What is a cyclist?

On this newsgroup are motorists who also claim to be cyclists but who
are highly critical of cyclists, which casts doubt on their claim to
be cyclists. So what, for the purposes of debate here, might qualify
as a cyclist?

May I suggest the following: 'If a person travels further each year on
a cycle than they do in a car then they can be regarded as a genuine
cyclist'.

Now, take some examples for evaluation. Someone commutes to work on a
bicycle but at the weekend bombs around in a car for fun. Conversely,
a person commutes by car but bombs around for fun and exercise at the
weekend on a cycle. What are they primarily, motorist or cyclist? It
surely depends how far they travel on each?

--
World Carfree Network
http://www.worldcarfree.net/
Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.

"Doug" wrote in message
...
On this newsgroup are motorists who also claim to be cyclists but who
are highly critical of cyclists, which casts doubt on their claim to
be cyclists. So what, for the purposes of debate here, might qualify
as a cyclist?

May I suggest the following: 'If a person travels further each year on
a cycle than they do in a car then they can be regarded as a genuine
cyclist'.

Now, take some examples for evaluation. Someone commutes to work on a
bicycle but at the weekend bombs around in a car for fun. Conversely,
a person commutes by car but bombs around for fun and exercise at the
weekend on a cycle. What are they primarily, motorist or cyclist? It
surely depends how far they travel on each?

I think that when I ride my bike I qualify as a cyclist and when I drive my
car I qualify as a motorist. As a cyclist who rides most days and thousands
of miles a year I think that qualifys me as a fairly experienced cyclist. I
may however drive more miles in a car but that does not negate the fact that
I am a cyclist. Doug seems to think that cyclists and motorists are mutually
exclusive: that you can only be one and not the other.

On 10 Sep, 07:35, "mileburner" wrote:
"Doug" wrote in message

...

On this newsgroup are motorists who also claim to be cyclists but who
are highly critical of cyclists, which casts doubt on their claim to
be cyclists. So what, for the purposes of debate here, might qualify
as a cyclist?

May I suggest the following: 'If a person travels further each year on
a cycle than they do in a car then they can be regarded as a genuine
cyclist'.

Now, take some examples for evaluation. Someone commutes to work on a
bicycle but at the weekend bombs around in a car for fun. Conversely,
a person commutes by car but bombs around for fun and exercise at the
weekend on a cycle. What are they primarily, motorist or cyclist? It
surely depends how far they travel on each?

I think that when I ride my bike I qualify as a cyclist and when I drive my
car I qualify as a motorist. As a cyclist who rides most days and thousands
of miles a year I think that qualifys me as a fairly experienced cyclist. I
may however drive more miles in a car but that does not negate the fact that
I am a cyclist. Doug seems to think that cyclists and motorists are mutually
exclusive: that you can only be one and not the other.

Nope, I contend that you are more one than another and that this
colours your judgement and opinions, bearing in mind that we are all
in competition for road space.

As an ex-motorist and now full-time cyclist I freely admit that I do
not like cars, or the widespread blight that their mass use brings,
though I do understand that in a few rare cases there is a need for
them. If I was still primarily a motorist no doubt my view would be
different and I might well also be tempted onto this cycling newsgroup
to roundly criticise cyclists. So it depends entirely, you see, where
you are coming from.

--
World Carfree Network
http://www.worldcarfree.net/
Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.

"Doug" wrote in message
...
On 10 Sep, 07:35, "mileburner" wrote:
"Doug" wrote in message

[..]

As an ex-motorist and now full-time cyclist I freely admit that I do
not like cars,

DOUG TELLING THE TRUTH!!!! I DON'T BELIEVE IT!!!!!!!

"Doug" wrote in message
...
On 10 Sep, 07:35, "mileburner" wrote:
"Doug" wrote in message

...

On this newsgroup are motorists who also claim to be cyclists but who
are highly critical of cyclists, which casts doubt on their claim to
be cyclists. So what, for the purposes of debate here, might qualify
as a cyclist?

May I suggest the following: 'If a person travels further each year on
a cycle than they do in a car then they can be regarded as a genuine
cyclist'.

Now, take some examples for evaluation. Someone commutes to work on a
bicycle but at the weekend bombs around in a car for fun. Conversely,
a person commutes by car but bombs around for fun and exercise at the
weekend on a cycle. What are they primarily, motorist or cyclist? It
surely depends how far they travel on each?

I think that when I ride my bike I qualify as a cyclist and when I drive
my
car I qualify as a motorist. As a cyclist who rides most days and
thousands
of miles a year I think that qualifys me as a fairly experienced cyclist.
I
may however drive more miles in a car but that does not negate the fact
that
I am a cyclist. Doug seems to think that cyclists and motorists are
mutually
exclusive: that you can only be one and not the other.

