara > wrote:
> In article >,
>
> *bugbear > wrote:
> > ComandanteBanana wrote:
> > > There's only one side you can be on, if you know what I mean.
>
> > The concept of "you're either with us or against us" does not have a
> > noble history.
>
> Nice summation.

"You are either with bicycles or against bicycles" sounds like a
reasonable way to draw the lines...

By the way, where do motorcyclists stand? ;)

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 16, 10:28*pm, "Vito" > wrote:
> > > > > > Share the road. Don't be a selfish ass.
>
> Hard to imagine any more selfish than a group of cyclists riding 3 & 4
> abreast at 12 mph on a 2-lane public highway with a 55 mph speed limit. *And
> no, it's not a fantasy - I used to see it every Saturday morning. *That's
> one reason "jousting" became popular.

Here in Miami Beach, a group of them was wiped out by taxi recently on
the MacArthur Causeway, and you may be inclined to question what they
were doing in that fast road, but other causeways out of the beach are
no-man's land for bicycles, and indeed it was in one of them that I
had that incident with that terrorist.

There's only one causeway out of the beach --Venetian Causeway-- and
that's not always convenient for all.

The bottom line is MAKE BIKE LANES, OR TAME TRAFFIC OR GO TO
HOLLAND. ;)

[Tim McNamara]

In article >,
"WR69" > wrote:

> "S'mee" > wrote in message
>
> ... On Oct 16, 6:35 pm, "WR69" > wrote:
>
> SNIP
>
> > Then trim motorcycle newsgroups from your posts, you stupid,
> > ****ing idiot.
>
> Unclench your sphincter punk.
>
> What is a sphincter punk?
>
> Btw I didn't post that remark ...it was the road glidin' moron ya
> dolt.

S'mee isn't the dolt, since your post didn't include a quote string or
proper attribution. If you're going to participate in Usenet, learn how
to do it.

[Tim McNamara]

In article m>,
"Vito" > wrote:

> "Tim McNamara" > wrote
> > Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than
> > riding motorcycles? I think you'd need to find some way to back up
> > your claim.
>
> It only seems that way to you because they think like you. People
> commonly believe those more intellegent than they are stupid simply
> because their higher logic is beyond them. Your demand that I "back
> up" what should be obvious to even the most casual observer is an
> excellent example of that.

LOL! Thanks for the irony.

[BrianNZ]

KingOfTheApes wrote:
> On Oct 16, 8:10 pm, Tim McNamara > wrote:
>> In article >,
>>
>> bugbear > wrote:
>>> ComandanteBanana wrote:
>>>> There's only one side you can be on, if you know what I mean.
>>> The concept of "you're either with us or against us" does not have a
>>> noble history.
>> Nice summation.
>
> "You are either with bicycles or against bicycles" sounds like a
> reasonable way to draw the lines...
>
> By the way, where do motorcyclists stand? ;)


Just as POTUS managed to alienate a lot of support from the middle
ground with his 'with us or against us' rhetoric, so will anyone else
who tries the same thing. I don't really care about bicycles as long as
they don't block the flow of traffic.....I'm certainly not 'with' them,
so I guess I will just have to move to the other camp and start going
out of my way to make their lives more miserable.

[Vito]

"KingOfTheApes" > wrote

> By the way, where do motorcyclists stand? ;)

A couple of good old boys I know like to get in the back of a pick up and go
out "jousting" using a 2x4 or whatever's at hand.

[Road Glidin' Don[_2_]]

On Oct 17, 1:47*pm, Tim McNamara > wrote:
> In article m>,
>
> *"Vito" > wrote:
> > "Tim McNamara" > wrote
> > > Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than
> > > riding motorcycles? *I think you'd need to find some way to back up
> > > your claim.
>
> > It only seems that way to you because they think like you. People
> > commonly believe those more intellegent than they are stupid simply
> > because their higher logic is beyond them. *Your demand that I "back
> > up" what should be obvious to even the most casual observer is an
> > excellent example of that.
>
> LOL! *Thanks for the irony.

Hey dumb****. Remember:

"I only see posts form this idiot when someone responds to him (like
you). Put him in your killfile, life is much too short to waste
telling
trolls to shut up."

You feeding the same troll's thread... now THAT'S irony.

[Road Glidin' Don[_2_]]

On Oct 17, 2:27*pm, BrianNZ > wrote:
> KingOfTheApes wrote:
> > On Oct 16, 8:10 pm, Tim McNamara > wrote:
> >> In article >,
>
> >> *bugbear > wrote:
> >>> ComandanteBanana wrote:
> >>>> There's only one side you can be on, if you know what I mean.
> >>> The concept of "you're either with us or against us" does not have a
> >>> noble history.
> >> Nice summation.
>
> > "You are either with bicycles or against bicycles" sounds like a
> > reasonable way to draw the lines...
>
> > By the way, where do motorcyclists stand? ;)
>
> Just as POTUS managed to alienate a lot of support from the middle
> ground with his 'with us or against us' rhetoric, so will anyone else
> who tries the same thing. I don't really care about bicycles as long as
> they don't block the flow of traffic.....I'm certainly not 'with' them,
> so I guess I will just have to move to the other camp and start going
> out of my way to make their lives more miserable.

You do realize you're trying to out-argue a mental midget who lives in
his Mom's basement, right?

[Tuesday Blimpie]

On Oct 15, 8:09*pm, "BryanUT" > wrote:
> "ComandanteBanana" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > Well guys, this story happened in Georgia, but I just omitted the rest
> > of the title (link below) because it could have happened where I live.
> > And indeed it has happened to me even more scary.
>
> <snip>
>
> As both a bicyclist and a motorcyclist, I am really shocked (not really) at
> the hate directed at bike riders in the above posts.
>
> We, as motorcyclists, have more in common with bicyclists than cagers. *Like
> it or not, we are on the same team.
>
> Share the road.
>
> Those of you complaining about riders two abreast, I hope you understand why
> some of us don't tolerate Harley parades. Self righteous pricks I say. Both
> of 'em.
>
> Yeah, make fun of spandex, and I reserve the right to laugh at chaps and
> leather vests. You are all a bunch of selfish people. *Me, Me, Me!
>
> Share the road with our 2 wheeled friends. *Get off you ass and ride a bike
> in traffic, I double dog dare you, are you man (or women) ennough?
>
> All you loud pipes folks talk of freedom and rights, well, put up or shut
> up. *Let the pedalers be free. *The roads belong to the people.
>
> Share the road. *Don't be a selfish ass.

When I ride my motorcycle, I don't hold up trafic. If I'm riding
slow, I ride in the right lane. If its a 2 lane road, I pull over to
let faster traffic go by. If Im on my biciclye, I ride on the
sidewalk where I can & the bike lane wear there is one, and othewise
stayt as far to the right as I can. I don't holdpeeps up. So when I
drive my car, I get mad/frustraited when someone else (motorcycle,
bicycle, or car/truck/SUV) holds up the flow of traffic. Its
definitly more dangerous to the person doing it tho if their riding
abicycle.

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 17, 4:34*pm, "Road Glidin' Don" > wrote:
> On Oct 17, 2:27*pm, BrianNZ > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > KingOfTheApes wrote:
> > > On Oct 16, 8:10 pm, Tim McNamara > wrote:
> > >> In article >,
>
> > >> *bugbear > wrote:
> > >>> ComandanteBanana wrote:
> > >>>> There's only one side you can be on, if you know what I mean.
> > >>> The concept of "you're either with us or against us" does not have a
> > >>> noble history.
> > >> Nice summation.
>
> > > "You are either with bicycles or against bicycles" sounds like a
> > > reasonable way to draw the lines...
>
> > > By the way, where do motorcyclists stand? ;)
>
> > Just as POTUS managed to alienate a lot of support from the middle
> > ground with his 'with us or against us' rhetoric, so will anyone else
> > who tries the same thing. I don't really care about bicycles as long as
> > they don't block the flow of traffic.....I'm certainly not 'with' them,
> > so I guess I will just have to move to the other camp and start going
> > out of my way to make their lives more miserable.
>
> You do realize you're trying to out-argue a mental midget who lives in
> his Mom's basement, right?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Yeah sure, then why are afraid to debate the issues, and always try to
dodge the bullet so to speak.

Bicyclists are in the vanguard of the revolution because the rest of
you out there burn oil from Venezuela and the Middle East and would be
happy to have a Chavez or... what's the name of Iran's president?

So we preach by example, not fly a little flag made in China.

So now where do you stand?

By the way, Chavez says we are sinking ship, but then...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo Baggins
President Chavez sees america as sinking ship
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/world/story/53087.html

***

If American ship goes down, Chinese ship goes down, and Venezuelan
ship goes does down.

That's why is better to plan the revolution around bananas, not oil!

Your own people can always eat the banana. ;)

[Tim McNamara]

In article
>,
Twibil > wrote:

> On Oct 17, 8:55*am, KingOfTheApes >
> wrote:
>
> > The bottom line is MAKE BIKE LANES, OR TAME TRAFFIC OR GO TO
> > HOLLAND.
>
> The bottom line is:
>
> (A) Why should the huge majority of taxpaying motorists have to give
> up any of their lanes for you, much less pay their taxes to build new
> ones just for you to use?
>
> You want new lanes, pay for 'em yourselves.

Dude, like most cyclists I pay an assload of taxes that fund the roads
already. Taxes on my house, taxes on my income, taxes on the car that
sits in front of my house when I'm riding my bike. No different than
most everybody else.

> (B) "Tame traffic" is just code for "make everyone else slow down to
> match *MY* speed"; and the answer is "NO".
>
> (C) I think I prefer to stay here and occasionally put the fear of
> God into lane-blocking bicyclists. It's *good* for 'em!

Don't say we didn't warn you. :-D

[Tim McNamara]

In article
>,
"Road Glidin' Don" > wrote:

> On Oct 17, 1:47*pm, Tim McNamara > wrote:
> > In article m>,
> >
> > *"Vito" > wrote:
> > > "Tim McNamara" > wrote
> > > > Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than
> > > > riding motorcycles? *I think you'd need to find some way to
> > > > back up your claim.
> >
> > > It only seems that way to you because they think like you. People
> > > commonly believe those more intellegent than they are stupid
> > > simply because their higher logic is beyond them. *Your demand
> > > that I "back up" what should be obvious to even the most casual
> > > observer is an excellent example of that.
> >
> > LOL! *Thanks for the irony.
>
> Hey dumb****. Remember:
>
> "I only see posts form this idiot when someone responds to him (like
> you). Put him in your killfile, life is much too short to waste
> telling trolls to shut up."
>
> You feeding the same troll's thread... now THAT'S irony.

I'm not responding to the troll, knucklehead. I'm responding, in this
case, to the idiot. Mainly because it's fun watching you.

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 17, 8:32*pm, Tim McNamara > wrote:

> > (C) I think I prefer to stay here and occasionally put the fear of
> > God into lane-blocking bicyclists. It's *good* for 'em!
>
> Don't say we didn't warn you. *:-D

I fear for my life while riding a bike in America. I hear Holland is
very open to political refugees...

Originally Posted by cudak888
Is that what you're advocating? If so, you ought to think twice about
your ultimatums. You're not obligated to ride as others do (legally),
but I'll be rightfully ticked off if someone tries to force their type
of riding on me.

-Kurt

***

Oh, I don't advocate moving to Holland, just that I keep getting
disapointed with the first two options, ie. bike lanes and traffic
calming.

Perhaps we can claim political prosecution upon arriving to Holland.

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
Tim McNamara > writes:
> In article >,
> bugbear > wrote:
>
>> ComandanteBanana wrote:
>> > There's only one side you can be on, if you know what I mean.
>>
>> The concept of "you're either with us or against us" does not have a
>> noble history.
>
> Nice summation.

I've heard that some (not all) bicycling advocacy groups
can have that ideological attitude (yer either furrous
or a Guinness) if one doesn't share their ideas of bike
lanes being slap-dashed everywhere as a "safety" panacea.

Sg't Simian here ostensibly wants bike lanes
slap-dashed everywhere as a safety panacea.
That's his purported "revolution," although
I remain convinced he just wants to frighten
bicyclists off the road. My conjecture is
supported by his prepondency to crosspost to
certain newsgroups which are guaranteed to
evoke anti-bicyclist responses from socially
inept, *-trash peckerwoo .. erm ... ~people~,
who talk about "jousting" with 2x4s from
dirty ol' pickup trucks from which a bunch
of Wendy's wrappers and fall out onto the
road off the floorboard every time a door
is opened.

Of course, there's always the other side of the coin --
those who ideologically don't want bike lanes installed
anywhere at all.

Personally I prefer a middle-of-the-road approach.
I believe bike lanes can be useful treatments in
certain localized situations. Same as left turn
bays/advanced left-turn-only lights at problem
intersections. But installing those things /everywhere/
would kill us with frustration, at needless expense.

I guess we don't need a revolution. Just some
improvement, and intelligent application, and
traffic engineers who possess some insight and
an ear & mind open to the occaisional needs of
/everybody/ who constitutes traffic, including
bicyclists. Fortunately, such creatures do exist.
All we've gotta do is identify them, and communicate
with them.

Revolutions are for when The System doesn't work.
But it's been my experience that The System
/does/ work when we approach it with arguments
that transcend "special interest," and connote
the "general good." Politicians love to take
credit for stuff that makes more people happy
than unhappy. They also like to get critics
off their backs.


cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
Tim McNamara > writes:
> Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than riding
> motorcycles?

Because we bicyclists have to read the minds of the
motor vehicle operators around us. We often
have to do their thinking for them. We know what
they're gonna do before they know what they're
gonna do. Because what they're gonna do is gonna
be the most detrimental thing to us if we aren't
heads-up about their brainless movements.

And besides, bicycles are often a more intelligent
choice of vehicle.


cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 17, 9:15*pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:

> Revolutions are for when The System doesn't work.
> But it's been my experience that The System
> /does/ work when we approach it with arguments
> that transcend "special interest," and connote
> the "general good." *Politicians love to take
> credit for stuff that makes more people happy
> than unhappy. *They also like to get critics
> off their backs.
>
> cheers,
> * * * * Tom

I don't know. I feel like taking desperate steps...

Can I claim political refugee in Holland if I fear for my life while
riding a bike in America? I know they welcome refugees from all over
the world, even those who don't respect Dutch open ways toward
democracy.

I could actually prove that I promote the Dutch model for America and
other uncivilized places where cyclists are routinely harassed,
prosecuted and spit upon.

What do you think?

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 17, 9:28*pm, Twibil > wrote:

> > Don't say we didn't warn you. *:-D
>
> Feel free. Any time 200 pounds of bicyclist+bike decide to argue with
> 700+ pounds of motorcyclist, or, better yet, 3,000+ pounds of
> automobile, they're going to lose.

Isn't that the Law of the Jungle?

I've been hesitating to go into the jungle lately. ;)

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
ComandanteBanana > writes:
> On Oct 17, 9:15*pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
>> Revolutions are for when The System doesn't work.
>> But it's been my experience that The System
>> /does/ work when we approach it with arguments
>> that transcend "special interest," and connote
>> the "general good." *Politicians love to take
>> credit for stuff that makes more people happy
>> than unhappy. *They also like to get critics
>> off their backs.
>>
>> cheers,
>> * * * * Tom
> I don't know. I feel like taking desperate steps...

We know already.

You yack, yack, yack, but you don't /do/.

You say you want a revolution but all you do
is plant seeds of FUD. You stir-up contention,
pit people against people, and attempt to destroy
any positive inroads that have been made to integrate
bicycling as a regular & accepted feature of traffic.

In short: you are truly anti-socially and
anti-humanly evil. I see you for what you are.

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
Twibil > writes:
> On Oct 17, 8:55*am, KingOfTheApes > wrote:
>> The bottom line is MAKE BIKE LANES, OR TAME TRAFFIC OR GO TO
>> HOLLAND.
> The bottom line is:
> (A) Why should the huge majority of taxpaying motorists have to give
> up any of their lanes for you, much less pay their taxes to build new
> ones just for you to use?

At least the outside lane is for /all/ vehicles, regardless of
speed. If you wanna pass slower vehicles, go to the inside
lane. It's pretty easy. A li'l turn of the steering wheel
(that's what it's for.)
> You want new lanes, pay for 'em yourselves.

Everybody, driver or not, pays for drivers' lanes.
I'm a non-driver. I pay for your lanes. I also
pay for many of your parking spots. So gimme a
break already.

> (B) "Tame traffic" is just code for "make everyone else slow down to
> match *MY* speed"; and the answer is "NO".

Apparently you want that horror to continue.

Actually traffic calming is about mitigating hurting/killing
people. Taming-traffic/traffic-calming is all about assuaging
high-volume commuter traffic on adjacent residential streets
that drivers infiltrate to turn into arterial feeder streets.

But if you want to run-over, or feel the right or need to run-over
little girls playing hopscotch in traffic-calmed residential
streets in your rush to get home after work, I guess nobody
can stop ya.

> (C) I think I prefer to stay here and occasionally put the fear of God
> into lane-blocking bicyclists. It's *good* for 'em!

You're ****ed up with hatred.
It surely must suck to be you.


--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[Road Glidin' Don]

On Fri, 17 Oct 2008 16:58:52 -0700 (PDT), ComandanteBanana
> wrote:

>On Oct 17, 4:34*pm, "Road Glidin' Don" > wrote:
>>
>> You do realize you're trying to out-argue a mental midget who lives in
>> his Mom's basement, right?
>
>Yeah sure, then why are afraid to debate the issues, and always try to
>dodge the bullet so to speak.
>
>Bicyclists are in the vanguard of the revolution because the rest of
>you out there burn oil from Venezuela and the Middle East and would be
>happy to have a Chavez or... what's the name of Iran's president?
>
>So we preach by example, not fly a little flag made in China.
>
>So now where do you stand?
>
>By the way, Chavez says we are sinking ship, but then...
>
>Quote:
>Originally Posted by Bilbo Baggins
>President Chavez sees america as sinking ship
>http://www.mcclatchydc.com/world/story/53087.html
>
>***
>
>If American ship goes down, Chinese ship goes down, and Venezuelan
>ship goes does down.
>
>That's why is better to plan the revolution around bananas, not oil!
>
>Your own people can always eat the banana. ;)

First motorcyclists are good because you imagine they might be allies
on your pet project.

Then you discover you're shunned by them, so now they're the enemy.
Problem is, you've already cross-posted to us in hopes of support (no
rec.auto is there?).

You've just demonstrated that you adopt whichever position you want in
order to make yourself feel like a significant somebody. After all,
that's the whole point with impotent losers like yourself, isn't it?
No girlfriend and living in your mom's basement, you don't have much
else in life to feel good about. You think it doesn't show, banana
boy?

And, speaking of bananas, that style of seat you sit on? It's gonna
result in scar tissue on that little noodle between your legs. Not
that you're ever going to use it to procreate anyways...

