|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Impressions from Bike to Work Day
Chalo, I enjoy your posts, especially from someone in the business, but this one I find incredibly arrogant and supercilious.
the same kind of tools who wear helmets to ride loops around their neighborhoods at 6.5mph. What a crime! Forgive them for getting outside on their bikes instead of lying on the couch. Forgive them for bothering to wear a helmet. The same kind of tools who think riding a hundred miles is such a bold feat that others should donate money to a charitable cause in awe of their attempt to do so. Yes, the nerve of people to put themselves into shape and ride a 100 miles. Imagine that! So astoundingly reprehensible! Please forgive them for they know not what they do. And, whether you recognize it or not, it is an achievement requiring work and dedication for many. Especially when they have jobs, kids, commutes. Raising money for charities such as aids, leukemia, heart disease while riding your bike. The nerve of it all! How immoral. Why, we should insist that the recipients return all this tainted money. Having looked at reviews of bike shops on yelp and other sites here in the bay area, the one constant is the large percentage of people who have received arrogant treatment from the staff, overtly viewing them as the village idiot. You see it over and over again. As for myself, I'm happy when anyone gets out to ride. They don't deserve to be put down because they don't just happen to meet your august standards. People should be encouraged to ride, not dissed. Bike To Work Day is a nominally harmless but actually counterproductive annual custom in the United States. The subtext of this event is, "on this _one day_ out of the year, let's do something really silly and _ride our bicycles_ to work! We can even wear some of those funny stretchy clothes like Lance Armstrong! Don't forget to wear your helmet!" Bike To Work day is favored by the same kind of tools who wear helmets to ride loops around their neighborhoods at 6.5mph. The same kind of tools who think riding a hundred miles is such a bold feat that others should donate money to a charitable cause in awe of their attempt to do so. That's why Scharf's statistical sample is skewed-- if he took note of the headwear habits of people who ride their bikes for transportation every single day, instead of just on Talk Like A Pirate Day, excuse me, Bike To Work Day, he'd see that a lot of those folks don't bother wearing a foolish foam hat instead of exercising good judgment. Like bicycle helmets, Bike To Work day purports to be a pro-cycling event, but actually has a net anti-cycling effect by helping marginalize transportational cycling. Can you imagine having a well-publicized "Drive To Work Day" where Americans were supposed to make a big deal and ceremony out of using their cars to go to work? That might actually have a positive effect on utilitarian cycling in terms of raised consciousness. More than likely it would just go over people's heads, though. Chalo |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Impressions from Bike to Work Day
On 5/15/2011 1:18 PM, yirgster wrote:
Chalo, I enjoy your posts, especially from someone in the business, but this one I find incredibly arrogant and supercilious. If you want arrogant and supercilious, check out the Lycranauts™ [1]. the same kind of tools who wear helmets to ride loops around their neighborhoods at 6.5mph. What a crime! Forgive them for getting outside on their bikes instead of lying on the couch. Forgive them for bothering to wear a helmet. If they did their research, they would know that the bicycle foam hat is unnecessary. The same kind of tools who think riding a hundred miles is such a bold feat that others should donate money to a charitable cause in awe of their attempt to do so. Yes, the nerve of people to put themselves into shape and ride a 100 miles. Imagine that! So astoundingly reprehensible! Please forgive them for they know not what they do. And, whether you recognize it or not, it is an achievement requiring work and dedication for many. Especially when they have jobs, kids, commutes. Why not commute on the bicycle instead? Raising money for charities such as aids, leukemia, heart disease while riding your bike. The nerve of it all! How immoral. Why, we should insist that the recipients return all this tainted money. Would it not be better to raise money for charities *against* those causes? AIDS, leukemia, and heart disease seem to being doing just fine without assistance. Having looked at reviews of bike shops on yelp and other sites here in the bay area, the one constant is the large percentage of people who have received arrogant treatment from the staff, overtly viewing them as the village idiot. You see it over and over again. Why do these people go back then? As for myself, I'm happy when anyone gets out to ride. They don't deserve to be put down because they don't just happen to meet your august standards. People should be encouraged to ride, not dissed. Do you disagree with the late Sheldon Brown? http://sheldonbrown.com/thons.html [1] Trademarked by Tim McNamara. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007 I am a vehicular cyclist. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Impressions from Bike to Work Day
