Critical Mass Tunnel Freaks

In article slrnbh03nd.g00.idontreadthis@yahoobb220004112240. bbtec.net,
Baka Dasai wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 12:26:51 GMT, Buck said (and I quote):
"Baka Dasai" wrote in message
This is termed "corking", and is done to ensure the mass doesn't get
broken up. If this offends your sense of vehicular cycling, think
of the mass as a single vehicle that requires a longer-than-usual
traffic light cycle to get through an intersection.

Call it what you want, but it is illegal and shows the world how CMers think
theat the laws don't apply to them.

It's not necessarily illegal.

In my home town of Sydney, Australia, velocops accompany the mass, and
fully approve of the corking.

I think it's important to make some distinctions he "legal" is not
the same thing as "law enforcement thinks it's legal", which is not the
same thing as "law enforcement is willing to go along with it."

In fact, the velocops get a bit tetchy if the corking isn't being done
properly as they are very concerned to ensure that cars don't enter the
mass. They see it as simply a safety issue - corking makes the mass
safe.

I'd be curious to see any hard evidence on the safety issue. Cyclists
who do ride daily as a "critical mass of one", surrounded mostly by
motor vehicles, and who seem to mostly do OK, may find it hard to
believe that car-bike mixtures really raise such a huge safety problems.

There are also obvious safety disadvantages to being in a big crowd of
densely packed probably not terribly disciplined cyclists. Probably
it's not a big deal. On balance, perhaps the mass is a little safer
without cars mixed in; I really have no idea. Which is why I'd be
interested in evidence either way.

But it seems unlikely that the difference in safety, whatever it may be,
is really that huge. And I'm a little worried that bike cops who are
"very concerned to ensure that cars don't enter the mass" may also
discourage the reverse situation--single bicyclists commuting with
mainly motor vehicle traffic.

--Bruce Fields

Baka Dasai

wrote:

Hunrobe said (and I quote):
OTOH if you are one of the C-Mers that does idiotic things like
intentionally blocking intersections with *stationary* bikes

This is termed "corking", and is done to ensure the mass doesn't get
broken up. If this offends your sense of vehicular cycling, think
of the mass as a single vehicle that requires a longer-than-usual
traffic light cycle to get through an intersection.

Corking is a direct contradiction of the statement, "We are traffic". Are
cyclists only "traffic" when we are in a large group? That's what corking would
seem to imply.
But I wasn't referring to corking. I was referring to a description of a
particular incident that the poster I was replying to had posted in the summer
of 2002. In that instance a C-M ride had simply stopped in a major
intersection. The riders had then dismounted and spent close to 30 minutes
mingling and talking in the roadway. If that isn't a statement of, "To hell
with anyone trying to get through this intersection. There are enough of us
here that we can do whatever we like. Might makes right." I don't know what is.


Regards,
Bob Hunt

Sat, 12 Jul 2003 12:47:45 GMT,
,
"Buck" j u n k m a i l @ g a l a x y c o r p . c o m wrote:

Perhaps there is no proof that CM causes a backlash (and it would be
difficult to prove anyway),

Then why continue spewing it? Without proof, it's a myth. It's your
movie. Fantasyland material you created to shift the blame for
drivers' ****ty attitudes.

but it has been observed, as has been posted
here several times, that traffic reacts differently (and not in a positive
way) after a CM ride.

And I'm saying that's bulldadda. A figment of overactive imaginations
on the part of persons who, without having any direct experience,
decided CM is a bad thing because it doesn't conveniently fit into
their world view.

I gave putznutz a plausible out by suggesting he may have been
reacting to a sticker or just a random self-righteous asswipe on a
mission instead of suggesting, without any proof, that his behaviour
was excusable because he may have at some time past been delayed by a
CM ride in which I may have participated.

Why couldn't his stupidity have been a reaction to some roadies
blatant disregard for traffic laws when they're out training? Or maybe
his panties get wadded over curb-jumping BMX riders. To zealously lay
blame for the caged jerks reactions directly at the feet of CM seems
to be your mission. And you seem to think it's okay to do because 'CM
riders' have an identifiable look you apparently don't like.
--
zk

12 Jul 2003 16:16:38 GMT,
,
(Hunrobe) wrote:

I was referring to a description of a
particular incident that the poster I was replying to had posted in the summer
of 2002. In that instance a C-M ride had simply stopped in a major
intersection. The riders had then dismounted and spent close to 30 minutes
mingling and talking in the roadway. If that isn't a statement of, "To hell
with anyone trying to get through this intersection. There are enough of us
here that we can do whatever we like. Might makes right." I don't know what is.