[Road Glidin' Don]

On Fri, 17 Oct 2008 19:34:21 -0500, Tim McNamara
> wrote:

>In article
>,
> "Road Glidin' Don" > wrote:
>
>> On Oct 17, 1:47*pm, Tim McNamara > wrote:
>> > In article m>,
>> >
>> > *"Vito" > wrote:
>> > > "Tim McNamara" > wrote
>> > > > Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than
>> > > > riding motorcycles? *I think you'd need to find some way to
>> > > > back up your claim.
>> >
>> > > It only seems that way to you because they think like you. People
>> > > commonly believe those more intellegent than they are stupid
>> > > simply because their higher logic is beyond them. *Your demand
>> > > that I "back up" what should be obvious to even the most casual
>> > > observer is an excellent example of that.
>> >
>> > LOL! *Thanks for the irony.
>>
>> Hey dumb****. Remember:
>>
>> "I only see posts form this idiot when someone responds to him (like
>> you). Put him in your killfile, life is much too short to waste
>> telling trolls to shut up."
>>
>> You feeding the same troll's thread... now THAT'S irony.
>
>I'm not responding to the troll, knucklehead. I'm responding, in this
>case, to the idiot. Mainly because it's fun watching you.

Yeah, but I only see posts form that idiot when someone responds to
him (like you). Put him in your killfile, life is much too short to
waste telling trolls to shut up.

[[email protected]]

Tom Keats wrote:

>> Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than
>> riding motorcycles?

> Because we bicyclists have to read the minds of the motor vehicle
> operators around us. We often have to do their thinking for them.
> We know what they're gonna do before they know what they're gonna
> do. Because what they're gonna do is gonna be the most detrimental
> thing to us if we aren't heads-up about their brainless movements.

> And besides, bicycles are often a more intelligent choice of
> vehicle.

I think these two postings are examples of what causes trouble on many
roads. It is an elitist attitude of bicyclists who let car drivers
know how much smarter they are and how much more environmentally their
bicycle (recreation) is than driving a car. As I have often mentioned
here, I ride on many narrow, heavily traveled roads in the Santa Cruz
mountains and rarely have differences with car traffic, except when
with a rider who has the elitist bicyclist mentality.

What may not be apparent to many self righteous bicyclists is that
their body language reveals their disdain for motorized traffic,
eliciting rude and often dangerous behavior in response. As for mind
reading, it doesn't take a seer to understand what the bicyclist out
in the traffic lane is trying to say about his motorized fellow human.

> Nothing is safe from me.

Don't ride near me.

Jobst Brandt

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
writes:

> I think these two postings are examples of what causes trouble on many
> roads.

You are totally wrong.

It is an elitist attitude of bicyclists who let car drivers
> know how much smarter they are and how much more environmentally their
> bicycle (recreation) is than driving a car.

No it isn't.

As I have often mentioned
> here, I ride on many narrow, heavily traveled roads in the Santa Cruz
> mountains and rarely have differences with car traffic, except when
> with a rider who has the elitist bicyclist mentality.

Good for you. Bully for you!

> What may not be apparent to many self righteous bicyclists is that
> their body language reveals their disdain for motorized traffic,
> eliciting rude and often dangerous behavior in response. As for mind
> reading, it doesn't take a seer to understand what the bicyclist out
> in the traffic lane is trying to say about his motorized fellow I.
>
human could try to explain it, but ... <sigh>

>> Nothing is safe from me.
>
> Don't ride near me.

Don't worry. I know where I'm not wanted.
Which is pretty much everywhere.

So, we can pretty much avoid each other,
and not get anywhere, nor achieve anything.

Thank you for your kind input.

May the Almighty bless you. But I steer
clear of everybody, which is just what
you want, so be happy.

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[Jym Dyer]

> You are a loser. I don't think you ride either a bicycle
> or motorcycle.

=v= I'm familiar with both (and I think it takes/indicates
more brains to ride a bicycle than a motorcycle).

> Maybe an SUV.

=v= I have not had a motor vehicle of any kind for 18 years.
My primary means of transportation for that time, for most of
my adult life and most of my childhood, has been a bicycle.
<_Jym_>

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
Jym Dyer > writes:
>>> I don't know. I feel like taking desperate steps...
>
> =v= ... in front of an oncoming SUV ...

Nah, we don't want anybody to get killed.

>> In short: you [ComandanteBanana] are truly anti-socially
>> and anti-humanly evil. I see you for what you are.
>
> =v= Also, he's no comandante, because nobody would ever be
> stupid enough to follow him.

He's a plant by a drivers' special interest group[s]
who wants to scare bicyclists off the streets & roads.

> (Whatever became of Generalissimo
> Ape****, who used to take him down a notch on this point?)

I guess he realized Monkey Boy shoots himself in the foot.
Might as well let him go ahead. Or he just doesn't have
the time to waste anymore.

> Also, he's no king of the apes, because even apes wouldn't
> be stupid enough to follow him.

That would be a character created by Edgar Rice Burroughs --
a white boy, airdropped into the depths of the African continent,
orphaned, and more savvy about the environs than the indiginous
locals, because the gorillas who subsequently raised him thought
he was somehow too "special" to bash his head in with a big rock
and eat him. I guess it's a Rudyard Kipling kind of thing.

Biologically, humans /are/ Great Apes, along with
chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas and orangutans.
So, since our "lyric" revolutionary/Pied Piper
claims to be king of us all, he presents himself
as someone suffering some sort of messiach complex.


cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 17, 9:15*pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:

> Revolutions are for when The System doesn't work.
> But it's been my experience that The System
> /does/ work when we approach it with arguments
> that transcend "special interest," and connote
> the "general good." *Politicians love to take
> credit for stuff that makes more people happy
> than unhappy. *They also like to get critics
> off their backs.
>
> cheers,
> * * * * Tom

First off, the Banana Revolution is for Banana Republics and Canada is
not known to grow bananas, even if there's no civilized behavior on
its roads either. Anyway here's the perfect scenario for it...

Originally Posted by -=£em in Pa=-
"Florida is the only place Ive ever lived where I can maintain a
20+mph average.
As stated to the point of painful redndancy, the 3rd world environment
makes
cycling a very undesirable activity to most people anywhere off of the
usual
scenic/tourist routes."

I call it Banana Republic environment, albeit a rather sophisticated
one... Actually it decided the elections the changed the meaning of
democracy...

US: A Sophisticated Banana Republic
The Times of India, December 17, 2000
The US is not on par with banana republics where the winner of a
presidential election is known long before election day. But the US
Supreme Court has just said in an amazing verdict on the Bush-Gore
dispute that Americans have no fundamental right to vote in a
presidential election. In that case, the US looks like and smells like
a banana, no matter howsophisticated its procedures.

http://banana-republic.net/20001217_us_banana.html

http://banana-republic.net/

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 17, 9:29*pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
> In article >,
> * * * * Tim McNamara > writes:
>
> > Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than riding
> > motorcycles?
>
> Because we bicyclists have to read the minds of the
> motor vehicle operators around us. *We often
> have to do their thinking for them. *We know what
> they're gonna do before they know what they're
> gonna do. *Because what they're gonna do is gonna
> be the most detrimental thing to us if we aren't
> heads-up about their brainless movements.
>
> And besides, bicycles are often a more intelligent
> choice of vehicle.
>
> cheers,
> * * * * Tom

You contradict your claim to being smart when you refuse to bring here
the bike facilities that work elsewhere. But it ain't so much that you
are stupid, it's simply that you are elitist and are selfish as
such...

I quote here from someone who have figured out that your kind should
shut up and mind your own business..

"First thing I would do would be to purge snobbish/elitist advocates
from leadership or policy making positions at any publicly funded
bicycling advocacy/educational organization; i.e. the clubby
enthusiast type who believes cycling skill (or advocacy goals) is
defined by being a racer (like himself) or a cyclist (like himself)
who moves consistently at speeds greater than 12mph."

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?p=7688868&posted=1#post7688868

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 17, 9:45*pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
> In article >,
> * * * * ComandanteBanana > writes:
>
> > On Oct 17, 9:15*pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
> >> Revolutions are for when The System doesn't work.
> >> But it's been my experience that The System
> >> /does/ work when we approach it with arguments
> >> that transcend "special interest," and connote
> >> the "general good." *Politicians love to take
> >> credit for stuff that makes more people happy
> >> than unhappy. *They also like to get critics
> >> off their backs.
>
> >> cheers,
> >> * * * * Tom
> > I don't know. I feel like taking desperate steps...
>
> We know already.
>
> You yack, yack, yack, but you don't /do/.
>
> You say you want a revolution but all you do
> is plant seeds of FUD. *You stir-up contention,
> pit people against people, and attempt to destroy
> any positive inroads that have been made to integrate
> bicycling as a regular & accepted feature of traffic.
>
> In short: you are truly anti-socially and
> anti-humanly evil. *I see you for what you are.

You are an elitist bicyclist that is as selfish as those behind the
wheel of an SUV.

But of course, you are in the revolution... You are a collaborator,
right? ;)

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 17, 11:02*pm, (Road Glidin' Don) wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Oct 2008 16:58:52 -0700 (PDT), ComandanteBanana
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> >On Oct 17, 4:34*pm, "Road Glidin' Don" > wrote:
>
> >> You do realize you're trying to out-argue a mental midget who lives in
> >> his Mom's basement, right?
>
> >Yeah sure, then why are afraid to debate the issues, and always try to
> >dodge the bullet so to speak.
>
> >Bicyclists are in the vanguard of the revolution because the rest of
> >you out there burn oil from Venezuela and the Middle East and would be
> >happy to have a Chavez or... what's the name of Iran's president?
>
> >So we preach by example, not fly a little flag made in China.
>
> >So now where do you stand?
>
> >By the way, Chavez says we are sinking ship, but then...
>
> >Quote:
> >Originally Posted by Bilbo Baggins
> >President Chavez sees america as sinking ship
> >http://www.mcclatchydc.com/world/story/53087.html
>
> >***
>
> >If American ship goes down, Chinese ship goes down, and Venezuelan
> >ship goes does down.
>
> >That's why is better to plan the revolution around bananas, not oil!
>
> >Your own people can always eat the banana. ;)
>
> First motorcyclists are good because you imagine they might be allies
> on your pet project. *
>
> Then you discover you're shunned by them, so now they're the enemy.
> Problem is, you've already cross-posted to us in hopes of support (no
> rec.auto is there?).
>
> You've just demonstrated that you adopt whichever position you want in
> order to make yourself feel like a significant somebody. *After all,
> that's the whole point with impotent losers like yourself, isn't it?
> No girlfriend and living in your mom's basement, you don't have much
> else in life to feel good about. *You think it doesn't show, banana
> boy?
>
> And, speaking of bananas, that style of seat you sit on? *It's gonna
> result in scar tissue on that little noodle between your legs. *Not
> that you're ever going to use it to procreate anyways...- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I just give up any effort to rescue the monkey within you. I think
your sheepish comes through... baaah!

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 17, 11:04*pm, wrote:
> Tom Keats wrote:
> >> Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than
> >> riding motorcycles?
> > Because we bicyclists have to read the minds of the motor vehicle
> > operators around us. *We often have to do their thinking for them.
> > We know what they're gonna do before they know what they're gonna
> > do. *Because what they're gonna do is gonna be the most detrimental
> > thing to us if we aren't heads-up about their brainless movements.
> > And besides, bicycles are often a more intelligent choice of
> > vehicle.
>
> I think these two postings are examples of what causes trouble on many
> roads. *It is an elitist attitude of bicyclists who let car drivers
> know how much smarter they are and how much more environmentally their
> bicycle (recreation) is than driving a car. *As I have often mentioned
> here, I ride on many narrow, heavily traveled roads in the Santa Cruz
> mountains and rarely have differences with car traffic, except when
> with a rider who has the elitist bicyclist mentality.
>
> What may not be apparent to many self righteous bicyclists is that
> their body language reveals their disdain for motorized traffic,
> eliciting rude and often dangerous behavior in response. *As for mind
> reading, it doesn't take a seer to understand what the bicyclist out
> in the traffic lane is trying to say about his motorized fellow human.
>
> > Nothing is safe from me.
>
> Don't ride near me.
>
> Jobst Brandt

Some of the elitist cyclists (not to be confused with the elite
cyclists) are just selfish that want to be like the lion, and yet they
look like a parrot in their colorful lycra suits...

THE PARROT THAT KNEW HOW TO ROAR

Once upon a time, in the deep jungle, there was a Parrot whose
capacity to mimic others impressed everybody. One day, observing that
all the little animals panicked when the King of the Jungle roared,
and fearing for his own life, he learned to roar himself... It
occurred to him that he could form an alliance with the Lion and
partake of his feasts, and even, why not, be revered like a king...

One time, however, the Lion --who happened to be running out of little
animals to hunt and was mighty hungry-- noticed the Parrot, and
roared: "You are exactly what you I'm looking for!" and gulped him
down amid the bird's cries of, "I'm a lion too!"

***

Hey, wannabe lions, don't you understand that everybody hates you?
Including the lion? ;)

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 18, 12:51*am, (Tom Keats) wrote:
> In article >,
> * * * * writes:
>
> > I think these two postings are examples of what causes trouble on many
> > roads.
>
> You are totally wrong.
>
> * It is an elitist attitude of bicyclists who let car drivers
>
> > know how much smarter they are and how much more environmentally their
> > bicycle (recreation) is than driving a car.
>
> No it isn't.
>
> * As I have often mentioned
>
> > here, I ride on many narrow, heavily traveled roads in the Santa Cruz
> > mountains and rarely have differences with car traffic, except when
> > with a rider who has the elitist bicyclist mentality.
>
> Good for you. *Bully for you!

Hey, if you **** off the bull, you may get gored.

OK, my plan calls for separate bike facilities and taming traffic, but
not slower by any means, just smarter. Bring experts from Germany
(unlimited speeds) and Holland (bike facilities), and retire 50% of
drivers. Yes, we are better off with them riding bikes. ;)

Of course, that's also the official position of the revolution.

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 18, 3:56 am, Jym Dyer > wrote:
> >> I don't know. I feel like taking desperate steps...
>
> =v= ... in front of an oncoming SUV ...
>
> > In short: you [ComandanteBanana] are truly anti-socially
> > and anti-humanly evil. I see you for what you are.
>
> =v= Also, he's no comandante, because nobody would ever be
> stupid enough to follow him. (Whatever became of Generalissimo
> Ape****, who used to take him down a notch on this point?)
> Also, he's no king of the apes, because even apes wouldn't
> be stupid enough to follow him.
> <_Jym_>

Maybe the sheep are not smart enough to follow the ape.

You prefer the wolf in the sheep's clothing.

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 18, 12:48 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:

> Biologically, humans /are/ Great Apes, along with
> chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas and orangutans.
> So, since our "lyric" revolutionary/Pied Piper
> claims to be king of us all, he presents himself
> as someone suffering some sort of messiach complex.

You are not an ape, you have the brain of a lesser monkey. Now dance a
little bit, stupid monkey...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_EyXPs2_Jk

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

aka Jobst Brandt wrote:
> Tom Keats wrote:
>
>>> Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than
>>> riding motorcycles?
>
>> Because we bicyclists have to read the minds of the motor vehicle
>> operators around us. We often have to do their thinking for them.
>> We know what they're gonna do before they know what they're gonna
>> do. Because what they're gonna do is gonna be the most detrimental
>> thing to us if we aren't heads-up about their brainless movements.
>
>> And besides, bicycles are often a more intelligent choice of
>> vehicle.
>
> I think these two postings are examples of what causes trouble on many
> roads. It is an elitist attitude of bicyclists who let car drivers
> know how much smarter they are and how much more environmentally their
> bicycle (recreation) is than driving a car. As I have often mentioned
> here, I ride on many narrow, heavily traveled roads in the Santa Cruz
> mountains and rarely have differences with car traffic, except when
> with a rider who has the elitist bicyclist mentality.
>
I typically see less than a dozen cyclists per week while driving, and
typically pass less than 10 per month, so motorists being held up by
cyclists is hardly a common occurrence. Yet, the same anti-cyclist
attitude can be encountered. It has nothing to do with the behavior of
cyclists, and everything to do with people who grew up as privileged
spoiled brats who have to have their way (literally in this case).

"How dare you take your rightful share of the road!"

These are the same people who run red lights, jump their turn at 4-way
stops, pass on the shoulder in congested urban freeway traffic, tailgate
people in the right lane with their "brights" on instead of passing to
the left.

> What may not be apparent to many self righteous bicyclists is that
> their body language reveals their disdain for motorized traffic,
> eliciting rude and often dangerous behavior in response. As for mind
> reading, it doesn't take a seer to understand what the bicyclist out
> in the traffic lane is trying to say about his motorized fellow human.
>
Relying on motorists to pass at a close distance is foolish,
particularly drivers of wide SUV's, truck and vans that are
multi-tasking (eating, talking on the phone, etcetera). Unless the lane
is extra wide (e.g. right lanes on certain urban arterials), or there is
a vacant parking lane or paved shoulder, taking the lane is the only
sensible choice.

"God forbid that I get delayed a few seconds on my way to the mall, and
have to moved my foot from the throttle to the brake and back!"

>> Nothing is safe from me.
>
> Don't ride near me.
>
Is Vancouver near Palo Alto?

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

KingOfTheApes aka anti-cycling troll wrote:
> On Oct 17, 9:29 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
>> In article >,
>> Tim McNamara > writes:
>>
>>> Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than riding
>>> motorcycles?
>> Because we bicyclists have to read the minds of the
>> motor vehicle operators around us. We often
>> have to do their thinking for them. We know what
>> they're gonna do before they know what they're
>> gonna do. Because what they're gonna do is gonna
>> be the most detrimental thing to us if we aren't
>> heads-up about their brainless movements.
>>
>> And besides, bicycles are often a more intelligent
>> choice of vehicle.
>>
>> cheers,
>> Tom
>
> You contradict your claim to being smart when you refuse to bring here
> the bike facilities that work elsewhere. But it ain't so much that you
> are stupid, it's simply that you are elitist and are selfish as
> such...
>
If you actually rode a bicycle, you would understand why "bicycle lanes"
are separate and unequal facilities.

> I quote here from someone who have figured out that your kind should
> shut up and mind your own business..
>
> "First thing I would do would be to purge snobbish/elitist advocates
> from leadership or policy making positions at any publicly funded
> bicycling advocacy/educational organization; i.e. the clubby
> enthusiast type who believes cycling skill (or advocacy goals) is
> defined by being a racer (like himself) or a cyclist (like himself)
> who moves consistently at speeds greater than 12mph."
>
> http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?p=7688868&posted=1#post7688868

Yes, let us put the cyclists in a ghetto bike lane to keep them out of
the way of the superior motorists!