Nope, I contend that you are more one than another and that this
colours your judgement and opinions, bearing in mind that we are all
in competition for road space.

I seriously do not think there is "competition" for road space. So long as
the cyclist places himself in the proper position they have all the space
they need. Cars and other traffic may sometimes get in the way, but that is
just because it is traffic and all road users have to share the roads.

As an ex-motorist and now full-time cyclist I freely admit that I do
not like cars, or the widespread blight that their mass use brings,
though I do understand that in a few rare cases there is a need for
them. If I was still primarily a motorist no doubt my view would be
different and I might well also be tempted onto this cycling newsgroup
to roundly criticise cyclists. So it depends entirely, you see, where
you are coming from.

As a motorist and a cyclist, I too will freely admit that I do not like cars
and the widespread blight that their mass use brings. My view does not
change whether I am driving or cycling or if I do more than one or the
other.

On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 14:25:48 +0100, mileburner wrote:

"Doug" wrote in message
news:14b747c0-a3fa-4039-878d-
...
On 10 Sep, 07:35, "mileburner" wrote:
"Doug" wrote in message


...

On this newsgroup are motorists who also claim to be cyclists but
who are highly critical of cyclists, which casts doubt on their
claim to be cyclists. So what, for the purposes of debate here,
might qualify as a cyclist?

May I suggest the following: 'If a person travels further each year
on a cycle than they do in a car then they can be regarded as a
genuine cyclist'.

Now, take some examples for evaluation. Someone commutes to work on
a bicycle but at the weekend bombs around in a car for fun.
Conversely, a person commutes by car but bombs around for fun and
exercise at the weekend on a cycle. What are they primarily,
motorist or cyclist? It surely depends how far they travel on each?

I think that when I ride my bike I qualify as a cyclist and when I
drive my
car I qualify as a motorist. As a cyclist who rides most days and
thousands
of miles a year I think that qualifys me as a fairly experienced
cyclist. I
may however drive more miles in a car but that does not negate the
fact that
I am a cyclist. Doug seems to think that cyclists and motorists are
mutually
exclusive: that you can only be one and not the other.

Nope, I contend that you are more one than another and that this
colours your judgement and opinions, bearing in mind that we are all in
competition for road space.

I seriously do not think there is "competition" for road space.

There isn't. Well, only in Doug's tiny mind..

Mike P

On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 00:03:44 -0700 (PDT), Doug
wrote:

On 10 Sep, 07:35, "mileburner" wrote:
"Doug" wrote in message

...

On this newsgroup are motorists who also claim to be cyclists but who
are highly critical of cyclists, which casts doubt on their claim to
be cyclists. So what, for the purposes of debate here, might qualify
as a cyclist?

May I suggest the following: 'If a person travels further each year on
a cycle than they do in a car then they can be regarded as a genuine
cyclist'.

Now, take some examples for evaluation. Someone commutes to work on a
bicycle but at the weekend bombs around in a car for fun. Conversely,
a person commutes by car but bombs around for fun and exercise at the
weekend on a cycle. What are they primarily, motorist or cyclist? It
surely depends how far they travel on each?

I think that when I ride my bike I qualify as a cyclist and when I drive my
car I qualify as a motorist. As a cyclist who rides most days and thousands
of miles a year I think that qualifys me as a fairly experienced cyclist. I
may however drive more miles in a car but that does not negate the fact that
I am a cyclist. Doug seems to think that cyclists and motorists are mutually
exclusive: that you can only be one and not the other.

Nope, I contend that you are more one than another and that this
colours your judgement and opinions, bearing in mind that we are all
in competition for road space.

As an ex-motorist and now full-time cyclist I freely admit that I do
not like cars, or the widespread blight that their mass use brings,
though I do understand that in a few rare cases there is a need for
them. If I was still primarily a motorist no doubt my view would be
different and I might well also be tempted onto this cycling newsgroup
to roundly criticise cyclists. So it depends entirely, you see, where
you are coming from.

You do talk ******** sometimes Doug.

A couple of years ago I clocked up over 6,000 miles on my bikes and
15,000 miles in my car. But my car mileage included a trip London -
Pyrenees - Paris - Britanny - London, and two return trips to the
Scottish Highlands. I probaly used my car fewer than 50 days over the
year, and my bikes on over 300 days over the year.

I would certainly class myself as a cyclist over motorist.

On 11 Sep, 04:51, Tom Crispin
wrote:
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 00:03:44 -0700 (PDT), Doug
wrote:



On 10 Sep, 07:35, "mileburner" wrote:
"Doug" wrote in message

....

On this newsgroup are motorists who also claim to be cyclists but who
are highly critical of cyclists, which casts doubt on their claim to
be cyclists. So what, for the purposes of debate here, might qualify
as a cyclist?

May I suggest the following: 'If a person travels further each year on
a cycle than they do in a car then they can be regarded as a genuine
cyclist'.