On May 15, 3:52*pm, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° ""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote: Do you disagree with the late Sheldon Brown? http://sheldonbrown.com/thons.html I wouldn't diss the people who ride the 'thons. But I agree with Sheldon, we shouldn't be portraying riding a bike as risky, grueling, or otherwise deserving of pity and charity. When I first started riding as an adult (in the early 1970s), I did one charity ride. Even then, I didn't solicit funds. I just donated money myself. Really, what would I be doing if nobody any money and the charity ride was canceled? Why, I'd be going for a bike ride! Here's the weirdest example I know: Some local charity has put on Rock-a-thons. Not rock music (that would be painful to me) but rocking chairs on a big porch. People are asked to volunteer to sit and rock for an hour to solicit contributions. ??? What the hell, just ask for money! And regarding the people riding around their residential streets at 6.5 mph wearing helmets, I figure they're just victims of a protracted and successful scare campaign. The complaints should be directed primarily at the people pumping out the "Danger! Danger!" warnings, and the ridiculously exaggerated claims of helmet benefit. And nutcases like the folks who banned this advertisement: http://road.cc/content/news/34841-ad...shows-says-asa or http://tinyurl.com/3w8q3ty - Frank Krygowski |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Rocking Chairs
On 5/15/2011 3:13 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
[...] Here's the weirdest example I know: Some local charity has put on Rock-a-thons. Not rock music (that would be painful to me) but rocking chairs on a big porch. People are asked to volunteer to sit and rock for an hour to solicit contributions. ??? What the hell, just ask for money![...] My roommates vetoed the idea of a rocking chair. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007 I am a vehicular cyclist. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Impressions from Bike to Work Day
On May 15, 1:13*pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On May 15, 3:52*pm, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° ""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI $southslope.net" wrote: Do you disagree with the late Sheldon Brown? http://sheldonbrown.com/thons.html I wouldn't diss the people who ride the 'thons. *But I agree with Sheldon, we shouldn't be portraying riding a bike as risky, grueling, or otherwise deserving of pity and charity. When I first started riding as an adult (in the early 1970s), I did one charity ride. *Even then, I didn't solicit funds. *I just donated money myself. *Really, what would I be doing if nobody any money and the charity ride was canceled? *Why, I'd be going for a bike ride! Here's the weirdest example I know: *Some local charity has put on Rock-a-thons. *Not rock music (that would be painful to me) but rocking chairs on a big porch. *People are asked to volunteer to sit and rock for an hour to solicit contributions. *??? What the hell, just ask for money! And regarding the people riding around their residential streets at 6.5 mph wearing helmets, I figure they're just victims of a protracted and successful scare campaign. *The complaints should be directed primarily at the people pumping out the "Danger! Danger!" warnings, and the ridiculously exaggerated claims of helmet benefit. *And nutcases like the folks who banned this advertisement: Yirgster is right -- at least they are on their bikes. We are willing to spend billions in infrastructure to get scaredy-cats on bikes. If we can accomblish the same goal by allowing them to wear helmets, then that's great. What's the down side? They're over protected? They are not making YOU wear a helmet, and they are not staying off their bikes. They are obviously not risk compensating at 6mph. Now you're going to say that they're "sending a message that bicycling is dangerous." Who cares so long as the scaredy-cats are on bikes. That sends a more potent message to other scaredy-cats . . . "you can do it, too!" Personally, I don't want other people to ride bikes because they get in my way -- including this ass-wipe on a RECUMBENT who about smashed in to me yesterday when he overshot a switchback descending a hill. Last place I would expect to see a recumbent -- someone must have given him a ride to the top. But, if I had the normal desire to get other people on bikes, I would say let them wear helmets if that does the trick. -- Jay Beattie. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Impressions from Bike to Work Day
yirgster wrote:
Chalo, I enjoy your posts, especially from someone in the business, but this one I find incredibly arrogant and supercilious. the same kind of tools who wear helmets to ride loops around their neighborhoods at 6.5mph. What a crime! Forgive them for getting outside on their bikes instead of lying on the couch. Forgive them for bothering to wear a helmet. Would you think it worthy of comment if they donned helmets to ride a lawnmower? Because that's what it amounts to when you mount a helmet to take a slow stroll on a bike. You make yourself look like a fool-- but more than that, you demean bicycling as a normal activity. A _normal_ activity. Not risky. Not brave. Not remarkable. A normal thing to do. There's nothing wrong with riding slowly. I ride slowly most of the time. But wearing protective gear to ride slowly is like wearing protective gear to walk slowly or eat slowly. It betrays deeply misguided thinking about what you're doing. The same kind of tools who think riding a hundred miles is such a bold feat that others should donate money to a charitable cause in awe of their attempt to do so. Yes, the nerve of people to put themselves into shape and ride a 100 miles. Imagine that! So astoundingly reprehensible! Please forgive them for they know not what they do. And, whether you recognize it or not, it is an achievement requiring work and dedication for many. Especially when they have jobs, kids, commutes. What would you think of someone who decided to drive