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

ComandanteBanana aka anti-cyclist troll wrote:
> On Oct 15, 6:55 pm, BrianNZ > wrote:
>> KingOfTheApes wrote:
>>> On Oct 15, 5:40 pm, "Vito" > wrote:
>>>> "ComandanteBanana" > wrote
>>>>> Halfway down the hill, a LOUD horn almost caused me to wreck! ....
>>>> Of course you were going as fast as cars on the same road do, right?
>>> Well, I only relay the story. The point is that never, ever a car
>>> should be pick up on a cyclist or motorcyclist without the risk of
>>> being tried for terrorism.
>>> It happened to me where the guy wanted to play vigilante to enforce a
>>> "walk your bike on sidewalk" on a bridge whose sidewalk is barely wide
>>> enough to walk. It's only 2 1/2 ' wide while he enjoyed two lanes all
>>> to himself. He blasted the horn to scare me away, and I gave him the
>>> finger.
>>> Bad move where the big fish felt the need to do justice. Better
>>> strategy for me is NEVER to go where the terrorists feel the right to
>>> kill, and stay away from the jungle.
>> No, get off the road and go ride in the jungle. You expect motorists to
>> obey the rules, yet pick and choose which ones you want to obey.
>>
>> As long as a cyclist isn't impeding the flow of traffic, there is no
>> problem. The problem is when some lycra clad tour de france wannabe
>> abuses his 'right' to be on the road by not keeping out of the traffic
>> flow.....figuring his right is more important than the hundreds of
>> motorists who get the trickle down stop start ripple.
>>
>> If I see a cyclists on the open road I will treat them as a car if there
>> is no oncoming traffic and move over the centreline. If there is
>> oncoming traffic and the group stay at the legal but inconsiderate two
>> abrest, I will move as wide as the oncoming vehicle allows me (Often the
>> oncoming cars will pull right over to make room, why can't cyclists in a
>> group show the same consideration?). If it hugs the centreline, so will
>> I and the cyclists get a wind blast.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> The commuters and other practical cyclists and the elite cyclists are
> two different animal species.
>
Dude, the transportational cyclists ARE the elite (in the best sense of
the word) cyclists.

> I'm afraid is the latter that want to block any effort to make bike
> lanes and other bike facilities. They ride fairly fast and almost go
> as fast as slow traffic, so they feel safer. But once in a while are
> wiped out too by reckless drivers too.
>
> Of course, everyone is at risk, including motorcyclists. Different
> medal for them, though. ;)

The commuters are hampered by the "bicycle lanes" that get them "right
hooked" by motorists and put them in more danger when needing to make a
left turn.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

S'mee wrote:
> On Oct 16, 1:58 pm, KingOfTheApes
>
> SNIP
>> Maybe motorcyclists do it for looks when they refuse to wear a helmet.
>
> No it looks stupid to not wear a helmet. Regardless of whether you
> ride a bicycle or a motorcycle. If you choose not to...let the
> consequences be on your head. Me I'm wearing a helmet.[...]
>
There are NO properly done studies that show that BICYCLE helmets have
any significant effect in reducing serious head injuries or deaths.

The much heavier motorcycle helmet should not be compared to the foam
bicycle hat.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

Twibil ? wrote:
> On Oct 17, 5:32 pm, Tim McNamara > wrote:
>
>>> (A) Why should the huge majority of taxpaying motorists have to give
>>> up any of their lanes for you, much less pay their taxes to build new
>>> ones just for you to use?
>>> You want new lanes, pay for 'em yourselves.
>> Dude, like most cyclists I pay an assload of taxes that fund the roads
>> already. Taxes on my house, taxes on my income, taxes on the car that
>> sits in front of my house when I'm riding my bike. No different than
>> most everybody else.
>
> That's right: "No different than most anybody else". So why do you
> expect special treatment in the form of lanes dedicated only to *your*
> usage?
>
Dude, real bicycles do NOT want bicycle ghetto lanes. "BananaApe Boy"
does NOT speak for cyclists.

> Motorcyclist lane-split; we don't expect anybody to build special
> lanes just for us.
>
"Bicycle lane" promoters are either misguided or anti-cyclist. The real
purpose of "bicycle lanes" is to ghettoize cyclists out of the way of
motorists.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

[S'mee]

On Oct 18, 12:15*pm, KingOfTheApes >
wrote:
> On Oct 18, 3:56 am, Jym Dyer > wrote:
>
> > >> I don't know. I feel like taking desperate steps...
>
> > =v= ... in front of an oncoming SUV ...
>
> > > In short: you [ComandanteBanana] are truly anti-socially
> > > and anti-humanly evil. *I see you for what you are.
>
> > =v= Also, he's no comandante, because nobody would ever be
> > stupid enough to follow him. *(Whatever became of Generalissimo
> > Ape****, who used to take him down a notch on this point?)
> > Also, he's no king of the apes, because even apes wouldn't
> > be stupid enough to follow him.
> > * * <_Jym_>
>
> Maybe the sheep are not smart enough to follow the ape.
>
> You prefer the wolf in the sheep's clothing.

You called? Your pathetic "revolution" is less well thought than a
greek communist revolution. ALL will bow down to their superiors the
motorcyclists...Join the club now and get 40% off your club jacket
today (club colours cost extra, prices may vary due to jurisdictions)

--
Keith

[S'mee]

On Oct 18, 9:22*pm, Tom Sherman >
wrote:
> S'mee wrote:
> > On Oct 16, 1:58 pm, KingOfTheApes
>
> > SNIP
> >> Maybe motorcyclists do it for looks when they refuse to wear a helmet.
>
> > No it looks stupid to not wear a helmet. Regardless of whether you
> > ride a bicycle or a motorcycle. If you choose not to...let the
> > consequences be on your head. Me I'm wearing a helmet.[...]
>
> There are NO properly done studies that show that BICYCLE helmets have
> any significant effect in reducing serious head injuries or deaths.
>
> The much heavier motorcycle helmet should not be compared to the foam
> bicycle hat.

Something is better than nothing. Not only that but nobody that I'm
aware of has the guts to do it right in the bicycling world. Too hung
up on having the wind in their hair...fading though it is.

Oh and if I ever see another bunch riding abreast...I'm punting them.
It's illegal to do that and frankly as a bicyclist and a motorcyclist
I'm sick and tired of you road hogs...be warned, be aware. Your lot is
has had it's fun but your time is through, no begone foul vermin.
--
Keith

[S'mee]

On Oct 18, 9:30*pm, Tom Sherman >
wrote:

Elitest scum.

Take that mass what ever the hell you call yourselves and go eat a
spoke sideways.
--
Keith

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

S'mee wrote:
> On Oct 18, 9:30 pm, Tom Sherman >
> wrote:
>
> Elitest scum.
>
Context man!

> Take that mass what ever the hell you call yourselves and go eat a
> spoke sideways.

I have never participated in a Critical Mass ride and have no plans to.
Judging all bicyclists by Critical Mass is like judging all
motorcyclists by the handful of anti-social criminal gang members.

> --

There needs to be a space after the two dashes, i.e. "-- ".

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

S'mee wrote:
> On Oct 18, 9:22 pm, Tom Sherman >
> wrote:
>> S'mee wrote:
>>> On Oct 16, 1:58 pm, KingOfTheApes
>>> SNIP
>>>> Maybe motorcyclists do it for looks when they refuse to wear a helmet.
>>> No it looks stupid to not wear a helmet. Regardless of whether you
>>> ride a bicycle or a motorcycle. If you choose not to...let the
>>> consequences be on your head. Me I'm wearing a helmet.[...]
>> There are NO properly done studies that show that BICYCLE helmets have
>> any significant effect in reducing serious head injuries or deaths.
>>
>> The much heavier motorcycle helmet should not be compared to the foam
>> bicycle hat.
>
> Something is better than nothing.

There is no evidence to prove that contention. Whole population studies
show no benefit to wearing bicycle foam hats. The minimal energy
absorption is likely offset by the greater rotation acceleration cause
by the effective increase in head diameter.

> Not only that but nobody that I'm
> aware of has the guts to do it right in the bicycling world. Too hung
> up on having the wind in their hair...fading though it is.
>
Wearing a motorcycle helmet on a hot day while cycling will result in
heat exhaustion, possible heat stroke and/or death. Try climbing a 15%
grade for several miles under your own power on a hot, humid day.

> Oh and if I ever see another bunch riding abreast...I'm punting them.
> It's illegal to do that and frankly as a bicyclist and a motorcyclist
> I'm sick and tired of you road hogs...be warned, be aware. Your lot is
> has had it's fun but your time is through, no begone foul vermin.

Your posts are not as anonymous as you think. I am sure a prosecutor
could make a great impression on a jury with this post at your trial for
vehicular homicide.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
Tom Sherman > writes:
> aka Jobst Brandt wrote:
>> Tom Keats wrote:
>>
>>>> Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than
>>>> riding motorcycles?
>>
>>> Because we bicyclists have to read the minds of the motor vehicle
>>> operators around us. We often have to do their thinking for them.
>>> We know what they're gonna do before they know what they're gonna
>>> do. Because what they're gonna do is gonna be the most detrimental
>>> thing to us if we aren't heads-up about their brainless movements.
>>
>>> And besides, bicycles are often a more intelligent choice of
>>> vehicle.
>>
>> I think these two postings are examples of what causes trouble on many
>> roads. It is an elitist attitude of bicyclists who let car drivers
>> know how much smarter they are and how much more environmentally their
>> bicycle (recreation) is than driving a car. As I have often mentioned
>> here, I ride on many narrow, heavily traveled roads in the Santa Cruz
>> mountains and rarely have differences with car traffic, except when
>> with a rider who has the elitist bicyclist mentality.
>>
> I typically see less than a dozen cyclists per week while driving, and
> typically pass less than 10 per month, so motorists being held up by
> cyclists is hardly a common occurrence. Yet, the same anti-cyclist
> attitude can be encountered. It has nothing to do with the behavior of
> cyclists, and everything to do with people who grew up as privileged
> spoiled brats who have to have their way (literally in this case).
>
> "How dare you take your rightful share of the road!"
>
> These are the same people who run red lights, jump their turn at 4-way
> stops, pass on the shoulder in congested urban freeway traffic, tailgate
> people in the right lane with their "brights" on instead of passing to
> the left.
>
>> What may not be apparent to many self righteous bicyclists is that
>> their body language reveals their disdain for motorized traffic,
>> eliciting rude and often dangerous behavior in response. As for mind
>> reading, it doesn't take a seer to understand what the bicyclist out
>> in the traffic lane is trying to say about his motorized fellow human.
>>
> Relying on motorists to pass at a close distance is foolish,
^^^^^
ITYM "safe" distance?

Anyway, I'm off to tow a trailerload of laundry a mere
15 city blocks to the laundromat, using my humble trailer
and my humble bike. Maybe do some grocery shopping on
the return leg, using my humble new Axiom Hunter[tm]
pannier-like shopping bag (which is working quite
admirably for my purposes.)

If I'm elitist for not needing a pickup truck to do all that,
so be it. While en route I'm likely to encounter drivers who
don't know how to deal with mid-intersection rotary islands.
That's okay -- I'll do their thinking for 'em, and maybe
offer words of encouragement. Sometimes drivers look like
they're making a left turn around those things when they're
actually making a U-turn around them. Gotta watch out for
that. Reading their minds helps. Reading their minds also
helps when a driver's apparent simple right turn is really
a hasty diagonal line into a driveway on the far side of the
cross street (like westbound off 33rd @ Ontario, into the
Vancouver Racquets Club.) Reading their minds isn't about
booking past them ~before~ they pull their stunts; its about
backing off, staying outa their way, and letting them get
it over with.


cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

Tom Keats wrote:
> In article >,
> Tom Sherman > writes:
>> aka Jobst Brandt wrote:
>>> Tom Keats wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than
>>>>> riding motorcycles?
>>>> Because we bicyclists have to read the minds of the motor vehicle
>>>> operators around us. We often have to do their thinking for them.
>>>> We know what they're gonna do before they know what they're gonna
>>>> do. Because what they're gonna do is gonna be the most detrimental
>>>> thing to us if we aren't heads-up about their brainless movements.
>>>> And besides, bicycles are often a more intelligent choice of
>>>> vehicle.
>>> I think these two postings are examples of what causes trouble on many
>>> roads. It is an elitist attitude of bicyclists who let car drivers
>>> know how much smarter they are and how much more environmentally their
>>> bicycle (recreation) is than driving a car. As I have often mentioned
>>> here, I ride on many narrow, heavily traveled roads in the Santa Cruz
>>> mountains and rarely have differences with car traffic, except when
>>> with a rider who has the elitist bicyclist mentality.
>>>
>> I typically see less than a dozen cyclists per week while driving, and
>> typically pass less than 10 per month, so motorists being held up by
>> cyclists is hardly a common occurrence. Yet, the same anti-cyclist
>> attitude can be encountered. It has nothing to do with the behavior of
>> cyclists, and everything to do with people who grew up as privileged
>> spoiled brats who have to have their way (literally in this case).
>>
>> "How dare you take your rightful share of the road!"
>>
>> These are the same people who run red lights, jump their turn at 4-way
>> stops, pass on the shoulder in congested urban freeway traffic, tailgate
>> people in the right lane with their "brights" on instead of passing to
>> the left.
>>
>>> What may not be apparent to many self righteous bicyclists is that
>>> their body language reveals their disdain for motorized traffic,
>>> eliciting rude and often dangerous behavior in response. As for mind
>>> reading, it doesn't take a seer to understand what the bicyclist out
>>> in the traffic lane is trying to say about his motorized fellow human.
>>>
>> Relying on motorists to pass at a close distance is foolish,
> ^^^^^
> ITYM "safe" distance?
>
No, Jobst has previously posted that he is fine with motorists (e.g.
London buses) passing cyclists at close distances. I do not agree with
leaving such a small margin for error.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

[Jym Dyer]

> I'm off to tow a trailerload of laundry a mere 15 city blocks
> to the laundromat, using my humble trailer and my humble
> bike. Maybe do some grocery shopping on the return leg ....
>
> If I'm elitist for not needing a pickup truck to do all that,
> so be it.

=v= Clearly you live in one of the parts of [North] America that
Sarah Palin characterizes as anti-American. Danged eeleetist.*
<_Jym_>

__________________________________________________ ______________
* Note that True Blue Red Scare Americans pronounce that word
the same way as Dan Quayle. None of that unpatriotic accent
agile stuff for us!

[Jym Dyer]

>>> and > = Tom Sherman

>>> Dude, real bicycles do NOT want bicycle ghetto lanes.
>>> "BananaApe Boy" does NOT speak for cyclists.

=v= Neither does Tom Sherman.

>>> "Bicycle lane" promoters are either misguided or
>>> anti-cyclist.

=v= That statement represents an ideology, not a consensus.
Many "real" bicyclists quite reasonable hold other opinions.

> Judging all bicyclists by Critical Mass is like judging
> all motorcyclists by the handful of anti-social criminal
> gang members.

=v= Absolute bull****. Tom Sherman's declaration of "criminal
gang member" status is contradicted very directly by a number
of court rulings. In the U.S., in fact, a Federal judge has in
fact ruled that "Participation in the Critical Mass bike ride
constitutes expressive association entitled to First Amendment
protection."
<_Jym_>

--
"There should be 1,000 of you out there, like in San Francisco."
-- Oakland Mayor (and now Attorney General) Jerry Brown

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
Tom Sherman > writes:

>>> Relying on motorists to pass at a close distance is foolish,
>> ^^^^^
>> ITYM "safe" distance?
>>
> No, Jobst has previously posted that he is fine with motorists (e.g.
> London buses) passing cyclists at close distances. I do not agree with
> leaving such a small margin for error.

At any rate, Jobst seems to have mistaken me as
one of the riders described in:
http://www.bicyclepaper.com/articles/2008/09/you_got_a_problem__dude

I suppose his misguided opinion of me and my riding
is ultimately mildly amusing.


cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

Jym Dyer wrote:
>>>> and > = Tom Sherman
>
>>>> Dude, real bicycles do NOT want bicycle ghetto lanes.
>>>> "BananaApe Boy" does NOT speak for cyclists.
>
> =v= Neither does Tom Sherman.
>
Most of the cyclists I have been around agree with me on the bike lanes
issue.

>>>> "Bicycle lane" promoters are either misguided or
>>>> anti-cyclist.
>
> =v= That statement represents an ideology, not a consensus.
> Many "real" bicyclists quite reasonable hold other opinions.
>
Due to irrational fears of getting run over from behind?

>> Judging all bicyclists by Critical Mass is like judging
>> all motorcyclists by the handful of anti-social criminal
>> gang members.
>
> =v= Absolute bull****. Tom Sherman's declaration of "criminal
> gang member" status is contradicted very directly by a number
> of court rulings. In the U.S., in fact, a Federal judge has in
> fact ruled that "Participation in the Critical Mass bike ride
> constitutes expressive association entitled to First Amendment
> protection."
>

Absolute misinterpretation of what I wrote. The gang members reference
was to tarring all MOTORCYCLISTS as criminals based on the action of a
very few. Similarly, most people who ride bicycles do not participate in
Critical Mass rides.

Next time read what was actually written before shooting from the hip.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

Jym Dyer wrote:
>>>> and > = Tom Sherman
>
>>>> Dude, real bicycles do NOT want bicycle ghetto lanes.
>>>> "BananaApe Boy" does NOT speak for cyclists.
>
> =v= Neither does Tom Sherman.
>
>>>> "Bicycle lane" promoters are either misguided or
>>>> anti-cyclist.
>
> =v= That statement represents an ideology, not a consensus.
> Many "real" bicyclists quite reasonable hold other opinions.
>
>> Judging all bicyclists by Critical Mass is like judging
>> all motorcyclists by the handful of anti-social criminal
>> gang members.
>
> =v= Absolute bull****. Tom Sherman's declaration of "criminal
> gang member" status is contradicted very directly by a number
> of court rulings. In the U.S., in fact, a Federal judge has in
> fact ruled that "Participation in the Critical Mass bike ride
> constitutes expressive association entitled to First Amendment
> protection."
> <_Jym_>
>

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
Jym Dyer > writes:
>> I'm off to tow a trailerload of laundry a mere 15 city blocks
>> to the laundromat, using my humble trailer and my humble
>> bike. Maybe do some grocery shopping on the return leg ....
>>
>> If I'm elitist for not needing a pickup truck to do all that,
>> so be it.
>
> =v= Clearly you live in one of the parts of [North] America that
> Sarah Palin characterizes as anti-American. Danged eeleetist.*

The laundromat/grocery shopping run was pretty good.

On my way there, an attractive woman got out of a parked car
I rode by, and she gave me a big smile. At first I put it down
to my good looks & aura of charm, but shortly later realized
she was just appreciative of my staying clear of the door zone.
Maybe she liked my trailer, too. Actually, it was one of the
smaller, car-frame SUVs that she disembarked from. One of those
fat station wagon thingies.

I note via posters I saw en route that Our Community Bikes!
is pitching an All Saints Day celebration on Nov 1. I just
might go.

Tina Palin would fit right in, in Calgary, Alberta.
Especially if she espoused a "get tough" approach
to everything.

cheers, & lately I like riding my bike 'cuz it isn't a forklift,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
Tom Sherman > writes:
>
>>>>> "Bicycle lane" promoters are either misguided or
>>>>> anti-cyclist.
>>
>> =v= That statement represents an ideology, not a consensus.
>> Many "real" bicyclists quite reasonable hold other opinions.
>>
> Due to irrational fears of getting run over from behind?

Actually, cyclists /do/ get run over from behind.
Not as much as from the front or side during intersection
crossings, but it does nevertheless happen. Fear to the
point of phobia is irrational, but dealing with possibilities
with use of active lights & reflectives, isn't.

As I understand it, when cyclists are hit from behind, it's
usually because they're riding unlit on night-darkened, and
often rural roads. That white stripe that delineates a bike
lane is usually reflective. I figure anything at night that
retroreflects is a good thing. I'm not suggesting that
riders should rely on the reflectivity of bike lane stripes,
but it all cumulatively helps.

>>> Judging all bicyclists by Critical Mass is like judging
>>> all motorcyclists by the handful of anti-social criminal
>>> gang members.