Now, take some examples for evaluation. Someone commutes to work on a
bicycle but at the weekend bombs around in a car for fun. Conversely,
a person commutes by car but bombs around for fun and exercise at the
weekend on a cycle. What are they primarily, motorist or cyclist? It
surely depends how far they travel on each?

I think that when I ride my bike I qualify as a cyclist and when I drive my
car I qualify as a motorist. As a cyclist who rides most days and thousands
of miles a year I think that qualifys me as a fairly experienced cyclist. I
may however drive more miles in a car but that does not negate the fact that
I am a cyclist. Doug seems to think that cyclists and motorists are mutually
exclusive: that you can only be one and not the other.

Nope, I contend that you are more one than another and that this
colours your judgement and opinions, bearing in mind that we are all
in competition for road space.

As an ex-motorist and now full-time cyclist I freely admit that I do
not like cars, or the widespread blight that their mass use brings,
though I do understand that in a few rare cases there is a need for
them. If I was still primarily a motorist no doubt my view would be
different and I might well also be tempted onto this cycling newsgroup
to roundly criticise cyclists. So it depends entirely, you see, where
you are coming from.

You do talk ******** sometimes Doug.

A couple of years ago I clocked up over 6,000 miles on my bikes and
15,000 miles in my car. *But my car mileage included a trip London -
Pyrenees - Paris - Britanny - London, and two return trips to the
Scottish Highlands. *I probaly used my car fewer than 50 days over the
year, and my bikes on over 300 days over the year.

I would certainly class myself as a cyclist over motorist.

But what you have to take into account, Tom, is that motorists do feel
a little guilty these days of greater environmental awareness and
maybe take refuge in cycling as an excuse. What better greenwash than
to be regarded as a regular cyclist while sneaking around furtively in
your car!

Surely a truly green cyclist would never dream of using a car?

--
World Carfree Network
http://www.worldcarfree.net/
Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.

Doug wrote:
On 11 Sep, 04:51, Tom Crispin
wrote:
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 00:03:44 -0700 (PDT), Doug
wrote:



On 10 Sep, 07:35, "mileburner" wrote:
"Doug" wrote in message

...

On this newsgroup are motorists who also claim to be cyclists but
who are highly critical of cyclists, which casts doubt on their
claim to be cyclists. So what, for the purposes of debate here,
might qualify as a cyclist?

May I suggest the following: 'If a person travels further each
year on a cycle than they do in a car then they can be regarded
as a genuine cyclist'.

Now, take some examples for evaluation. Someone commutes to work
on a bicycle but at the weekend bombs around in a car for fun.
Conversely, a person commutes by car but bombs around for fun and
exercise at the weekend on a cycle. What are they primarily,
motorist or cyclist? It surely depends how far they travel on
each?

I think that when I ride my bike I qualify as a cyclist and when I
drive my car I qualify as a motorist. As a cyclist who rides most
days and thousands of miles a year I think that qualifys me as a
fairly experienced cyclist. I may however drive more miles in a
car but that does not negate the fact that I am a cyclist. Doug
seems to think that cyclists and motorists are mutually exclusive:
that you can only be one and not the other.

Nope, I contend that you are more one than another and that this
colours your judgement and opinions, bearing in mind that we are all
in competition for road space.

As an ex-motorist and now full-time cyclist I freely admit that I do
not like cars, or the widespread blight that their mass use brings,
though I do understand that in a few rare cases there is a need for
them. If I was still primarily a motorist no doubt my view would be
different and I might well also be tempted onto this cycling
newsgroup to roundly criticise cyclists. So it depends entirely,
you see, where you are coming from.

You do talk ******** sometimes Doug.

A couple of years ago I clocked up over 6,000 miles on my bikes and
15,000 miles in my car. But my car mileage included a trip London -
Pyrenees - Paris - Britanny - London, and two return trips to the
Scottish Highlands. I probaly used my car fewer than 50 days over the
year, and my bikes on over 300 days over the year.

I would certainly class myself as a cyclist over motorist.

But what you have to take into account, Tom, is that motorists do feel
a little guilty these days of greater environmental awareness and
maybe take refuge in cycling as an excuse. What better greenwash than
to be regarded as a regular cyclist while sneaking around furtively in
your car!

Surely a truly green cyclist would never dream of using a car?

******** upon bollock.

On 2009-09-11, Doug wrote:
[...]
But what you have to take into account, Tom, is that motorists do feel
a little guilty these days of greater environmental awareness and
maybe take refuge in cycling as an excuse. What better greenwash than
to be regarded as a regular cyclist while sneaking around furtively in
your car!

Surely a truly green cyclist would never dream of using a car?

Being a cyclist has NOTHING to do with being green. If you ride a bike
because you think it's green, then you are not a cyclist.