his car 500 miles in one day and hit up all his friends and relatives for pledges of support? You do have to work up to the point where you can drive 500 miles safely in a day. Is that some big accomplishment that should be treated like a daredevil stunt? If not, why is riding a century treated that way? I'll tell you. Because these folks don't see bike riding as a normal thing to do. But it is. irrelevant_tangent Having looked at reviews of bike shops on yelp and other sites here in the bay area, the one constant is the large percentage of people who have received arrogant treatment from the staff, overtly viewing them as the village idiot. You see it over and over again. Specialty retail brings out people's self-esteem issues. I see it over and over again (though my shop has had the best ratings in town for as long as I've bothered to check). You have to be considerate and gentle with people's feelings, but you also owe them the truth. If that means letting them know their bike is not worth the cost to repair, or that vegetable oil isn't appropriate for chains, or their seat is way too low, or that it isn't safe/legal/socially responsible to ride without brakes, well, some of them will get butthurt about it. The alternative is not to tell them, which for a service professional can easily be unethical. /irrelevant_tangent As for myself, I'm happy when anyone gets out to ride. They don't deserve to be put down because they don't just happen to meet your august standards. People should be encouraged to ride, not dissed. I agree. If they'd just get out and ride, instead of trying to make their ride into some sort of heroic endeavor, they'd enjoy it more and they'd also be good for cycling in their communities. But by treating cycling as a major adversity to be conquered, they discourage others from trying it and they help cement ordinary cycling's unearned reputation as a kooky thing to do. Tomorrow is Bike To Work Day here in Austin. I imagine I'll see a lot of the same folks I see on any given day. We're not an official station, but I expect we'll line up some snacks and refreshments just the same. If someone drops in who only rides to work on this one day per year, I hope he or she gets to meet other folks who don't drive a motor vehicle to work (or at all), so he or she can see there's nothing so special about it. People should not ride a bike to work because it's "epic", or because it's virtuous, or because they've worked themselves up to some arbitrary fitness goal. They should do it because it makes sense-- because it's a reasonable, appropriate and economical way to get around that is accessible to practically everyone. They shouldn't see themselves breaking through some sort of barrier when they ride a bike, because usually there is no barrier except for simple unwillingness. Chalo |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Impressions from Bike to Work Day
On 5/15/2011 3:48 PM, Jay Beattie wrote:
Yirgster is right -- at least they are on their bikes. We are willing to spend billions in infrastructure to get scaredy-cats on bikes.[...] Who is "we", facilities man? [1] [1] Paraphrase of old Lone Ranger-Tonto joke. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007 I am a vehicular cyclist. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Impressions from Bike to Work Day
On 5/15/2011 4:39 PM, Çhâlõ Çólîñã wrote:
[...] Specialty retail brings out people's self-esteem issues. I see it over and over again (though my shop has had the best ratings in town for as long as I've bothered to check). You have to be considerate and gentle with people's feelings, but you also owe them the truth. If that means letting them know their bike is not worth the cost to repair, or that vegetable oil isn't appropriate for chains, Unless they live on Planet Trevor. or their seat is way too low, Ground clearance becomes an issue with seat heights less than about 15 cm. or that it isn't safe/legal/socially responsible to ride without brakes, Does it really matter if a few fixie hipsters get run over because they are unable to yield to traffic when legally required to? well, some of them will get butthurt about it. A 'bent fixes butthurt. The alternative is not to tell them, which for a service professional can easily be unethical. This is America! -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007 I am a vehicular cyclist. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Impressions from Bike to Work Day
On May 15, 4:48*pm, Jay Beattie wrote:
On May 15, 1:13*pm, Frank Krygowski wrote: And regarding the people riding around their residential streets at 6.5 mph wearing helmets, I figure they're just victims of a protracted and successful scare campaign. *The complaints should be directed primarily at the people pumping out the "Danger! Danger!" warnings, and the ridiculously exaggerated claims of helmet benefit. *And nutcases like the folks who banned this advertisement: Yirgster is right -- at least they are on their bikes. *We are willing to spend billions in infrastructure to get scaredy-cats on bikes. *If we can accomblish the same goal by allowing them to wear helmets, then that's great. *What's the down side? *They're over protected? *They are not making YOU wear a helmet, and they are not staying off their bikes. *They are obviously not risk compensating at 6mph. *Now you're going to say that they're "sending a message that bicycling is dangerous." *Who cares so long as the scaredy-cats are on bikes. That sends a more potent message to other scaredy-cats *. . . "you can do it, too!" Jay, you seem to be responding to something you imagined I wrote, but which I did not write. And even aside from that, your response is not particularly logical. It's