>> =v= Absolute bull****. Tom Sherman's declaration of "criminal
>> gang member" status is contradicted very directly by a number
>> of court rulings. In the U.S., in fact, a Federal judge has in
>> fact ruled that "Participation in the Critical Mass bike ride
>> constitutes expressive association entitled to First Amendment
>> protection."

> Absolute misinterpretation of what I wrote. The gang members reference
> was to tarring all MOTORCYCLISTS as criminals based on the action of a
> very few. Similarly, most people who ride bicycles do not participate in
> Critical Mass rides.

And most people who participate in CM do not do so with
criminal or anti-social intent. Just like the people who
participate in daily Car Critical Mass (otherwise known
as Rush Hour) don't necessarily do so with criminal intent.


cheers,
Tom


--

Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
KingOfTheApes > writes:
> On Oct 17, 9:29*pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
>> In article >,
>> * * * * Tim McNamara > writes:
>>
>> > Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than riding
>> > motorcycles?
>>
>> Because we bicyclists have to read the minds of the
>> motor vehicle operators around us. *We often
>> have to do their thinking for them. *We know what
>> they're gonna do before they know what they're
>> gonna do. *Because what they're gonna do is gonna
>> be the most detrimental thing to us if we aren't
>> heads-up about their brainless movements.
>>
>> And besides, bicycles are often a more intelligent
>> choice of vehicle.

> You contradict your claim to being smart when you refuse to bring here
> the bike facilities that work elsewhere.

Streets & roads /are/ bike facilities.


> But it ain't so much that you
> are stupid, it's simply that you are elitist and are selfish as
> such...

And yet I'm not out to plant fear into the minds of people,
while you /are/!

> I quote here from someone who have figured out that your kind should
> shut up and mind your own business..
> "First thing I would do would be to purge snobbish/elitist advocates
> from leadership or policy making positions at any publicly funded
> bicycling advocacy/educational organization; i.e. the clubby
> enthusiast type who believes cycling skill (or advocacy goals) is
> defined by being a racer (like himself) or a cyclist (like himself)
> who moves consistently at speeds greater than 12mph."
> http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?p=7688868&posted=1#post7688868

My "kind," eh?

Strike one.

Snobbish/elitist advocate, eh?

Strike two.

Shall we go on to your strike 85?

You're evilly anti-human, and I'm
calling you on it. You hate bicycling
because it gets in your way as a driver,
and it sticks in your throat like a fishbone.
You're not out to promote bicycling; you're
out to restrict it.

"By their fruits shall ye know them."

Your fruits are distasteful and highly,
bitterly spit-out-able.

And you are despicable for it.

It is /you/ who is not only the elitist snob,
but the greedy pig doing everything you can to
force everybody else out of your way as you
muscle into what you perceive as the free-for-all
traffic trough in which you believe non-drivers
don't belong.

I don't hate you. I don't pity you. It's not mine
to harbour either of those sentiments. I just work
around you, you odious obstacle.

Just as you work against people.


--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

Tom Keats wrote:
> [...]
> Streets & roads /are/ bike facilities.[...]

HOT DOG, WE HAVE A WEINER!

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

Tom Keats wrote:
> In article >,
> Tom Sherman > writes:
>>>>>> "Bicycle lane" promoters are either misguided or
>>>>>> anti-cyclist.
>>> =v= That statement represents an ideology, not a consensus.
>>> Many "real" bicyclists quite reasonable hold other opinions.
>>>
>> Due to irrational fears of getting run over from behind?
>
> Actually, cyclists /do/ get run over from behind.
> Not as much as from the front or side during intersection
> crossings, but it does nevertheless happen. Fear to the
> point of phobia is irrational, but dealing with possibilities
> with use of active lights & reflectives, isn't.
>
Certainly the last part is a good idea, and high visibility clothing in
the day time does not hurt either.

> As I understand it, when cyclists are hit from behind, it's
> usually because they're riding unlit on night-darkened, and
> often rural roads. That white stripe that delineates a bike
> lane is usually reflective. I figure anything at night that
> retroreflects is a good thing. I'm not suggesting that
> riders should rely on the reflectivity of bike lane stripes,
> but it all cumulatively helps.
>
I got some ca. 5 by 10 cm orange reflectors at the hardware store and
mounted them to my rear racks with cable ties.

>>>> Judging all bicyclists by Critical Mass is like judging
>>>> all motorcyclists by the handful of anti-social criminal
>>>> gang members.
>
>>> =v= Absolute bull****. Tom Sherman's declaration of "criminal
>>> gang member" status is contradicted very directly by a number
>>> of court rulings. In the U.S., in fact, a Federal judge has in
>>> fact ruled that "Participation in the Critical Mass bike ride
>>> constitutes expressive association entitled to First Amendment
>>> protection."
>
>> Absolute misinterpretation of what I wrote. The gang members reference
>> was to tarring all MOTORCYCLISTS as criminals based on the action of a
>> very few. Similarly, most people who ride bicycles do not participate in
>> Critical Mass rides.
>
> And most people who participate in CM do not do so with
> criminal or anti-social intent.

The effect (at least in some areas) is to cause addition congestion.

> Just like the people who
> participate in daily Car Critical Mass (otherwise known
> as Rush Hour) don't necessarily do so with criminal intent.
>
Cruising would seem to be a better analogy.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
Tom Sherman > writes:
> Tom Keats wrote:
>> [...]
>> Streets & roads /are/ bike facilities.[...]
>
> HOT DOG, WE HAVE A WEINER!

Actually, that's "wiener," with the 'i" before the 'e'.
Because a true wiener is a Viennese sausage, and the word
wiener is etymologically, culturally and geographically
associated with "Vienna."

A "wiener" is a Vienner sausage.

I'm not sure what a weiner is, but it sounds like somebody
with a shaved head, who lies in a street gutter, clinging
onto a bottle of cheap, rotgut sherry in a paper bag, while
wearing lederhosen and singing tunes from Pink Floyd's The
Wall, or a Teutonic version of O Canada.


cheers,
Tom


--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 18, 10:55 pm, Tom Sherman >
wrote:
> aka Jobst Brandt wrote:
>
>
>
> > Tom Keats wrote:
>
> >>> Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than
> >>> riding motorcycles?
>
> >> Because we bicyclists have to read the minds of the motor vehicle
> >> operators around us. We often have to do their thinking for them.
> >> We know what they're gonna do before they know what they're gonna
> >> do. Because what they're gonna do is gonna be the most detrimental
> >> thing to us if we aren't heads-up about their brainless movements.
>
> >> And besides, bicycles are often a more intelligent choice of
> >> vehicle.
>
> > I think these two postings are examples of what causes trouble on many
> > roads. It is an elitist attitude of bicyclists who let car drivers
> > know how much smarter they are and how much more environmentally their
> > bicycle (recreation) is than driving a car. As I have often mentioned
> > here, I ride on many narrow, heavily traveled roads in the Santa Cruz
> > mountains and rarely have differences with car traffic, except when
> > with a rider who has the elitist bicyclist mentality.
>
> I typically see less than a dozen cyclists per week while driving, and
> typically pass less than 10 per month, so motorists being held up by
> cyclists is hardly a common occurrence. Yet, the same anti-cyclist
> attitude can be encountered. It has nothing to do with the behavior of
> cyclists, and everything to do with people who grew up as privileged
> spoiled brats who have to have their way (literally in this case).
>
> "How dare you take your rightful share of the road!"
>
> These are the same people who run red lights, jump their turn at 4-way
> stops, pass on the shoulder in congested urban freeway traffic, tailgate
> people in the right lane with their "brights" on instead of passing to
> the left.

Don't tell me anymore. If the roads were to be a jungle (and I have
every reason to believe it), these would be THE PREDATORS of the
jungle. Their philosophy is "me, myself and I" typical of the
predator.

However DRIVING SHOULD BE A COOPERATIVE EFFORT, something the monkeys
are so good at.

But I guess the vultures benefit from the status quo. ;)

>
> > What may not be apparent to many self righteous bicyclists is that
> > their body language reveals their disdain for motorized traffic,
> > eliciting rude and often dangerous behavior in response. As for mind
> > reading, it doesn't take a seer to understand what the bicyclist out
> > in the traffic lane is trying to say about his motorized fellow human.
>
> Relying on motorists to pass at a close distance is foolish,
> particularly drivers of wide SUV's, truck and vans that are
> multi-tasking (eating, talking on the phone, etcetera). Unless the lane
> is extra wide (e.g. right lanes on certain urban arterials), or there is
> a vacant parking lane or paved shoulder, taking the lane is the only
> sensible choice.
>
> "God forbid that I get delayed a few seconds on my way to the mall, and
> have to moved my foot from the throttle to the brake and back!"
>
> >> Nothing is safe from me.
>
> > Don't ride near me.
>
> Is Vancouver near Palo Alto?
>

Vancouver is near America, and that may be a problem if you get the
influence get to you. But then again the whole world watches American
movies and shows, so eventually SUVs and stupidity will trickle down. :
(

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 18, 11:07 pm, Tom Sherman >
wrote:
> KingOfTheApes aka anti-cycling troll wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 17, 9:29 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
> >> In article >,
> >> Tim McNamara > writes:
>
> >>> Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than riding
> >>> motorcycles?
> >> Because we bicyclists have to read the minds of the
> >> motor vehicle operators around us. We often
> >> have to do their thinking for them. We know what
> >> they're gonna do before they know what they're
> >> gonna do. Because what they're gonna do is gonna
> >> be the most detrimental thing to us if we aren't
> >> heads-up about their brainless movements.
>
> >> And besides, bicycles are often a more intelligent
> >> choice of vehicle.
>
> >> cheers,
> >> Tom
>
> > You contradict your claim to being smart when you refuse to bring here
> > the bike facilities that work elsewhere. But it ain't so much that you
> > are stupid, it's simply that you are elitist and are selfish as
> > such...
>
> If you actually rode a bicycle, you would understand why "bicycle lanes"
> are separate and unequal facilities.
>
> > I quote here from someone who have figured out that your kind should
> > shut up and mind your own business..
>
> > "First thing I would do would be to purge snobbish/elitist advocates
> > from leadership or policy making positions at any publicly funded
> > bicycling advocacy/educational organization; i.e. the clubby
> > enthusiast type who believes cycling skill (or advocacy goals) is
> > defined by being a racer (like himself) or a cyclist (like himself)
> > who moves consistently at speeds greater than 12mph."
>
> >http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?p=7688868&posted=1#post7688868
>
> Yes, let us put the cyclists in a ghetto bike lane to keep them out of
> the way of the superior motorists!
>
> --
> Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
> If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I've said BIKE LANES, TAME TRAFFIC, OR GO TO HOLLAND, but you are just
picking up on the first one.

Do you think they ever will tame traffic in America? Not without a
revolution, right? Then what are left with if you don't want to give
up on the country and leave it to the SUVs? Make bike facilities
including bike lanes, right? Well, that won't happen either without a
revolution...

So let's seek political assylum in Holland, I guess.

Are you retarded, by any chance?

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 18, 11:16 pm, Tom Sherman >
wrote:

> > The commuters and other practical cyclists and the elite cyclists are
> > two different animal species.
>
> Dude, the transportational cyclists ARE the elite (in the best sense of
> the word) cyclists.

No they are not, stupid. The elite wear lycra, ride big buck bikes,
and never do anthing practical with them. And then they only associate
with their own kind. Not with slow going practical bikers commuting or
going to the supermarket.

>
> > I'm afraid is the latter that want to block any effort to make bike
> > lanes and other bike facilities. They ride fairly fast and almost go
> > as fast as slow traffic, so they feel safer. But once in a while are
> > wiped out too by reckless drivers too.
>
> > Of course, everyone is at risk, including motorcyclists. Different
> > medal for them, though. ;)
>
> The commuters are hampered by the "bicycle lanes" that get them "right
> hooked" by motorists and put them in more danger when needing to make a
> left turn.

OK, then tame the f**ing traffic, and make the cyclist TAKE THE LANE
and end of the problem, comprende?

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 18, 11:30 pm, Tom Sherman >
wrote:
> Twibil ? wrote:
> > On Oct 17, 5:32 pm, Tim McNamara > wrote:
>
> >>> (A) Why should the huge majority of taxpaying motorists have to give
> >>> up any of their lanes for you, much less pay their taxes to build new
> >>> ones just for you to use?
> >>> You want new lanes, pay for 'em yourselves.
> >> Dude, like most cyclists I pay an assload of taxes that fund the roads
> >> already. Taxes on my house, taxes on my income, taxes on the car that
> >> sits in front of my house when I'm riding my bike. No different than
> >> most everybody else.
>
> > That's right: "No different than most anybody else". So why do you
> > expect special treatment in the form of lanes dedicated only to *your*
> > usage?
>
> Dude, real bicycles do NOT want bicycle ghetto lanes. "BananaApe Boy"
> does NOT speak for cyclists.
>
> > Motorcyclist lane-split; we don't expect anybody to build special
> > lanes just for us.
>
> "Bicycle lane" promoters are either misguided or anti-cyclist. The real
> purpose of "bicycle lanes" is to ghettoize cyclists out of the way of
> motorists.
>
> --
> Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
> If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

You know what they call the place where cyclists ride bikes in Holland
or Denmark?

Right, they are called BIKE LANES and it works for them.

But YOU are too smart and you consider them the problem. So what's the
solution "wiseman"?

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 19, 1:51*am, "S'mee" > wrote:
> On Oct 18, 12:15*pm, KingOfTheApes >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 18, 3:56 am, Jym Dyer > wrote:
>
> > > >> I don't know. I feel like taking desperate steps...
>
> > > =v= ... in front of an oncoming SUV ...
>
> > > > In short: you [ComandanteBanana] are truly anti-socially
> > > > and anti-humanly evil. *I see you for what you are.
>
> > > =v= Also, he's no comandante, because nobody would ever be
> > > stupid enough to follow him. *(Whatever became of Generalissimo
> > > Ape****, who used to take him down a notch on this point?)
> > > Also, he's no king of the apes, because even apes wouldn't
> > > be stupid enough to follow him.
> > > * * <_Jym_>
>
> > Maybe the sheep are not smart enough to follow the ape.
>
> > You prefer the wolf in the sheep's clothing.
>
> You called? Your pathetic "revolution" is less well thought than a
> greek communist revolution. ALL will bow down to their superiors the
> motorcyclists...Join the club now and get 40% off your club jacket
> today (club colours cost extra, prices may vary due to jurisdictions)
>
> --
> Keith- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Well, that the motorcyclists seem to be smarter than those cyclists
who deny bike facilities, don't make them superior, comrade. Just that
the cyclists are plain stupid.

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 19, 1:01 pm, Tom Sherman >
wrote:
> S'mee wrote:
> > On Oct 18, 9:30 pm, Tom Sherman >
> > wrote:
>
> > Elitest scum.
>
> Context man!
>
> > Take that mass what ever the hell you call yourselves and go eat a
> > spoke sideways.
>
> I have never participated in a Critical Mass ride and have no plans to.
> Judging all bicyclists by Critical Mass is like judging all
> motorcyclists by the handful of anti-social criminal gang members.

You said you were a collaborator so you don't need to say you are NOT
a rebel.

So what's your viewpoint, dude? Go with the flow? Baaah!

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 19, 11:20*pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
> In article >,
> * * * * KingOfTheApes > writes:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 17, 9:29*pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
> >> In article >,
> >> * * * * Tim McNamara > writes:
>
> >> > Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than riding
> >> > motorcycles?
>
> >> Because we bicyclists have to read the minds of the
> >> motor vehicle operators around us. *We often
> >> have to do their thinking for them. *We know what
> >> they're gonna do before they know what they're
> >> gonna do. *Because what they're gonna do is gonna
> >> be the most detrimental thing to us if we aren't
> >> heads-up about their brainless movements.
>
> >> And besides, bicycles are often a more intelligent
> >> choice of vehicle.
> > You contradict your claim to being smart when you refuse to bring here
> > the bike facilities that work elsewhere.
>
> Streets & roads /are/ bike facilities.
>
> > But it ain't so much that you
> > are stupid, it's simply that you are elitist and are selfish as
> > such...
>
> And yet I'm not out to plant fear into the minds of people,
> while you /are/!
>
> > I quote here from someone who have figured out that your kind should
> > shut up and mind your own business..
> > "First thing I would do would be to purge snobbish/elitist advocates
> > from leadership or policy making positions at any publicly funded
> > bicycling advocacy/educational organization; i.e. the clubby
> > enthusiast type who believes cycling skill (or advocacy goals) is
> > defined by being a racer (like himself) or a cyclist (like himself)
> > who moves consistently at speeds greater than 12mph."
> >http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?p=7688868&posted=1#post7688868
>
> My "kind," eh?
>
> Strike one.
>
> Snobbish/elitist advocate, eh?
>
> Strike two.
>
> Shall we go on to your strike 85?
>
> You're evilly anti-human, and I'm
> calling you on it. *You hate bicycling
> because it gets in your way as a driver,
> and it sticks in your throat like a fishbone.
> You're not out to promote bicycling; you're
> out to restrict it.
>
> "By their fruits shall ye know them."
>
> Your fruits are distasteful and highly,
> bitterly spit-out-able.
>
> And you are despicable for it.
>
> It is /you/ who is not only the elitist snob,
> but the greedy pig doing everything you can to
> force everybody else out of your way as you
> muscle into what you perceive as the free-for-all
> traffic trough in which you believe non-drivers
> don't belong.
>
> I don't hate you. *I don't pity you. *It's not mine
> to harbour either of those sentiments. *I just work
> around you, you odious obstacle.
>
> Just as you work against people.


No fear. I'm stating it's a jungle, so you get ready for it
accordingly. Some people drive SUVs in it rule and be reckless, others
ride bike with a gun, and other ride bikes trusting other people who
otherwise give a ****, be concerned about you.

Good luck in the jungle, man.

By the way, the fruit to be judged by is a banana. What's wrong with
giving a banana (finger) to the whole damn system?

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 19, 11:38 pm, Tom Sherman >
wrote:
> Tom Keats wrote:
> > [...]
> > Streets & roads /are/ bike facilities.[...]
>
> HOT DOG, WE HAVE A WEINER!
>

Streets and roads are place for tough competition and road rage.

You better go out with something, at least a banana.

[S'mee]

On Oct 20, 11:32*am, KingOfTheApes >
wrote:

What a limp dicked troll...not even logical or sensible.

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

KingOfTheApes wrote:
> On Oct 19, 1:01 pm, Tom Sherman >
> wrote:
>> S'mee wrote:
>>> On Oct 18, 9:30 pm, Tom Sherman >
>>> wrote:
>>> Elitest scum.
>> Context man!
>>
>>> Take that mass what ever the hell you call yourselves and go eat a
>>> spoke sideways.
>> I have never participated in a Critical Mass ride and have no plans to.
>> Judging all bicyclists by Critical Mass is like judging all
>> motorcyclists by the handful of anti-social criminal gang members.
>
> You said you were a collaborator so you don't need to say you are NOT
> a rebel.
>
> So what's your viewpoint, dude? Go with the flow? Baaah!

Vehicular cycling and vigorous prosecution of motorists who threaten,
harass and/or strike lawfully riding cyclists. Mandatory education of
motorists on the rights of cyclists.