How about instead of CM riders you see them as people saying, "We've
had it with your cars dominating public space at the peril of our
lives".
--
zk

Zoot Katz

wrote:

How about instead of CM riders you see them as people saying, "We've
had it with your cars dominating public space at the peril of our
lives".

The "public space" you are referring to is a roadway. Roadways exist to
facilitate getting from Point A to Point B. If one wants to block the public
right of way to hold a block party, street festival, parade, or protest then
they should apply for a permit. If they don't do that and instead just say, "We
can deny the rest of the public the right of freedom of movement because we are
special." then I don't care what they call themselves. I call them knotheads.
The inconsiderate jerks that doublepark next to each other and block the entire
street while they talk are knotheads. The pedestrians that stroll across the
road against a "do not walk" light are knotheads. People that lay their bikes
down in the middle of a major intersection so they can spend a half an hour
congratulating one another for successfully ****ing off the other road users
trying to get through that intersection are also knotheads.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

Zoot Katz wrote in message ...
Sat, 12 Jul 2003 12:47:45 GMT,
,
"Buck" j u n k m a i l @ g a l a x y c o r p . c o m wrote:

Perhaps there is no proof that CM causes a backlash (and it would be
difficult to prove anyway),

Then why continue spewing it? Without proof, it's a myth. It's your
movie. Fantasyland material you created to shift the blame for
drivers' ****ty attitudes.

It's simple. I don't like CM tactics. Period. If you claim that I have
no proof of the harm CM does, then neither can you make any claims
about the effectiveness of the rides. You can't have it both ways,
Zoot.


but it has been observed, as has been posted
here several times, that traffic reacts differently (and not in a positive
way) after a CM ride.

And I'm saying that's bulldadda. A figment of overactive imaginations
on the part of persons who, without having any direct experience,
decided CM is a bad thing because it doesn't conveniently fit into
their world view.

Perhaps you are so accustomed to getting accosted that you cannot tell
the difference the day after a CM ride. I wonder about someone who has
so many stories about how bad drivers are. I have been hit by a car
ONCE, yet I can only think of one time that someone has purposely
accosted me on my bike and only three other really stupid moves by
drivers that put me at risk. But the one attack came the day after a
CM ride. I maintain the position that CM rides cannot do any good
because of the tactics they use, nothing more.


I gave putznutz a plausible out by suggesting he may have been
reacting to a sticker or just a random self-righteous asswipe on a
mission instead of suggesting, without any proof, that his behaviour
was excusable because he may have at some time past been delayed by a
CM ride in which I may have participated.

Have you forgotten how to read? Perhaps your anger has elevated your
blood pressure to the point where you cannot comprehend what you are
reading. Let me put this into caps so you don't miss it: NOBODY HAS
SAID THAT ANY OF THE BEHAVIORS YOU HAVE DESCRIBED ARE EXCUSABLE!!!!!
Sheesh. Why is it that any time someone opposes your point of view,
they are immediately viewed by you as supporting assault with an
automobile? The question at hand is WHY he did it, not whether or not
it was an appropriate behavior.

Why couldn't his stupidity have been a reaction to some roadies
blatant disregard for traffic laws when they're out training? Or maybe
his panties get wadded over curb-jumping BMX riders. To zealously lay
blame for the caged jerks reactions directly at the feet of CM seems
to be your mission. And you seem to think it's okay to do because 'CM
riders' have an identifiable look you apparently don't like.

For all anyone knows, he has a deep-seated fear of cyclists and feels
the need to intimidate them every chance he gets. My mission here is
to point out that the tactics CM uses are objectionable to a large
number of drivers as well as other cyclists. I do not suggest that
every objectionable driver action is a direct result of CM actions.
But I do realize that CM is more likely to get a bad reaction than a
good one. Which rider is most likely to set off a moron like you
describe? The rider that gathers with hundreds of others to cause a
traffic jam, or the one that he passes without incident?

