Originally Posted by Helmet Head
You missed my point.
Whatever. I can provide 5 threads that meet your challenge simply by listing the top 5 current threads in the VC subforum in which I have posted.
- When HH & JF make their claims about cycling...
- VC acolytes, followers, disciples, etc.
- Take the VC Challenge!
- Positioning question when RTOL present
- Why do you agree/disagree with Forester
And why is it important whether I have my own original ideas or not? My purpose here is to advocate traffic cycling safety, which I happen to believe is best accomplished by advocating vehicular-cycling, which results in me having to explain why I believe this much of the time. When those explanations have been made by others, I cite them. So what?
[*]VC acolytes, followers, disciples, etc.: See post #27
When John Forester writes, "obey the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles..."
[*]Take the VC Challenge!: See post #53
Isn't it in Effective Cycling that Forester compares the German model...
[*]Positioning question when RTOL present: So all that talk about "phobias" was not first introduced in Foresters book?
[*]Why do you agree/disagree with Forester: I find it hard to believe that nothing you said in this thread had to do with the literary works of Forester.
So you provided
one example.
But really, there is no point in all of this. Out of the thousands of people on this board you have what... five that see your POV? Maybe you should borrow G. W. Bush's
Mission Accomplished banner.
Oh, and do you really believe you are advocating traffic/cycling safety to
anyone here?
Seriously?? How in the hell does pretending to be a psychologist and diagnosing people with "phobias" or pretending to be a lawyer and "interpeting" laws advocate for safety?
Bleh, it matters not. Why am I still reading this thread? You and your 4 or 5 VC friends have fun in here. If it weren't for the people that challenged you, this "Vehicular Cycling" subforum would be empty, and you know it.