If we want cycling facilities, build extra wide right lanes.

Sharrows are fine, as long as they are far enough from the curb and/or
parking lane.

Bicycle lanes just lead to motorists believing that cyclists do NOT
belong anywhere else on the road.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

KingOfTheApes wrote:
> On Oct 18, 11:07 pm, Tom Sherman >
> wrote:
>> KingOfTheApes aka anti-cycling troll wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Oct 17, 9:29 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
>>>> In article >,
>>>> Tim McNamara > writes:
>>>>> Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than riding
>>>>> motorcycles?
>>>> Because we bicyclists have to read the minds of the
>>>> motor vehicle operators around us. We often
>>>> have to do their thinking for them. We know what
>>>> they're gonna do before they know what they're
>>>> gonna do. Because what they're gonna do is gonna
>>>> be the most detrimental thing to us if we aren't
>>>> heads-up about their brainless movements.
>>>> And besides, bicycles are often a more intelligent
>>>> choice of vehicle.
>>>> cheers,
>>>> Tom
>>> You contradict your claim to being smart when you refuse to bring here
>>> the bike facilities that work elsewhere. But it ain't so much that you
>>> are stupid, it's simply that you are elitist and are selfish as
>>> such...
>> If you actually rode a bicycle, you would understand why "bicycle lanes"
>> are separate and unequal facilities.
>>
>>> I quote here from someone who have figured out that your kind should
>>> shut up and mind your own business..
>>> "First thing I would do would be to purge snobbish/elitist advocates
>>> from leadership or policy making positions at any publicly funded
>>> bicycling advocacy/educational organization; i.e. the clubby
>>> enthusiast type who believes cycling skill (or advocacy goals) is
>>> defined by being a racer (like himself) or a cyclist (like himself)
>>> who moves consistently at speeds greater than 12mph."
>>> http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?p=7688868&posted=1#post7688868
>> Yes, let us put the cyclists in a ghetto bike lane to keep them out of
>> the way of the superior motorists!
>>
Please Honor The Signature Separator.

- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> I've said BIKE LANES, TAME TRAFFIC, OR GO TO HOLLAND, but you are just
> picking up on the first one.
>
Bicycle lanes are separate and unequal facilities.

Taming traffic just requires education and enforcement.

The Netherlands are tempting, but they do not just offer citizenship to
anyone that asks.

> Do you think they ever will tame traffic in America? Not without a
> revolution, right? Then what are left with if you don't want to give
> up on the country and leave it to the SUVs? Make bike facilities
> including bike lanes, right? Well, that won't happen either without a
> revolution...
>
> So let's seek political assylum in Holland, I guess.
>
> Are you retarded, by any chance?
>
No, I am someone who has ridden a bicycle many miles in traffic, with no
issues other than harassment by motorists who believe that bicycles do
not belong on the road - like the guy who kept shouting and pointing at
the "bike path" on the sidewalk that could not be ridden safely at more
than 10 mph and required crossing every street as a pedestrian - a
second class bicycle ghetto facility.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

KingOfTheApes aka anti-cyclist troll wrote:
> On Oct 18, 11:16 pm, Tom Sherman >
> wrote:
>
>>> The commuters and other practical cyclists and the elite cyclists are
>>> two different animal species.
>> Dude, the transportational cyclists ARE the elite (in the best sense of
>> the word) cyclists.
>
> No they are not, stupid.

The troll called me stupid. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

> The elite wear lycra, ride big buck bikes,
> and never do anthing practical with them. And then they only associate
> with their own kind. Not with slow going practical bikers commuting or
> going to the supermarket.
>
Banana Boy is confused here.

>>> I'm afraid is the latter that want to block any effort to make bike
>>> lanes and other bike facilities. They ride fairly fast and almost go
>>> as fast as slow traffic, so they feel safer. But once in a while are
>>> wiped out too by reckless drivers too.
>>> Of course, everyone is at risk, including motorcyclists. Different
>>> medal for them, though. ;)
>> The commuters are hampered by the "bicycle lanes" that get them "right
>> hooked" by motorists and put them in more danger when needing to make a
>> left turn.
>
> OK, then tame the f**ing traffic, and make the cyclist TAKE THE LANE
> and end of the problem, comprende?

Dude, you are not making sense.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
KingOfTheApes > writes:
>>
>> > Maybe the sheep are not smart enough to follow the ape.
>>
>> > You prefer the wolf in the sheep's clothing.
>>
>> You called? Your pathetic "revolution" is less well thought than a
>> greek communist revolution. ALL will bow down to their superiors the
>> motorcyclists...Join the club now and get 40% off your club jacket
>> today (club colours cost extra, prices may vary due to jurisdictions)
>>
>> --
>> Keith- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
> Well, that the motorcyclists seem to be smarter than those cyclists
> who deny bike facilities, don't make them superior, comrade. Just that
> the cyclists are plain stupid.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The evil anti-cyclist fool who pretends to be pro-cyclist
shows his true colours.

The truth will always out.

Squirm, worm, squirm.


--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

KingOfTheApes aka anti-cyclist troll wrote:
> On Oct 18, 11:30 pm, Tom Sherman >
> wrote:
>> Twibil ? wrote:
>>> On Oct 17, 5:32 pm, Tim McNamara > wrote:
>>>>> (A) Why should the huge majority of taxpaying motorists have to give
>>>>> up any of their lanes for you, much less pay their taxes to build new
>>>>> ones just for you to use?
>>>>> You want new lanes, pay for 'em yourselves.
>>>> Dude, like most cyclists I pay an assload of taxes that fund the roads
>>>> already. Taxes on my house, taxes on my income, taxes on the car that
>>>> sits in front of my house when I'm riding my bike. No different than
>>>> most everybody else.
>>> That's right: "No different than most anybody else". So why do you
>>> expect special treatment in the form of lanes dedicated only to *your*
>>> usage?
>> Dude, real bicycles do NOT want bicycle ghetto lanes. "BananaApe Boy"
>> does NOT speak for cyclists.
>>
>>> Motorcyclist lane-split; we don't expect anybody to build special
>>> lanes just for us.
>> "Bicycle lane" promoters are either misguided or anti-cyclist. The real
>> purpose of "bicycle lanes" is to ghettoize cyclists out of the way of
>> motorists.
>>
PLEASE HONOR THE SIGNATURE SEPARATOR.

- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> You know what they call the place where cyclists ride bikes in Holland
> or Denmark?
>
Er streets? Last time I was in Denmark, most of the cyclists were riding
on the street, not in separate bicycle lanes. Only the major arterials
have lanes. I do not imagine that all cyclists can get to their
destinations exclusively using bicycle lanes.

> Right, they are called BIKE LANES and it works for them.
>
> But YOU are too smart and you consider them the problem. So what's the
> solution "wiseman"?
>
Cycling on the streets in the US is already a quite safe activity, so
only incremental improvements are needed.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
KingOfTheApes > writes:

>> > But it ain't so much that you
>> > are stupid, it's simply that you are elitist and are selfish as
>> > such...
>>
>> And yet I'm not out to plant fear into the minds of people,
>> while you /are/!
>>
>> > I quote here from someone who have figured out that your kind should
>> > shut up and mind your own business..
>> > "First thing I would do would be to purge snobbish/elitist advocates
>> > from leadership or policy making positions at any publicly funded
>> > bicycling advocacy/educational organization; i.e. the clubby
>> > enthusiast type who believes cycling skill (or advocacy goals) is
>> > defined by being a racer (like himself) or a cyclist (like himself)
>> > who moves consistently at speeds greater than 12mph."
>> >http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?p=7688868&posted=1#post7688868
>>
>> My "kind," eh?
>>
>> Strike one.
>>
>> Snobbish/elitist advocate, eh?
>>
>> Strike two.
>>
>> Shall we go on to your strike 85?
>>
>> You're evilly anti-human, and I'm
>> calling you on it. *You hate bicycling
>> because it gets in your way as a driver,
>> and it sticks in your throat like a fishbone.
>> You're not out to promote bicycling; you're
>> out to restrict it.
>>
>> "By their fruits shall ye know them."
>>
>> Your fruits are distasteful and highly,
>> bitterly spit-out-able.
>>
>> And you are despicable for it.
>>
>> It is /you/ who is not only the elitist snob,
>> but the greedy pig doing everything you can to
>> force everybody else out of your way as you
>> muscle into what you perceive as the free-for-all
>> traffic trough in which you believe non-drivers
>> don't belong.
>>
>> I don't hate you. *I don't pity you. *It's not mine
>> to harbour either of those sentiments. *I just work
>> around you, you odious obstacle.
>>
>> Just as you work against people.
> No fear. I'm stating it's a jungle

It's not a jungle, it's Society. If
you can't hack it, that's your prob.

You are indeed a loathesome fearmongerer
with an agendum.


--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
KingOfTheApes > writes:
> On Oct 18, 12:48 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
>
>> Biologically, humans /are/ Great Apes, along with
>> chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas and orangutans.
>> So, since our "lyric" revolutionary/Pied Piper
>> claims to be king of us all, he presents himself
>> as someone suffering some sort of messiach complex.
>
> You are not an ape, you have the brain of a lesser monkey. Now dance a
> little bit, stupid monkey...

Whatever I am, I'm glad to be me and not you.
After all, I'm a /real/ bike rider, and not a
phony who's out to prevent would-be bike riders
from hitting the streets.

I find it notable that my acknowledgement of your
delusions has drawn such ire from you. I wish
you luck in dealing with your issues.


--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 20, 11:15*pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
> In article >,
> * * * * KingOfTheApes > writes:
>
>
>
>
>
> >> > But it ain't so much that you
> >> > are stupid, it's simply that you are elitist and are selfish as
> >> > such...
>
> >> And yet I'm not out to plant fear into the minds of people,
> >> while you /are/!
>
> >> > I quote here from someone who have figured out that your kind should
> >> > shut up and mind your own business..
> >> > "First thing I would do would be to purge snobbish/elitist advocates
> >> > from leadership or policy making positions at any publicly funded
> >> > bicycling advocacy/educational organization; i.e. the clubby
> >> > enthusiast type who believes cycling skill (or advocacy goals) is
> >> > defined by being a racer (like himself) or a cyclist (like himself)
> >> > who moves consistently at speeds greater than 12mph."
> >> >http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?p=7688868&posted=1#post7688868
>
> >> My "kind," eh?
>
> >> Strike one.
>
> >> Snobbish/elitist advocate, eh?
>
> >> Strike two.
>
> >> Shall we go on to your strike 85?
>
> >> You're evilly anti-human, and I'm
> >> calling you on it. *You hate bicycling
> >> because it gets in your way as a driver,
> >> and it sticks in your throat like a fishbone.
> >> You're not out to promote bicycling; you're
> >> out to restrict it.
>
> >> "By their fruits shall ye know them."
>
> >> Your fruits are distasteful and highly,
> >> bitterly spit-out-able.
>
> >> And you are despicable for it.
>
> >> It is /you/ who is not only the elitist snob,
> >> but the greedy pig doing everything you can to
> >> force everybody else out of your way as you
> >> muscle into what you perceive as the free-for-all
> >> traffic trough in which you believe non-drivers
> >> don't belong.
>
> >> I don't hate you. *I don't pity you. *It's not mine
> >> to harbour either of those sentiments. *I just work
> >> around you, you odious obstacle.
>
> >> Just as you work against people.
> > No fear. I'm stating it's a jungle
>
> It's not a jungle, it's Society. *If
> you can't hack it, that's your prob.
>
> You are indeed a loathesome fearmongerer
> with an agendum.
>
> --
> Nothing is safe from me.
> I'm really at:
> tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

And how do you know, if you don't live near LA, Chicago, NY, or Miami?

It's NOT a jungle in Key West (and some other islands of peace), but
everything else IS a jungle

Beware of the big predators, you fool.

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 20, 11:35*pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
> In article >,
> * * * * KingOfTheApes > writes:
>
> > On Oct 18, 12:48 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
>
> >> Biologically, humans /are/ Great Apes, along with
> >> chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas and orangutans.
> >> So, since our "lyric" revolutionary/Pied Piper
> >> claims to be king of us all, he presents himself
> >> as someone suffering some sort of messiach complex.
>
> > You are not an ape, you have the brain of a lesser monkey. Now dance a
> > little bit, stupid monkey...
>
> Whatever I am, I'm glad to be me and not you.
> After all, I'm a /real/ bike rider, and not a
> phony who's out to prevent would-be bike riders
> from hitting the streets.

That you are a soldier who's survived so many wars doesn't prove war
is safe.

Actually, the situation could quite different if you looked what's
going in the rest of the world, including the UK, one of the groups
posted to.

And it could be even better...

Here are some aspects of the problem for those who don't believe they
know everything and there's nothing to change...

Alternative approaches
For most of the 20th Century, many road authorities believed that
traffic should be separated and controlled by class (pedestrian,
bicyclist, and motor vehicle driver) in order to combine high speed
use of motor vehicles with good traffic safety.[7] Acceptance of this
view by the authorities has led to the widespread use of traffic
lights, Belisha beacons, pedestrian crossings, and, in some
jurisdictions, cycle lanes.

Alternatives to this approach have been suggested, such as those
offered by J. S. Dean, a former chairman of the UK Pedestrians'
Association: Better roads, better sight lines, fewer bends and blind
corners, less traffic, better lighting, better visibility, better
weather conditions – all these that are supposed to make for greater
safety, in fact, make for greater danger ... because every
"nonrestrictive" safety measure, however admirable in itself, is
treated by the drivers as an opportunity for more speeding, so that
the net amount of danger is increased and the latter state is worse
than the first.[8]

In the latter part of the 20th Century, alternative design approaches
such as those pioneered in woonerven became more popular. These
approaches, recognising that higher traffic speeds made collisions
more likely and injuries more severe, sought to reduce traffic speeds
in community and housing zones by the use of lower speed limits
enforced by the use of special signage and road markings, the
introduction of traffic calming measures, and by giving pedestrians
priority over motorists.

....

Criticisms

Non-motorised lobby
Pedestrians' advocates, environmental groups and related organisations
such as RoadPeace have been strongly critical of what they see as
moves to solve the problem of danger posed to vulnerable road users by
motor traffic through increasing restrictions on vulnerable road
users, an approach which they believe both blames the victim and fails
to address the problem at source. This is discussed in detail by Dr
Robert Davis in the book Death on the Streets: Cars and the mythology
of road safety, and the core problem is also addressed in books by
Professor John Adams, Mayer Hillman and others.

It is argued by some that the problem of road safety is largely being
stated in the wrong terms because most road safety measures are
designed to increase the safety of drivers, but many road traffic
casualties are not drivers (in the UK only 40% of casualties are
drivers), and those measures which increase driver safety may,
perversely, increase the risk to these others, through risk
compensation.

castitlivevideo.com/play.php?vid=567

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 20, 8:57 pm, Tom Sherman >
wrote:
> KingOfTheApes wrote:
> > On Oct 19, 1:01 pm, Tom Sherman >
> > wrote:
> >> S'mee wrote:
> >>> On Oct 18, 9:30 pm, Tom Sherman >
> >>> wrote:
> >>> Elitest scum.
> >> Context man!
>
> >>> Take that mass what ever the hell you call yourselves and go eat a
> >>> spoke sideways.
> >> I have never participated in a Critical Mass ride and have no plans to.
> >> Judging all bicyclists by Critical Mass is like judging all
> >> motorcyclists by the handful of anti-social criminal gang members.
>
> > You said you were a collaborator so you don't need to say you are NOT
> > a rebel.
>
> > So what's your viewpoint, dude? Go with the flow? Baaah!
>
> Vehicular cycling and vigorous prosecution of motorists who threaten,
> harass and/or strike lawfully riding cyclists. Mandatory education of
> motorists on the rights of cyclists.
>
> If we want cycling facilities, build extra wide right lanes.

Yeah sure. That's the way the dealt with it in Europe where streets
are narrower than an American SUV, right?

That would only lead to ever wider SUVs, dummy.

I think even the lesser monkeys are smarter than you. ;)

>
> Sharrows are fine, as long as they are far enough from the curb and/or
> parking lane.
>
> Bicycle lanes just lead to motorists believing that cyclists do NOT
> belong anywhere else on the road.

Yeah sure. It also leads them to believe that traffic lanes are for
motorized traffic only.

They just don't consider the mundane bicycles traffic, comprende,
lesser monkey?

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 20, 9:03 pm, Tom Sherman >
wrote:

> > I've said BIKE LANES, TAME TRAFFIC, OR GO TO HOLLAND, but you are just
> > picking up on the first one.
>
> Bicycle lanes are separate and unequal facilities.

Why unequal, dummy? Just separate but equal.

This IS true discrimination...

"There's no doubt that car drivers need to clean up their act. Taking
speed limits down to 20mph in built-up areas will make the roads safer
for motorists, cyclists and pedestrians alike. Enforcing the ban on
mobile phone use will help drivers become more attentive. And applying
the Highway Code more strictly will make many people think twice about
engaging in the current bully-boy hierarchy of bigger is better.
....

Now, saying that motor vehicles should have the same rights as
pedestrians or cyclists is like saying that water skiers should be
allowed on all waters in front of a popular beach. The Highway Code by
instigating this non-sensical equality status, that inevitably leads
to the law of the jungle, is bunk. It has the same moral standing as
the South African Pbutt Law."

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote91

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 20, 10:49*pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:

> >> - Show quoted text -
> > Well, that the motorcyclists seem to be smarter than those cyclists
> > who deny bike facilities, don't make them superior, comrade. Just that
> > the cyclists are plain stupid.
>
> * ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> The evil anti-cyclist fool who pretends to be pro-cyclist
> shows his true colours.
>
> The truth will always out.
>
> Squirm, worm, squirm.
>
>

Evil, you must be into some kind of Cult to Stupidity or something,
right, snake?

That thing about the truth is supposed to say something? ;)

[ComandanteBanana]

(remember that project of the VW?)

Originally Posted by genec
'I don't know of a single American company that makes the bike
components... such as derailuers.

About all you can get "Made in America" is a frame.'

Just thinking about that successful project of the VW, supposed a true
pro-bike revolutionary government (that stops that cheap competition
from communist China) comes to power and wants to build a bike for the
masses...

OK, this is what is what it would look like...

1- Aluminum frame (rust free to take the weather)

2- No derailleur (it sounds like French and it would be less
complicated)

3- Single speed (for greater workout, which leads to healthy masses)

4- Union made (for greater mass participation)

5- Recycled from SUVs (to show there's no more room for junk)...

So what do you think of the VB project, and would you buy one?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHY THE BANANA REVOLUTION?
(home of the Dutch model!)

http://webspawner.com/users/bananarevolution

[ComandanteBanana]

Originally Posted by Roughstuff

cyclists of the world unite! You've nothing to lose but your chains!

I like the idea of revolutions starting from the ground (pavement? )
up.

roughstuff

***

I sounds like a good foundation for the revolution!

Volks-Bikes and Bike Lanes all over the place.

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 20, 11:35 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:

> > You are not an ape, you have the brain of a lesser monkey. Now dance a
> > little bit, stupid monkey...
>
> Whatever I am, I'm glad to be me and not you.
> After all, I'm a /real/ bike rider, and not a
> phony who's out to prevent would-be bike riders
> from hitting the streets.
>
> I find it notable that my acknowledgement of your
> delusions has drawn such ire from you. I wish
> you luck in dealing with your issues.