Now as for why you are focused on the "look" of a CM cyclist, I cannot
say. I have pointed out that many put on costumes for the ride. Do you
deny this? In fact, I only mentioned the way CMers dress in two posts,
one over two years ago. Are you afraid that everyone has you
stereotyped somehow? From what I have seen and read, there is no
identifiable look to a CM rider. Well, other than the guy riding in a
dinosaur costume.

Part of my point is that there is no way to determine who was at the
last CM unless the driver recognizes the person or the bike. That's
why I said maybe he recognized YOU. Any backlash that occurs from a CM
ride will be aimed at any and all cyclists. In fact, it will likely be
the lone cyclist on an otherwise empty road so there aren't any
witnesses....

I suppose I wish that all CMers were required to wear a big flashing
CM banner all the time so that the blame for the traffic jam would be
placed on the right people. Are you starting to understand why I don't
appreciate CM tactics? They reflect on ME although I have nothing to
do with them!

-Buck

12 Jul 2003 17:33:14 -0700,
,
(Buck) wrote:

Have you forgotten how to read? Perhaps your anger has elevated your
blood pressure to the point where you cannot comprehend what you are
reading. Let me put this into caps so you don't miss it: NOBODY HAS
SAID THAT ANY OF THE BEHAVIORS YOU HAVE DESCRIBED ARE EXCUSABLE!!!!!
Sheesh. Why is it that any time someone opposes your point of view,
they are immediately viewed by you as supporting assault with an
automobile?

You said asswipe's actions could be the those of a crazy person.

Well, here we don't even let crazy people stand trial. They're excused
because they're crazy. That's why I said you were excusing his
behaviour by pleading his sanity.

You also are propounding that I, as an individual, was targeted
because I was recognised and remembered from some past event and so
now fukwad's actions become somehow justifiable.

Why can't you accept the guy was just a random idiot?

The day after any CM ride is always Saturday. You've said nothing to
convince me this supposed backlash exists anywhere outside your
imagination. You're projecting your own inability to come to terms
with CM onto others. You're using CM to excuse the assholes' behaviour
by shifting blame for their attitudes.

I'm not angry.
I'm laughing at the preposterous notion of your backlash boogey man.
--
zk

12 Jul 2003 21:14:26 GMT,
,
(Hunrobe) wrote:


How about instead of CM riders you see them as people saying, "We've
had it with your cars dominating public space at the peril of our
lives".

The "public space" you are referring to is a roadway. Roadways exist to
facilitate getting from Point A to Point B. If one wants to block the public
right of way to hold a block party, street festival, parade, or protest then
they should apply for a permit. If they don't do that and instead just say, "We
can deny the rest of the public the right of freedom of movement because we are
special." then I don't care what they call themselves. I call them knotheads.

Any of the supposedly blocked road users could have exchanged their
mode of transport for one that is self-propelled and continued their
journey to Point B.

Nobody was infringing on that "right".

Their own mass prevented them from detouring.
Yep, knotheads everywhere.
--
zk

Sun, 13 Jul 2003 00:14:32 -0700,
,
Ryan Cousineau wrote:


If anyone has any proposals, suggestions, etc. for a meeting, toss them
to me.

I won a gift certificate to donate to the occasion.
The first $100 worth of bike fuel at Subeez Cafe (891 Homer) is on me.

Pre or post race?
--
zk

Zoot Katz

wrote:

Any of the supposedly blocked road users could have exchanged their
mode of transport for one that is self-propelled and continued their
journey to Point B.

Nobody was infringing on that "right".

Their own mass prevented them from detouring.
Yep, knotheads everywhere.

Hmmm. Let's change the situation just slightly. You are riding along on a 4
lane surface street when you come upon an intersection that is totally blocked.
Numerous car drivers have parked their vehicles haphazardly in that
intersection and are standing around talking. There's no crash involved and no
discernible reason why they are parked there. You intend to thread your way
through the mess but as soon you are spotted approaching the intersection the
owners of the parked cars stand in front of you blocking your way. Short of a
physical confrontation you can not proceed. Your choices are to:
1- wait until those blocking the intersection decide to leave or
2- to detour around them or
3- abandon your bicycle and proceed as a pedestrian.

Has your right to use the roadway been denied by those blocking it?
Are the blockers spontaneous free-spirited individuals who decided that
intersection was the perfect place to hold a conversation or are they simply
knotheads?

Regards,
Bob Hunt