nonsense to say we are getting them on their bikes by "allowing them to wear helmets." Nobody has ever been forbidden to wear a bike helmet, AFAIK. What is happening is that after scaring millions of people into believing that serious injury is very likely during ANY bike ride, even one on a deserted street at low speed, we are convincing a certain percentage that the risk is less if they wear the funny, flimsy hat. Sorry, that does not count as promoting bicycling. It would be far better to drop the fear mongering. Give an accurate picture of the minimal risks. Also give an accurate picture of the far greater benefits of cycling, benefits that completely outweigh the risks. Get back to treating cycling as an ordinary, useful, pleasant activity, not an extreme sport If you want to reduce the risks even further, fine, but please, do it without fear mongering. And do it by concentrating on measures that actually attack the problem mechanisms. Get cyclists to ride legally, visibly and predictably. Teach them to avoid road hazards (still the biggest cause of crashes). Teach motorists to treat us correctly. Drop the emphasis on the under-designed, over-promoted, ineffective funny hats. - Frank Krygowski |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Bike to Work thread is now helmets (what a surprise)
===========
Frank Krygowski" wrote in message May 15, 4:48 pm, Jay Beattie wrote: On May 15, 1:13 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote: What is happening is that after scaring millions of people into believing that serious injury is very likely during ANY bike ride, even one on a deserted street at low speed, we are convincing a certain percentage that the risk is less if they wear the funny, flimsy hat. Sorry, that does not count as promoting bicycling. It would be far better to drop the fear mongering. Give an accurate picture of the minimal risks. Also give an accurate picture of the far greater benefits of cycling, benefits that completely outweigh the risks. Get back to treating cycling as an ordinary, useful, pleasant activity, not an extreme sport =========== Is it out of fear, and fear alone, that one buys any type of insurance? In most cases, the insurance isn't technically useful, because the insured event has such a low percentage chance of happening. Insurance in most cases isn't even designed to cover you 100% for the insured event. So are people buying insurance entirely out of fear? Or is there something between fear and calm certainty that all is OK without it, a place that most people feel comfortable being? --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReactionBicycles.com "Frank Krygowski" wrote in message ... On May 15, 4:48 pm, Jay Beattie wrote: On May 15, 1:13 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote: And regarding the people riding around their residential streets at 6.5 mph wearing helmets, I figure they're just victims of a protracted and successful scare campaign. The complaints should be directed primarily at the people pumping out the "Danger! Danger!" warnings, and the ridiculously exaggerated claims of helmet benefit. And nutcases like the folks who banned this advertisement: Yirgster is right -- at least they are on their bikes. We are willing to spend billions in infrastructure to get scaredy-cats on bikes. If we can accomblish the same goal by allowing them to wear helmets, then that's great. What's the down side? They're over protected? They are not making YOU wear a helmet, and they are not staying off their bikes. They are obviously not risk compensating at 6mph. Now you're going to say that they're "sending a message that bicycling is dangerous." Who cares so long as the scaredy-cats are on bikes. That sends a more potent message to other scaredy-cats . . . "you can do it, too!" Jay, you seem to be responding to something you imagined I wrote, but which I did not write. And even aside from that, your response is not particularly logical. It's nonsense to say we are getting them on their bikes by "allowing them to wear helmets." Nobody has ever been forbidden to wear a bike helmet, AFAIK. What is happening is that after scaring millions of people into believing that serious injury is very likely during ANY bike ride, even one on a deserted street at low speed, we are convincing a certain percentage that the risk is less if they wear the funny, flimsy hat. Sorry, that does not count as promoting bicycling. It would be far better to drop the fear mongering. Give an accurate picture of the minimal risks. Also give an accurate picture of the far greater benefits of cycling, benefits that completely outweigh the risks. Get back to treating cycling as an ordinary, useful, pleasant activity, not an extreme sport If you want to reduce the risks even further, fine, but please, do it without fear mongering. And do it by concentrating on measures that actually attack the problem mechanisms. Get cyclists to ride legally, visibly and predictably. Teach them to avoid road hazards (still the biggest cause of crashes). Teach motorists to treat us correctly. Drop the emphasis on the under-designed, over-promoted, ineffective funny hats. - Frank Krygowski |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Impressions from Bike to Work Day | SMS | Techniques | 448 | May 30th 11 12:39 AM |
Impressions from Bike to Work Day | Tºm Shermªn™ °_°[_2_] | Recumbent Biking | 12 | May 23rd 11 02:22 PM |
Impressions from Bike to Work Day | Tºm Shermªn™ °_°[_2_] | Recumbent Biking | 0 | May 14th 11 07:51 AM |
New (to me) Road Bike First Impressions | Bill Henry | General | 11 | October 9th 05 02:57 PM |
Newbie impressions of a suspension bike. | Rural QLD CC | Mountain Biking | 10 | June 18th 04 01:25 AM |