You are such a well behaved sheep that will blend in the wolf in
sheep's clothing.

[Bob Myers]

"ComandanteBanana" > wrote in message
...
> So what do you think of the VB project, and would you buy one?

I dunno - what do YOU think of the Buell 1125R?

(Hint: this has long ago ceased to be of interest to rec.motorcycles.)


Bob M.

[MikeWhy]

"ComandanteBanana" > wrote in message
...
> On Oct 20, 9:03 pm, Tom Sherman >
> wrote:
>
>> > I've said BIKE LANES, TAME TRAFFIC, OR GO TO HOLLAND, but you are just
>> > picking up on the first one.
>>
>> Bicycle lanes are separate and unequal facilities.
>
> Why unequal, dummy? Just separate but equal.
>
> This IS true discrimination...
>
> "There's no doubt that car drivers need to clean up their act. Taking
> speed limits down to 20mph in built-up areas will make the roads safer
> for motorists, cyclists and pedestrians alike. Enforcing the ban on
> mobile phone use will help drivers become more attentive. And applying
> the Highway Code more strictly will make many people think twice about
> engaging in the current bully-boy hierarchy of bigger is better.
> ...
>
> Now, saying that motor vehicles should have the same rights as
> pedestrians or cyclists is like saying that water skiers should be
> allowed on all waters in front of a popular beach. The Highway Code by
> instigating this non-sensical equality status, that inevitably leads
> to the law of the jungle, is bunk. It has the same moral standing as
> the South African Pbutt Law."

Sure, go ahead and build your own roads. Use the huge surplus from the
otherwise untapped bicycle road use taxes. The Feds can't fund it, because
bicycles have no interstate commerce value. State, county, and
municipalities can incorporate them as recreational land under eminent
domain. They might even be able to sell bonds to fund construction. Be sure
to write back and let us know that goes. You need to go elsewhere to find
your socialist utopia. Try Canada.

[S'mee]

On Oct 21, 12:12*pm, ComandanteBanana >
wrote:
SNIP
> You are such a well behaved sheep that will blend in the wolf in
> sheep's clothing.

What about the wolves who don't wear sheeps clothing, run with the
sheep and wolves and manipulate both to their will??? No clue (why am
I not surprised) Those wolves are called alpha wolves and there are
even Wolves over them...it's good to be THE wolf and not just another
alpha wolf. It's the same whether a push bike or a motorcycle, all do
my will. Even when they don't know they are being manipulated.
--
Keith

[BrianNZ]

S'mee wrote:
> On Oct 21, 12:12 pm, ComandanteBanana >
> wrote:
> SNIP
>> You are such a well behaved sheep that will blend in the wolf in
>> sheep's clothing.
>
> What about the wolves who don't wear sheeps clothing, run with the
> sheep and wolves and manipulate both to their will??? No clue (why am
> I not surprised) Those wolves are called alpha wolves and there are
> even Wolves over them...it's good to be THE wolf and not just another
> alpha wolf. It's the same whether a push bike or a motorcycle, all do
> my will. Even when they don't know they are being manipulated.
> --
> Keith



A wolf in sheeps clothing will be treated as a sheep!.....minus the oral.

[S'mee]

On Oct 21, 1:59*pm, BrianNZ > wrote:
> S'mee wrote:
> > On Oct 21, 12:12 pm, ComandanteBanana >
> > wrote:
> > SNIP
> >> You are such a well behaved sheep that will blend in the wolf in
> >> sheep's clothing.
>
> > What about the wolves who don't wear sheeps clothing, run with the
> > sheep and wolves and manipulate both to their will??? No clue (why am
> > I not surprised) Those wolves are called alpha wolves and there are
> > even Wolves over them...it's good to be THE wolf and not just another
> > alpha wolf. It's the same whether a push bike or a motorcycle, all do
> > my will. Even when they don't know they are being manipulated.
> > --
> > Keith
>
> A wolf in sheeps clothing will be treated as a sheep!.....minus the oral.

Well isn't that a given? I thought everyone, even those without wolves
understood that. Bugger them if they get in the way.
--
Keith

[KingOfTheApes]

(Whatever political differences MAY be between bikers and bicyclists,
is explained here)

Originally Posted by gcottay

'In the United States. "Biker Joe" would not be a cyclist but rather a
motorcycle rider.'

***

That Joe may be for McCain, but Joe the Cyclist must be for Obama.
Statistically speaking at least.

How many sensible bicycle riders could be voting for McCain when all
he promises is "more drilling"? Obama too but he got the drill from
McCain.

[BrianNZ]

S'mee wrote:
> On Oct 21, 1:59 pm, BrianNZ > wrote:
>> S'mee wrote:
>>> On Oct 21, 12:12 pm, ComandanteBanana >
>>> wrote:
>>> SNIP
>>>> You are such a well behaved sheep that will blend in the wolf in
>>>> sheep's clothing.
>>> What about the wolves who don't wear sheeps clothing, run with the
>>> sheep and wolves and manipulate both to their will??? No clue (why am
>>> I not surprised) Those wolves are called alpha wolves and there are
>>> even Wolves over them...it's good to be THE wolf and not just another
>>> alpha wolf. It's the same whether a push bike or a motorcycle, all do
>>> my will. Even when they don't know they are being manipulated.
>>> --
>>> Keith
>> A wolf in sheeps clothing will be treated as a sheep!.....minus the oral.
>
> Well isn't that a given? I thought everyone, even those without wolves
> understood that. Bugger them if they get in the way.
> --
> Keith


....and tie them up if they try to get out of the way?

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 21, 3:40 pm, "MikeWhy" > wrote:

> > Now, saying that motor vehicles should have the same rights as
> > pedestrians or cyclists is like saying that water skiers should be
> > allowed on all waters in front of a popular beach. The Highway Code by
> > instigating this non-sensical equality status, that inevitably leads
> > to the law of the jungle, is bunk. It has the same moral standing as
> > the South African Pbutt Law."
>
> Sure, go ahead and build your own roads. Use the huge surplus from the
> otherwise untapped bicycle road use taxes. The Feds can't fund it, because
> bicycles have no interstate commerce value. State, county, and
> municipalities can incorporate them as recreational land under eminent
> domain. They might even be able to sell bonds to fund construction. Be sure
> to write back and let us know that goes. You need to go elsewhere to find
> your socialist utopia. Try Canada.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Bicycles may not be necessary in a system built around waste, but that
doesn't make the bicycle something to be dismissed. Maybe the system
is...

"In a society dominated by the fact of commercial competition, money
is necessarily the test of prowess, and wastefulness the sole
criterion of power." -Upton Sinclair, book 'The Jungle'

[.p.jm@see_my_sig_for_address.com]

On Tue, 21 Oct 2008 13:08:40 -0700 (PDT), KingOfTheApes
> wrote:

>(Whatever political differences MAY be between bikers and bicyclists,
>is explained here)
>
>Originally Posted by gcottay
>
>'In the United States. "Biker Joe" would not be a cyclist but rather a
>motorcycle rider.'
>
>***
>
>That Joe may be for McCain, but Joe the Cyclist must be for Obama.
>Statistically speaking at least.
>
>How many sensible bicycle riders could be voting for McCain when all
>he promises is "more drilling"? Obama too but he got the drill from
>McCain.

Toll-o-meter gives you a '1' on that one.


--
Click here every day to feed an animal that needs you today !!!
www.theanimalrescuesite.com/

Paul ( pjm @ pobox . com ) - remove spaces to email me
'Some days, it's just not worth chewing through the restraints.'
'With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine.'
HVAC/R program for Palm PDA's
Free demo online at www.pmilligan.net/palm/
Free 'People finder' program now at www.pmilligan.net/finder.htm

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 21, 3:49*pm, "S'mee" > wrote:
> On Oct 21, 12:12*pm, ComandanteBanana >
> wrote:
> SNIP
>
> > You are such a well behaved sheep that will blend in the wolf in
> > sheep's clothing.
>
> What about the wolves who don't wear sheeps clothing, run with the
> sheep and wolves and manipulate both to their will??? No clue (why am
> I not surprised) Those wolves are called alpha wolves and there are
> even Wolves over them...it's good to be THE wolf and not just another
> alpha wolf. It's the same whether a push bike or a motorcycle, all do
> my will. Even when they don't know they are being manipulated.
> --
> Keith

Some wolves operate without camouflage...

http://home.triad.rr.com/llambeth/Hitler%20vs%20UBI.jpg

And some wear the sheep's clothing...

http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2005/02/02/pope_dove_wideweb__430x410.jpg

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 21, 3:59*pm, BrianNZ > wrote:
> S'mee wrote:
> > On Oct 21, 12:12 pm, ComandanteBanana >
> > wrote:
> > SNIP
> >> You are such a well behaved sheep that will blend in the wolf in
> >> sheep's clothing.
>
> > What about the wolves who don't wear sheeps clothing, run with the
> > sheep and wolves and manipulate both to their will??? No clue (why am
> > I not surprised) Those wolves are called alpha wolves and there are
> > even Wolves over them...it's good to be THE wolf and not just another
> > alpha wolf. It's the same whether a push bike or a motorcycle, all do
> > my will. Even when they don't know they are being manipulated.
> > --
> > Keith
>
> A wolf in sheeps clothing will be treated as a sheep!.....minus the oral.

And they should be fleeced as well, no?

[KingOfTheApes]

(about the civilized behavior of bicycle riders)

Originally Posted by making
"I was on a fairly large group ride this weekend. Hilly Hundred. 5500
or so of the nicest, most polite, friendly people there are. Even
nicer than runners. Yea, I think we are at least well behaved if not
higher evolved."

So long as you don't invite the ones in lycra or Critical Mass,
everything's gonna be all right...

Just kidding. Everybody welcome to the bicycle rides and, please,
leave the beast behind.

[Vito]

"ComandanteBanana" > wrote
> "There's no doubt that car drivers need to clean up their act.

No, the answer is to ban cycles from public roads just as they are now
banned from interstate highways.

[Dave Larrington]

In ,
Bob Myers > tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell
us:

> (Hint: this has long ago ceased to be of interest to rec.motorcycles.)

It was /never/ of any interest to uk.rec.cycling, but that hasn't stopped
Monkeyboy posting his inane drivel thereto.
--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from
a yo-yo" - Enoch Root.

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 22, 3:48 am, "Dave Larrington" >
wrote:
> ,
> Bob Myers > tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell
> us:
>
> > (Hint: this has long ago ceased to be of interest to rec.motorcycles.)
>
> It was /never/ of any interest to uk.rec.cycling, but that hasn't stopped
> Monkeyboy posting his inane drivel thereto.
> --
> Dave Larrington
> <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
> "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from
> a yo-yo" - Enoch Root.

Just another deep thought and then I'll let you go (at least until
tomorrow)...

"The sheep hate the monkey because he makes them think. And besides,
they are wannabe lions" ;)

[MikeWhy]

"KingOfTheApes" > wrote in message
...
> On Oct 22, 3:48 am, "Dave Larrington" >
> wrote:
>> ,
>> Bob Myers > tweaked the Babbage-Engine to
>> tell
>> us:
>>
>> > (Hint: this has long ago ceased to be of interest to rec.motorcycles.)
>>
>> It was /never/ of any interest to uk.rec.cycling, but that hasn't stopped
>> Monkeyboy posting his inane drivel thereto.
>> --
>> Dave Larrington
>> <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
>> "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from
>> a yo-yo" - Enoch Root.
>
> Just another deep thought and then I'll let you go (at least until
> tomorrow)...
>
> "The sheep hate the monkey because he makes them think. And besides,
> they are wannabe lions" ;)

================
"Here we go in a flung festoon,
Half-way up to the jealous moon!
Don't you envy our pranceful bands?
Don't you wish you had extra hands?
Wouldn't you like if your tails were--so--
Curved in the shape of a Cupid's bow?
Now you're angry, but--never mind,
Brother, thy tail hangs down behind!

Here we sit in a branchy row,
Thinking of beautiful things we know;
Dreaming of deeds that we mean to do,
All complete, in a minute or two--
Something noble and wise and good,
Done by merely wishing we could.
We've forgotten, but--never mind,
Brother, thy tail hangs down behind!

All the talk we ever have heard
Uttered by bat or beast or bird--
Hide or fin or scale or feather--
Jabber it quickly and all together!
Excellent! Wonderful! Once again!

Now we are talking just like men!
Let's pretend we are ... never mind,
Brother, thy tail hangs down behind!
This is the way of the Monkey-kind.

Then join our leaping lines that scumfish through the pines,
That rocket by where, light and high, the wild grape swings.
By the rubbish in our wake, and the noble noise we make,
Be sure, be sure, we're going to do some splendid things!"

[ComandanteBanana]

On Oct 22, 11:53 am, "MikeWhy" > wrote:
> "KingOfTheApes" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 22, 3:48 am, "Dave Larrington" >
> > wrote:
> >> ,
> >> Bob Myers > tweaked the Babbage-Engine to
> >> tell
> >> us:
>
> >> > (Hint: this has long ago ceased to be of interest to rec.motorcycles.)
>
> >> It was /never/ of any interest to uk.rec.cycling, but that hasn't stopped
> >> Monkeyboy posting his inane drivel thereto.
> >> --
> >> Dave Larrington
> >> <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
> >> "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from
> >> a yo-yo" - Enoch Root.
>
> > Just another deep thought and then I'll let you go (at least until
> > tomorrow)...
>
> > "The sheep hate the monkey because he makes them think. And besides,
> > they are wannabe lions" ;)
>
> ================
> "Here we go in a flung festoon,
> Half-way up to the jealous moon!
> Don't you envy our pranceful bands?
> Don't you wish you had extra hands?
> Wouldn't you like if your tails were--so--
> Curved in the shape of a Cupid's bow?
> Now you're angry, but--never mind,
> Brother, thy tail hangs down behind!
>
> Here we sit in a branchy row,
> Thinking of beautiful things we know;
> Dreaming of deeds that we mean to do,
> All complete, in a minute or two--
> Something noble and wise and good,
> Done by merely wishing we could.
> We've forgotten, but--never mind,
> Brother, thy tail hangs down behind!
>
> All the talk we ever have heard
> Uttered by bat or beast or bird--
> Hide or fin or scale or feather--
> Jabber it quickly and all together!
> Excellent! Wonderful! Once again!
>
> Now we are talking just like men!
> Let's pretend we are ... never mind,
> Brother, thy tail hangs down behind!
> This is the way of the Monkey-kind.
>
> Then join our leaping lines that scumfish through the pines,
> That rocket by where, light and high, the wild grape swings.
> By the rubbish in our wake, and the noble noise we make,
> Be sure, be sure, we're going to do some splendid things!"- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Nice poem you put together (or did you copy it?)

Anyway, my twin brother KingOfTheApes made an statement such as not to
post at least for 24 hours... Well, forget about it. I,
ComandanteBanana, made such a great contributions to the ideas of THE
REVOLUTION, that I'm posting over my brother's foolish statements.

Anyway, the VolksBike would be simple and cheap, possibly under $200
for the proles...

Good thing though this NOT a Marxist revolution, so we can afford a
middle class, a rather large one like in Sweden or something, just
that the real big fish will be taxed to control their uncontrolled
appetites.

So this middle class could afford luxuries like the "cooperative made"
"American made" recumbents, which are more laid back to go with the
social status. They are perfectly fine to replace the automobile for
shorter distances while still giving you a nice workout. No more
bellies as a result of being couch potatos.

"Burley Design Cooperative, a worker-owned manufacturing cooperative
for 25 years, produces high-quality, durable bicycle products,
including child trailers, cargo trailers, trailercycles, tandems,
recumbents, road bikes, commuter bikes and raingear in Eugene, Oregon.
Their products are sold nationally and internationally through
independent bicycle dealers and specialty sporting goods stores. For
more information call 541-687-1644, send email to or
visit the website: www.burley.com."

http://www.bikeroute.com/Recumbents/News/Archives/000016.html

[ComandanteBanana]

(Notice here that we renounce to the Trabant, the ideal Marxist car.
We however prefer something SMART)

Originally Posted by -=£em in Pa=-
"Excellent idea, Mr. Quixote !!
A SMART would be the perfect Nu Trabant or Peoples Car "

We can have the revolutionary,

"Yes to the Smart, no to the Stupid Unnecessary Vehicles"

Well, Smart manufacturer better chip in with the revolution. ;)

[ComandanteBanana]

I don't expect many people here to be revolutionaries... And anyway,
if you were, you'd probably agree with Chavez, but here's an open
letter to the comandante...

Mr. Chavez, Capitalist Crisis will starve your revolution!

I think you were right about the capitalism being in crisis (perhaps
as much as communism), but that can only starve your revolution! Yes,
the petrodollars to finance your social projects (besides the
militarty buildup) will dry up. Well, I have other objections even if
a Petrol Revolution were to work, like Global Warming, but that's too
deep, huh?

"Oil falls below $67 on US recession fears"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081022/ap_on_bi_ge/oil_prices

That's why I say we need a Banana Revolution. For real, from
Comandante to Comandante.

(I expect an answer by tomorrow) ;)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHY THE BANANA REVOLUTION?
(home of the Dutch model!)

http://webspawner.com/users/bananarevolution

[ComandanteBanana]

(Here I'm discussing with a comrade of the revolution about things
happening and said about the jungle where we all live)

Originally Posted by -=£em in Pa=-

1973 was the year the New York Dolls broke. Obviously, the greatest
year
in the history of history. Bikes and Cars were real steel as were the
revolutionaries
who rode them

Report from the Jungle : North sector.
Guy goes into towing agency a block from my job and shoots it up.
Good news is that with so many Sheriffs and WPB PD around, the
gangsters and crack dealers took a break making for a relatively
peaceful ride back to the Juno bunker

***

That's true. But it's also remembered by the oil embargo crisis that
forced Americans to change... Hopefully this time toward bicycles.

Report from the Jungle, south: I came out of my bunker and rode on
trails for 2 miles, then kayak, then back on my bike, and another mile
later. No major attack from either big fish or motorists. The rest of
the time in the Internet.

Plenty of news from the jungle though if you go to Google news and
search "law of the jungle"...

This curious news report is from Cuba, a country famous for his lion:

(What do you think? Do we dismiss it as propaganda?)

Reflections of Fidel
THE LAW OF THE JUNGLE

Trade, within a society and among countries, is the exchange of goods
and services produced by human beings. The owners of the means of
production appropriate the profits. As a class, they are the leaders
of the capitalist state and they boast of fostering development and
social well-being through the market. This they worship as an
infallible God.

In every country there is competition between the strongest and the
weakest; those with more physical energy, those who are better fed,
those who learned how to read and write, those who attended school,
those who have more accumulated experience, more social relations and
more resources, and those in society who do not have these advantages.

Among countries: those with a better climates and more arable land,
more water and more natural resources in the area where they are
located, when there are no more territories to conquer; those that
master technology, have greater development and handle unlimited media
resources, and those that, in contrast, do not enjoy any of these
prerogatives. These are the sometimes enormous differences between
countries described as rich or poor.

It is the law of the jungle.

http://www.granma.cu/ingles/2008/octubre/lun13/Reflections-13oct.html

[KingOfTheApes]

Originally Posted by Ed Holland
"Two places in which I spend much of my life, Oxford, UK and the S.F.
bay area have what you might term above average bicycle usage. In both
places (particularly Oxford) professional folks use a bike for day to
day stuff. It's partly a cultural thing, and changing culture and
habit are difficult.

Some sort of apocalypse is necessary to encourage 50% of the
population to use a bike to do their grocery shopping..."

The Global Plunge? I believe in the power of crises to regenarate and
bring out a new world. We just need some smart leaders, and they
either stupid or corrupt.

[.p.jm@see_my_sig_for_address.com]

On Wed, 22 Oct 2008 17:43:21 -0700 (PDT), KingOfTheApes
> wrote:

>Originally Posted by Ed Holland
>"Two places in which I spend much of my life, Oxford, UK and the S.F.
>bay area have what you might term above average bicycle usage. In both
>places (particularly Oxford) professional folks use a bike for day to
>day stuff. It's partly a cultural thing, and changing culture and
>habit are difficult.

Bloody poofs.


>Some sort of apocalypse is necessary to encourage 50% of the
>population to use a bike to do their grocery shopping..."
>
>The Global Plunge? I believe in the power of crises to regenarate and
>bring out a new world. We just need some smart leaders, and they
>either stupid or corrupt.

--
Click here every day to feed an animal that needs you today !!!
www.theanimalrescuesite.com/

Paul ( pjm @ pobox . com ) - remove spaces to email me
'Some days, it's just not worth chewing through the restraints.'
'With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine.'
HVAC/R program for Palm PDA's
Free demo online at www.pmilligan.net/palm/
Free 'People finder' program now at www.pmilligan.net/finder.htm

[Jym Dyer]

>> HOT DOG, WE HAVE A WEINER!
> Actually, that's "wiener," with the 'i" before the 'e'.
> Because a true wiener is a Viennese sausage, and the word
> wiener is etymologically, culturally and geographically
> associated with "Vienna."

Graffito: "I am a weiner."

Principal Skinner: Whoever did this is in very deep trouble!

Martin Prince: And a sloppy speller, too. The preferred
spelling of "wiener" is w I E n e r. ...
Although, E I is an acceptable ethnic variant.

Principal Skinner: Hmm. Good point.

=v= Moral of the story: Tom Keats is Martin Prince?
<_Jym_>

[Jym Dyer]

>> =v= Clearly you live in one of the parts of [North] America
>> that Sarah Palin characterizes as anti-American.
> Maybe she liked my trailer, too.

=v= I also get a lot of smiles from attractive others whenever
I tow my trailer around. It is, how you say, a "babe magnet."

> Tina Palin would fit right in, in Calgary, Alberta.

=v= See, I *knew* it was anti-American. Watch out, buddy, she
can see your country from her house too, you know.
<_Jym_>

[Rob Kleinschmidt]

On Oct 23, 10:21 am, Jym Dyer > wrote:
> >> HOT DOG, WE HAVE A WEINER!
> > Actually, that's "wiener," with the 'i" before the 'e'.
> > Because a true wiener is a Viennese sausage, and the word
> > wiener is etymologically, culturally and geographically
> > associated with "Vienna."
>
> Graffito: "I am a weiner."
>
> Principal Skinner: Whoever did this is in very deep trouble!
>
> Martin Prince: And a sloppy speller, too. The preferred
> spelling of "wiener" is w I E n e r. ...
> Although, E I is an acceptable ethnic variant.
>
> Principal Skinner: Hmm. Good point.

Eggzactly. The second vowel in the i/e pair determines
the pronunciation.

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
Jym Dyer > writes:
>>> HOT DOG, WE HAVE A WEINER!
>> Actually, that's "wiener," with the 'i" before the 'e'.
>> Because a true wiener is a Viennese sausage, and the word
>> wiener is etymologically, culturally and geographically
>> associated with "Vienna."
>
> Graffito: "I am a weiner."
>
> Principal Skinner: Whoever did this is in very deep trouble!
>
> Martin Prince: And a sloppy speller, too. The preferred
> spelling of "wiener" is w I E n e r. ...
> Although, E I is an acceptable ethnic variant.
>
> Principal Skinner: Hmm. Good point.
>
> =v= Moral of the story: Tom Keats is Martin Prince?

Since when is a moral a question?

Anyway, more like Jim "What Does A Yellow Light Mean"
Ignatowski -- I occasionally have my lucid moments,
but usually I'd rather not.

I think Martin Prince is half of Alice Cooper.
Ralph Wiggam is the other half.
Left brain/right brain.


cheers,
Tom (I'm *not* Alice Cooper. Normally.)

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[KingOfTheApes]

Good thing is thread is still alive so I can recycle this post... ;)

Originally Posted by Ed Holland
"There's good reason to believe that the humble banana is under threat
from diseases:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/20.../16/gm.science

Which doesn't bode well for the revolution. Also, I think reliance on
the banana as a food source is going to be rather unfair on the
digestion of those poor folks..."

***

Yes, I agree. Even I am trying to break my dependency from banana. For
example, I couldn't have my oats without banana and sugar. But my
girlfriend pointed out it was to better to eat the oats with salt,
which tastes nice without the banana. So now I'm banana free!

I just wished the OIL JUNKIES could do the same. They must be going
crazy with the price of oil and other stuff.

But don't you feel like doing something sane in a crazy world and
getting lost with your bike and a banana?

"Stocks, oil, gold tank on growing recession fears
Friday October 24, 11:09 am ET
By Patrick Rizzo and Ellen Simon, Associated Press Writers
Stock market rout spreads around the world as recession worries turn
to dismay"

[KingOfTheApes]

(I knew bicycles and motorcycles fit in somehow in the same thread)

On Oct 24, 1:58 pm, "Trance Gemini" > wrote:

> > But don't you feel like doing something sane in a crazy world and
> > getting lost with your bike and a banana?
>
> Well I need some time. I'm not really ready for bikes and bananas on my
> oatmeal :-)
>
> A motorbike ... okay. A banana without the oatmeal (or vice versa) okay.
>
> That I can handle. Lol.


Yes, I can handle that too. Riding a motorcycle to the Florida keys is
nice.

I just don't how the banana fits in. ;)

[KingOfTheApes]

I'm not sure I should remain banana-free with these news reports...

You can even give up your bike, but don't do it after 8pm, if you know
what I mean (there was my mistake)

"No desserts or snacks. Don’t eat after 8 p.m. Be in bed before
midnight. And get this, you don’t have to exercise to see the pounds
come off."


Are bananas the magic weight loss fruit?

NEW YORK, New York, October 24, 2008 (NBC) -- A weight loss craze that
started in Japan is now in the United States.

It's called the morning banana diet.

It's exactly that, eat bananas in the morning and lose weight.

If there was a magic diet or pill that she could do or take to lose
weight, Kathleen Scalley says she’s probably already tried it.

But what about a "magic" fruit, like the banana.

“Im going to try it I haven't had a banana in years," said Scalley.

The latest fad diet to hit New York City streets is called the morning
banana diet.

“I was told you eat a few bananas and you lose weight. Do you believe
it? “Uhhh...I don’t know,” said Vera Baird.

The plan is that easy. Eat fresh bananas for breakfast or brunch with
water at room temperature.

Eat whatever you want for lunch and dinner.

No desserts or snacks. Don’t eat after 8 p.m. Be in bed before
midnight. And get this, you don’t have to exercise to see the pounds
come off.

Does it work?

http://www.ksn.com/news/health/33223154.html

[GeneralissimoApeshit]

How the **** would you know what it feels like to do something sane?

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 25, 2:48*am, GeneralissimoApe****
> wrote:
> How the **** would you know what it feels like to do something sane?

I know riding an SUV is insane, so I'm assuming riding a bicycle or
motorcycle is sane.

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
Jym Dyer > writes:
>>> =v= Clearly you live in one of the parts of [North] America
>>> that Sarah Palin characterizes as anti-American.
>> Maybe she liked my trailer, too.
>
> =v= I also get a lot of smiles from attractive others whenever
> I tow my trailer around. It is, how you say, a "babe magnet."

Yikes! With my babe magnet rubber-bulb horn, I'm in
double trouble. I also met a guy who was writing down
the Leggero web site for future reference from the
printing on the side of my parked trailer, so maybe
I'm in triple trouble. I prefer to think it's just
a nice, appealing li'l trailer.

>> Tina Palin would fit right in, in Calgary, Alberta.
>
> =v= See, I *knew* it was anti-American. Watch out, buddy, she
> can see your country from her house too, you know.

No worries. Nothin' goin' on here that she'd be interested in.

Or even know about.


cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
KingOfTheApes > writes:
> On Oct 19, 11:20*pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
>> In article >,
>> * * * * KingOfTheApes > writes:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Oct 17, 9:29*pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
>> >> In article >,
>> >> * * * * Tim McNamara > writes:
>>
>> >> > Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than riding
>> >> > motorcycles?
>>
>> >> Because we bicyclists have to read the minds of the
>> >> motor vehicle operators around us. *We often
>> >> have to do their thinking for them. *We know what
>> >> they're gonna do before they know what they're
>> >> gonna do. *Because what they're gonna do is gonna
>> >> be the most detrimental thing to us if we aren't
>> >> heads-up about their brainless movements.
>>
>> >> And besides, bicycles are often a more intelligent
>> >> choice of vehicle.
>> > You contradict your claim to being smart when you refuse to bring here
>> > the bike facilities that work elsewhere.
>>
>> Streets & roads /are/ bike facilities.
>>
>> > But it ain't so much that you
>> > are stupid, it's simply that you are elitist and are selfish as
>> > such...
>>
>> And yet I'm not out to plant fear into the minds of people,
>> while you /are/!
>>
>> > I quote here from someone who have figured out that your kind should
>> > shut up and mind your own business..
>> > "First thing I would do would be to purge snobbish/elitist advocates
>> > from leadership or policy making positions at any publicly funded
>> > bicycling advocacy/educational organization; i.e. the clubby
>> > enthusiast type who believes cycling skill (or advocacy goals) is
>> > defined by being a racer (like himself) or a cyclist (like himself)
>> > who moves consistently at speeds greater than 12mph."
>> >http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?p=7688868&posted=1#post7688868
>>
>> My "kind," eh?
>>
>> Strike one.
>>
>> Snobbish/elitist advocate, eh?
>>
>> Strike two.
>>
>> Shall we go on to your strike 85?
>>
>> You're evilly anti-human, and I'm
>> calling you on it. *You hate bicycling
>> because it gets in your way as a driver,
>> and it sticks in your throat like a fishbone.
>> You're not out to promote bicycling; you're
>> out to restrict it.
>>
>> "By their fruits shall ye know them."
>>
>> Your fruits are distasteful and highly,
>> bitterly spit-out-able.
>>
>> And you are despicable for it.
>>
>> It is /you/ who is not only the elitist snob,
>> but the greedy pig doing everything you can to
>> force everybody else out of your way as you
>> muscle into what you perceive as the free-for-all
>> traffic trough in which you believe non-drivers
>> don't belong.
>>
>> I don't hate you. *I don't pity you. *It's not mine
>> to harbour either of those sentiments. *I just work
>> around you, you odious obstacle.
>>
>> Just as you work against people.
> No fear.

You're replete with fear and with fearmongering.

> I'm stating it's a jungle,

which is such an haywire perspective.

> so you get ready for it
> accordingly. Some people drive SUVs in it rule and be reckless, others
> ride bike with a gun, and other ride bikes trusting other people who
> otherwise give a ****, be concerned about you.
> Good luck in the jungle, man.

What <exasperation> f'ing jungle!?

> By the way, the fruit to be judged by is a banana.

The fruit to be judged by is that which we produce.
All you produce is Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt.

You have nothing positive to offer. But you sure
have a lot of negative to offer. You are truly
evil, and I'm calling you on it.

> What's wrong with
> giving a banana (finger) to the whole damn system?

For one thing, it's childishly silly. For another
thing, it doesn't accomplish anything. For another
thing, it's hypocritical to dis The (Democratic)
System before applying it.

And if things don't go your way and people don't
agree with you, Chancellor Baboon, consider there's
a good reason for it.

Go sit on yer stoopid banana, and think about what
a destructive fool you have exhibited yourself to be,
and have made yourself known to others.


--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[Vito]

"Tom Keats" > wrote
> All you produce is Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt.
>
And that's bad why? AFAIK one either produces Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt or
one is victimized by it.

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 25, 2:48 am, GeneralissimoApe****
> wrote:
> How the **** would you know what it feels like to do something sane?

Just do the sane things like riding a bike, or even a motorcycle, and
you'll be all right.

Voting Republican though would be insane. ;)

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
Jym Dyer > writes:

>>>> "Bicycle lane" promoters are either misguided or
>>>> anti-cyclist.
>
> =v= That statement represents an ideology, not a consensus.
> Many "real" bicyclists quite reasonable hold other opinions.

I don't mind intelligently-applied bike lanes that solve
localized problems such as poor sightlines. In fact I
rather appreciate them.

What I object to is the impetus to mindlessly slapdash "token"
bike lanes everywhere. AIUI some of your US jurisdictions are
inclined to do just that, just to get ISTEA funding. I figure
such bike lanes are more for the benefits of moneygrubbers
than for riders. And I figure a bike lane installed without
any thought toward the people who'd actually use it can be
more detrimental than beneficial to its users.

I hope my stance on this subject is reasonable enough.


cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[Paul O]

Tom Keats wrote, On 10/27/2008 5:05 PM:
> In article >,
> Jym Dyer > writes:
>
>
>>>>> "Bicycle lane" promoters are either misguided or
>>>>> anti-cyclist.
>>>>>
>> =v= That statement represents an ideology, not a consensus.
>> Many "real" bicyclists quite reasonable hold other opinions.
>>
>
> I don't mind intelligently-applied bike lanes that solve
> localized problems such as poor sightlines. In fact I
> rather appreciate them.
>
> What I object to is the impetus to mindlessly slapdash "token"
> bike lanes everywhere. AIUI some of your US jurisdictions are
> inclined to do just that, just to get ISTEA funding. I figure
> such bike lanes are more for the benefits of moneygrubbers
> than for riders. And I figure a bike lane installed without
> any thought toward the people who'd actually use it can be
> more detrimental than beneficial to its users.
>
> I hope my stance on this subject is reasonable enough.
>
>
> cheers,
> Tom
>
>
Actually, we prefer that submissions to RBM take the most extreme
position as possible. It makes it easier to identify the 'pro bike lane'
people from the 'anti bike lane' people...

--

Paul D Oosterhout
I work for SAIC (but I don't speak for SAIC)

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
Paul O > writes:

>> I don't mind intelligently-applied bike lanes that solve
>> localized problems such as poor sightlines. In fact I
>> rather appreciate them.
>>
>> What I object to is the impetus to mindlessly slapdash "token"
>> bike lanes everywhere. AIUI some of your US jurisdictions are
>> inclined to do just that, just to get ISTEA funding. I figure
>> such bike lanes are more for the benefits of moneygrubbers
>> than for riders. And I figure a bike lane installed without
>> any thought toward the people who'd actually use it can be
>> more detrimental than beneficial to its users.
>>
>> I hope my stance on this subject is reasonable enough.

> Actually, we prefer that submissions to RBM take the most extreme
> position as possible. It makes it easier to identify the 'pro bike lane'
> people from the 'anti bike lane' people...

"Making it easier" == dumbing down.

That's for drivers and people who buy those "Idiot's Guide to ..."
books, not for trolley-nosed elitists like us.

The Compleat Idiot's Guide to Volkswagen Repair notwithstanding --
that's classic literature, right up there with Betty Crocker's
contributions.


cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
Zoot Katz > writes:

> It's considered an expression of free speech guaranteed under our
> Charter of Rights. Local mayors, city council and parks board members
> have ridden CM in Vancouver. Since the yahoo element has grown we've
> been getting city paid baby sitters in blue. Motorcycle cops riding
> tail end and a few bicycle mounted cops riding in the mass. They even
> help corking. I've quit going but just might on Halloween!

Maybe see ya at the All Saints Day celebration at OCB.
It'd be kewl if Jym showed up too. I could fix yez all
up with imbibements, oblations & indulgences.

> The so called "bike paths" are for recreational riding

The paved north part of the False Creek seawall is for
walking to certain restaurants, and dodging compulsive
gamblers.

The unpaved stretch of the SeaSide route through Jericho &
Locarno beaches and Spanish Banks isn't too bad.

The bicycle part of the Stanley Park Seawall is for
lying down and avoiding.

Bike paths in parks are antithetical to the purpose of
parks anyways. They don't belong in parks, and they
shouldn't exist.

Parks are for slowing down and regaining one's psychic
bearings, not for whizzing through. We already have
overpriced, up-market shopping centres and malls for
whizzing through. Plus, their parkades.


cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

Vito wrote:
> "Tom Keats" > wrote
>> All you produce is Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt.
>>
> And that's bad why? AFAIK one either produces Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt or
> one is victimized by it.
>
>
The zero-sum attitude is part of what is seriously wrong with human
"civilization".

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

[Bob Myers]

"Tom Sherman" > wrote in message
...
> Vito wrote:
>> "Tom Keats" > wrote
>>> All you produce is Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt.
>>>
>> And that's bad why? AFAIK one either produces Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt
>> or one is victimized by it.
> The zero-sum attitude is part of what is seriously wrong with human
> "civilization".

Only some examples of it. Remember Gandhi's response
when asked for his opinion re "Western civilization"?


Bob M.

[Tom Keats]

In article m>,
"Vito" > writes:
> "Tom Keats" > wrote
>> All you produce is Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt.
>>
> And that's bad why?

Why is /any/ antisocial propaganda bull**** bad?

> AFAIK one either produces Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt or
> one is victimized by it.

<sigh>

Yeah. Except for those who can see FUD for the bull****
razmatazz it is. So it's not the simple-minded, either/or,
binary thing you portray it to be.


--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

Tom Keats wrote:
> In article >,
> Jym Dyer > writes:
>
>>>>> "Bicycle lane" promoters are either misguided or
>>>>> anti-cyclist.
>> =v= That statement represents an ideology, not a consensus.
>> Many "real" bicyclists quite reasonable hold other opinions.
>
> I don't mind intelligently-applied bike lanes that solve
> localized problems such as poor sightlines. In fact I
> rather appreciate them.
>
Separate but equal is never equal. Motorists need to accommodate
cyclists on the proper roads, or be banned from driving.

> What I object to is the impetus to mindlessly slapdash "token"
> bike lanes everywhere. AIUI some of your US jurisdictions are
> inclined to do just that, just to get ISTEA funding. I figure
> such bike lanes are more for the benefits of moneygrubbers
> than for riders. And I figure a bike lane installed without
> any thought toward the people who'd actually use it can be
> more detrimental than beneficial to its users.
>
Indeed.

> I hope my stance on this subject is reasonable enough.
>
This is Usenet. Non-dogmatic positions are NOT tolerated!

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
Tom Sherman > writes:
> Tom Keats wrote:
>> In article >,
>> Jym Dyer > writes:
>>
>>>>>> "Bicycle lane" promoters are either misguided or
>>>>>> anti-cyclist.
>>> =v= That statement represents an ideology, not a consensus.
>>> Many "real" bicyclists quite reasonable hold other opinions.
>>
>> I don't mind intelligently-applied bike lanes that solve
>> localized problems such as poor sightlines. In fact I
>> rather appreciate them.
>>
> Separate but equal is never equal. Motorists need to accommodate
> cyclists on the proper roads, or be banned from driving.

Sometimes a wee bit of bike lane is no worse than a
left turn lane/bay.

>> What I object to is the impetus to mindlessly slapdash "token"
>> bike lanes everywhere. AIUI some of your US jurisdictions are
>> inclined to do just that, just to get ISTEA funding. I figure
>> such bike lanes are more for the benefits of moneygrubbers
>> than for riders. And I figure a bike lane installed without
>> any thought toward the people who'd actually use it can be
>> more detrimental than beneficial to its users.
>>
> Indeed.
>
>> I hope my stance on this subject is reasonable enough.
>>
> This is Usenet. Non-dogmatic positions are NOT tolerated!

I can be such a rabble-rouser. Sometimes I'll even dare to
bring my cup & saucer to the teapot, instead of vice versa.

Sometimes I'll even eat a slab of pizza starting from the
wrong end.


cheers,
Tom



--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

Bob Myers wrote:
> "Tom Sherman" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Vito wrote:
>>> "Tom Keats" > wrote
>>>> All you produce is Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt.
>>>>
>>> And that's bad why? AFAIK one either produces Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt
>>> or one is victimized by it.
>> The zero-sum attitude is part of what is seriously wrong with human
>> "civilization".
>
> Only some examples of it. Remember Gandhi's response
> when asked for his opinion re "Western civilization"?
>
Yes, it would indeed by a good idea.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

[Jym Dyer]

Tom Keats writes:

> What I object to is the impetus to mindlessly slapdash "token"
> bike lanes everywhere. AIUI some of your US jurisdictions
> are inclined to do just that, just to get ISTEA funding.

=v= The VC party line on the eeevils of bike facilities hinged
on a 1974 study by Jerrold Kaplan. A more recent study by
William Moritz, in 1996, was designed to replicate the Kaplan
study.

=v= Neither study measures the *quality* of the surveyed bike
lanes and bike paths. Many bike lanes are just road shoulders
that somebody painted the words "Bike Lane" on, and bike paths
are usually actually multi-use recreation paths, or even just
sidewalks with some paint thrown on them. These studies blur
distinctions between badly- and well-designed facilities.

=v= This is a valid and useful measurement in that it reflects
the political reality that local governments may only fund
the worst facilities possible. In another sense, though, this
measurement is a disservice, since some of the bike facilities
are much better than others, and point the way towards what is
worth advocating for. Moritz notes that his study indicated
safety improvements for all bike facilities, and while finding
that multi-use paths are still more dangerous than street
riding, also found that they are TWICE AS SAFE as they were
in 1974. In other words, we now have a greater proportion of
well-designed bike paths.

VERY, VERY IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER!

=v= All of the above applies *only* to a specialized sample
population: "experienced, regular adult riders." The point
of the 1974 study was to see what happened when you weeded out
children and "inexperienced" adults, and made the assumption
that club riders were the most appropriate population to survey.
I do not share this assumption: Club riders ride at higher
speeds, which is obviously not a good idea on multi-use paths,
so it's no surprise that this population would be predisposed
against such facilities.

=v= The 1996 study tried to replicate this, and is based on
surveys of members of League of American Bicyclists (LAB). LAB
is predominantly club riders, and at the time it was actually
promoting Forester's Effective Cycling[TM] program and dogma,
so this surveyed population may have been *further* predisposed
against bicycle facilities. (Forester has since ended this
arrangement, as LAB did not adhere to his dogma to the extent
that he wanted them to.)

=v= Moritz did another 1995-1996 survey of a population that I
find to be of more relevance: bike commuters. This survey
found that, for this population, bike lanes, bike routes, and
bike paths were actually safer than street riding!

=v= You can find the two Moritz studies (and many others) here:

http://www.enhancements.org/trrtoc.htm

<_Jym_>

[Jym Dyer]

Tom Sherman writes:

> Separate but equal is never equal.

=v= Then I expect you to advocate strenuously against all
those motorist-only road systems that make things so unequal
for the rest of us. The Autobahn, the Interstate Highway
system, that sort of thing.
<_Jym_>

[Jym Dyer]

Tom Keats writes:

> Maybe see ya at the All Saints Day celebration at OCB.
> It'd be kewl if Jym showed up too. I could fix yez all
> up with imbibements, oblations & indulgences.

=v= Thanks for your kind invite; I always like biking in
Vancouver. This All Saints Day, though, I'll be on the
other coast, in the great city of Brooklyn:

http://times-up.org/index.php?page=halloween-cm

<_Jym_>

[Frank Krygowski]

Jym Dyer wrote:
>
>
> =v= The VC party line on the eeevils of bike facilities hinged
> on a 1974 study by Jerrold Kaplan. A more recent study by
> William Moritz, in 1996, was designed to replicate the Kaplan
> study.
>
> =v= Neither study measures the *quality* of the surveyed bike
> lanes and bike paths. Many bike lanes are just road shoulders
> that somebody painted the words "Bike Lane" on, and bike paths
> are usually actually multi-use recreation paths, or even just
> sidewalks with some paint thrown on them. These studies blur
> distinctions between badly- and well-designed facilities.

I can't imagine a realistic way of rating the quality of a bike lane or
bike path in a survey of this type. Would you simply ask the opinion of
a rider who had a crash? He'd be prejudiced to rate the facility badly.
Would you ask the designer of the facility? You couldn't reach him
for such a survey, and if you could, he'd say it was excellent.

Bike lanes are being striped in door zones right now. We know those are
bad, don't we? But they're being actively promoted by LAB and others.


>
> =v= All of the above applies *only* to a specialized sample
> population: "experienced, regular adult riders." The point
> of the 1974 study was to see what happened when you weeded out
> children and "inexperienced" adults, and made the assumption
> that club riders were the most appropriate population to survey.
> I do not share this assumption: Club riders ride at higher
> speeds, which is obviously not a good idea on multi-use paths,
> so it's no surprise that this population would be predisposed
> against such facilities.

Regarding Moritz's 1996 paper, and the improvement in safety on MUPs: I
think it's likely that design and construction standards had improved by
that time. But I also think it's likely that the dedicated cyclists
surveyed had caught on to the fact that bike paths are dangerous. Their
behavior may have been more defensive, on average. And still, the MUPs
were more dangerous than anything but sidewalks.

- Frank Krygowski

[Vito]

"Tom Keats" > wrote
>> AFAIK one either produces Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt or
>> one is victimized by it.
>
> <sigh>
>
> Yeah. Except for those who can see FUD for the bull****
> razmatazz it is. So it's not the simple-minded, either/or,
> binary thing you portray it to be.
>
They showed such a man on a true TV crime show. A criminal had been breaking
into couples' homes, tying up the man then brutally raping the woman right
in front of him. It got so bad they held a neighborhood meeting. One
attendee who could see through the FUD and wondered how a man could let such
a thing happen. The next night he found out.

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 27, 10:13 pm, Tom Sherman >
wrote:
> Tom Keats wrote:
> > In article >,
> > Jym Dyer > writes:
>
> >>>>> "Bicycle lane" promoters are either misguided or
> >>>>> anti-cyclist.
> >> =v= That statement represents an ideology, not a consensus.
> >> Many "real" bicyclists quite reasonable hold other opinions.
>
> > I don't mind intelligently-applied bike lanes that solve
> > localized problems such as poor sightlines. In fact I
> > rather appreciate them.
>
> Separate but equal is never equal. Motorists need to accommodate
> cyclists on the proper roads, or be banned from driving.

Do you think we will ever find THE SOLUTION before we finally trash
the planet?

At this rate it will take us one century to find the solution, and
another to do something about it.

It's either BIKE LANES or TRAFFIC TAMING, stupid! ;)

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 28, 11:12*am, "Vito" > wrote:
> "Tom Keats" > wrote>> AFAIK one either produces Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt or
> >> one is victimized by it.
>
> > <sigh>
>
> > Yeah. *Except for those who can see FUD for the bull****
> > razmatazz it is. *So it's not the simple-minded, either/or,
> > binary thing you portray it to be.
>
> They showed such a man on a true TV crime show. A criminal had been breaking
> into couples' homes, tying up the man then brutally raping the woman right
> in front of him. *It got so bad they held a neighborhood meeting. *One
> attendee who could see through the FUD and wondered how a man could let such
> a thing happen. *The next night he found out.

You have to walk a fine line between living in fear and becoming a
couch potato, and being stupid and riding a bike among reckless
drivers.

I don't think the 6o'clock news is the real world, but neither is to
ignore what's going on in the jungle, and bike happily as if you were
in Holland.

[KingOfTheApes]

(Finally common sense is prevailing in other forums. When will we have
some here?)

Originally Posted by -=£em in Pa=-
"Anyone who has spent time in THE JUNGLE knows a VICIOUS, hungry LION
cannot be tamed. Separate PATHS for the MONKEYS."

Yep, that's common sense among the monkeys. When is the world going to
be ruled by COMMON SENSE, and not the views of the lion? Only with the
revolution, of course... ;)

(And remember they never go in the jungle without a banana!)

[BrianNZ]

KingOfTheApes wrote:
> On Oct 28, 11:12 am, "Vito" > wrote:
>> "Tom Keats" > wrote>> AFAIK one either produces Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt or
>>>> one is victimized by it.
>>> <sigh>
>>> Yeah. Except for those who can see FUD for the bull****
>>> razmatazz it is. So it's not the simple-minded, either/or,
>>> binary thing you portray it to be.
>> They showed such a man on a true TV crime show. A criminal had been breaking
>> into couples' homes, tying up the man then brutally raping the woman right
>> in front of him. It got so bad they held a neighborhood meeting. One
>> attendee who could see through the FUD and wondered how a man could let such
>> a thing happen. The next night he found out.
>
> You have to walk a fine line between living in fear and becoming a
> couch potato, and being stupid and riding a bike among reckless
> drivers.
>
> I don't think the 6o'clock news is the real world, but neither is to
> ignore what's going on in the jungle, and bike happily as if you were
> in Holland.


So, you are not in a jungle, you are in a cage! A free king could live
where the wanted.

[Tom Keats]

In article m>,
"Vito" > writes:
> "Tom Keats" > wrote
>>> AFAIK one either produces Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt or
>>> one is victimized by it.
>>
>> <sigh>
>>
>> Yeah. Except for those who can see FUD for the bull****
>> razmatazz it is. So it's not the simple-minded, either/or,
>> binary thing you portray it to be.
>>
> They showed such a man on a true TV crime show. A criminal had been breaking
> into couples' homes, tying up the man then brutally raping the woman right
> in front of him. It got so bad they held a neighborhood meeting. One
> attendee who could see through the FUD and wondered how a man could let such
> a thing happen. The next night he found out.

A few posts upthread (in fact, in your most immediately previous post
upthread,) in response to:
>> "There's no doubt that car drivers need to clean up their act.

you stated:
> No, the answer is to ban cycles from public roads just as they are now
> banned from interstate highways.

Obviously FUD works for you and your agendum.

To selectively ban users from /public/ roads renders those roads
no longer public, but exclusive. E-x-c-l-u-s-i-v-e, as in certain
hoity-toity country clubs, and clots of self-made, self-styled
boneheads like fascist skinheads.

So, FUD works for you, and this stoopid post of yours to which
I'm replying certainly indicates you work for it.

Let someone ride a bicycle on a public road, and the next thing
you know, they're raping your wife.

Yeah, right.

Incidentally and FYI, bicycles are /not/ blanketly banned from
all interstate highways.


--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[KingOfTheApes]

On Oct 28, 6:43*pm, BrianNZ > wrote:
> KingOfTheApes wrote:
> > On Oct 28, 11:12 am, "Vito" > wrote:
> >> "Tom Keats" > wrote>> AFAIK one either produces Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt or
> >>>> one is victimized by it.
> >>> <sigh>
> >>> Yeah. *Except for those who can see FUD for the bull****
> >>> razmatazz it is. *So it's not the simple-minded, either/or,
> >>> binary thing you portray it to be.
> >> They showed such a man on a true TV crime show. A criminal had been breaking
> >> into couples' homes, tying up the man then brutally raping the woman right
> >> in front of him. *It got so bad they held a neighborhood meeting. *One
> >> attendee who could see through the FUD and wondered how a man could let such
> >> a thing happen. *The next night he found out.
>
> > You have to walk a fine line between living in fear and becoming a
> > couch potato, and being stupid and riding a bike among reckless
> > drivers.
>
> > I don't think the 6o'clock news is the real world, but neither is to
> > ignore what's going on in the jungle, and bike happily as if you were
> > in Holland.
>
> So, you are not in a jungle, you are in a cage! A free king could live
> where the wanted.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

The lion king is free but the monkey is in the cage!

"The wild, cruel beast is not behind the bars of the cage. He is in
front of it" -Axel Munthe

[Jym Dyer]

Vito writes:
> They showed such a man on a true TV crime show.

=v= Oh brother. Exemplarize the anomalous and you could
pretty much argue for anything. Be sure to use lots of
emotion to drown out any reason, context, or prespective.
<_Jym_>

[Jym Dyer]

> I can't imagine a realistic way of rating the quality of
> a bike lane or bike path in a survey of this type.

=v= You would have to pay attention to physical parameters
at the collision locations. Things like visibility, width,
distance from the door zone, treatments at intersections.
Note the differences between intersection X (location of
many collisions) and intersection Y (where collisions are
rare).

> Bike lanes are being striped in door zones right now.
> We know those are bad, don't we?

=v= Well yes, that's my point. What makes sense to me is
to point out that door zone bike lanes are bad, rather than
pretending bike lanes are all one undifferentated monolithic
lump of pure evil and declaring that anyone who supports
any bike lane at all is "anti-cyclist."

> And still, the MUPs were more dangerous than anything
> but sidewalks.

=v= Certainly the MUPs, as one undifferentiated monolith,
are dangerous. But my point is to look at the ones that
are less dangerous and see what we can learn from them.
<_Jym_>

[KingOfTheApes]

Originally Posted by closetbiker

"not just infrastructure, training drivers as well.

Licensing for motorists includes testing for knowledge on the rights
and respect of cyclists."


Yes, I totally agree. But there's ONE QUICK WAY to solve the
problem... ENFORCEMENT!

And WHO can change the tolerance toward reckless drivers? Right, the
politicians!

So as first law of the revolution I'd fire all politicians, and then
make them commute by bike one day a week before returning them to
their job.

[KingOfTheApes]

Originally Posted by San Rensho

"I think traffic taming works. In Miami, some of the more expensive
neighborhoods have gotten laws passed to put traffic circles at
intersections along long stretches of narrow two lane streets that
were being used as alternative commuttewr routes.

These are an absolute joy to bicycle on. The roundabouts have chased
away most of the traffic because its hard to get around the
roundabouts in a car since they are so small, and roundabouts are
great because you don't have to stop, so you can keep uo your
momentum."


Yeah, but remember these are the lions of the jungle that can change
the laws and do whatever they please. No such luck in the jungle
ghetto. SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST! Monkeys are fair game.

Not in their neighborhoods. They even block their own fancy
neighborhoods to traffic... and bikes! There's one such road block
nearby where I live, and they make sure to block even the smallest
space for the bike to squeeze by, and you have to go around it on the
more dangerous road.

That's another characteristic of the jungle... EVERYONE TO HIMSELF!

[KingOfTheApes]

(A parting shot? It sounds like one)

Originally Posted by Bekologist
"Some of the 'bike advocates' in america are overtly in collusion with
the auto lobby to perpetuate autocentric desires that help stunt bike
participation by continuing to predicate a 'cars first' approach to
city streetscape design."


Thank you again for reiterating something I noticed a long time ago...
In the car forums they are more open to bikes than in the bike forums.
They understand, for example, the need for bike lanes, and relate to
the argument that more bikes means fewer cars on the road, and thus
fewer traffic jams.

The bike saboteurs put obstacles all the way to impede any progress.
NO BIKE LANES, NO TRAFFIC TAMING --AND NO REVOLUTION.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHY THE BANANA REVOLUTION?
(home of the Dutch model!)

http://webspawner.com/users/bananarevolution

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
KingOfTheApes > writes:
> (A parting shot? It sounds like one)
>
> Originally Posted by Bekologist
> "Some of the 'bike advocates' in america are overtly in collusion with
> the auto lobby to perpetuate autocentric desires that help stunt bike
> participation by continuing to predicate a 'cars first' approach to
> city streetscape design."

Such as /you/, who are so desirous of sustaining an "us vs them"
warfare instead of a "we" cooperation.

> Thank you again for reiterating something I noticed a long time ago...
> In the car forums they are more open to bikes than in the bike forums.

Well, at least sometimes your disinformation is amusing.

> They understand, for example, the need for bike lanes,

Non-riders (such as yourself) who want bike lanes everywhere,
want them for only one reason -- to force bikes out of the
(perceived) ways of cars. In this, I'm sure John Forester
was right.

> and relate to
> the argument that more bikes means fewer cars on the road, and thus
> fewer traffic jams.

It seems many car forums people want bikes off the roads entirely
because they see riders as obstacles to their self-centred haste.
In truth, in most cases the rider moves a little right, the
overtaking driver moves a little left -- no sweat. But you're
so compelled to make mountains of molehills.

> The bike saboteurs put obstacles all the way to impede any progress.
> NO BIKE LANES, NO TRAFFIC TAMING --AND NO REVOLUTION.

Complaining about being called on your BS propaganda, eh?

Squirm, worm, squirm.


--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

[Vito]

"Tom Keats" > wrote
> Such as /you/, who are so desirous of sustaining an "us vs them"
> warfare instead of a "we" cooperation.

Montgomery County Maryland spent many taxpayer dollars building bicycle only
trails through nice parks. Never the less, a club of some 40 riders would
truck out to rural roads two-lane every weekend to ride 3 and 4 abreast,
blocking traffic for miles. Thanks to them I still have an Us vs Them
attitude.

I've never seen that in Florida. Many streets have exclusive bicycle lanes
and riders travel singley or in pairs, strung out to let traffic past.
Thanks to them I haven't gone jousting for years.

[Dane Buson]

In rec.bicycles.misc Tom Sherman >
wrote:
> KingOfTheApes wrote:
>> On Oct 19, 1:01 pm, Tom Sherman >
>> wrote:
>>
>> You said you were a collaborator so you don't need to say you are NOT
>> a rebel.
>>
>> So what's your viewpoint, dude? Go with the flow? Baaah!
>
> Vehicular cycling and vigorous prosecution of motorists who threaten,
> harass and/or strike lawfully riding cyclists. Mandatory education of
> motorists on the rights of cyclists.

I like these, but I also really like making the driving tests more
expensive, more frequent and harder. Let's get rid of the bottom 3% of
drivers.

> If we want cycling facilities, build extra wide right lanes.
>
> Sharrows are fine, as long as they are far enough from the curb and/or
> parking lane.
>
> Bicycle lanes just lead to motorists believing that cyclists do NOT
> belong anywhere else on the road.

Pretty much, as well as frequently positioning people using them in the
door zone.

--
Dane Buson -
"Gratitude is merely the secret hope of further favors."
-Anonymous