Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

View Poll Results: The current VC discussions and multitude of postings in AandS BFN have:
The current VC discussions and multitude of postings have advanced the cause of VC in the Bicycling Community 14 28.57%
The current VC discussions and multitude of postings have made no difference in the cause of VC in the Bicycling Community 18 36.73%
The current VC discussions and multitude of postings have hurt the cause of VC in the Bicycling Community 14 28.57%
No opinion/don't know 3 6.12%
Voters: 49. You may not vote on this poll

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-14-06, 09:25 AM   #1
DnvrFox
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
DnvrFox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Bikes:
Posts: 20,916
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Furthering or Hindering the cause of VC?

Do you believe that the continuous (some might say incessant) discussion and advocacy for VC (or whatever current PC word might be appropriate) on this forum has advanced the cause of VC in the overall Bicycling Community?
DnvrFox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-06, 09:36 AM   #2
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 23,513
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DnvrFox
Do you believe that the continuous (some might say incessant) discussion and advocacy for VC (or whatever current PC word might be appropriate) on this forum has advanced the cause of VC in the overall Bicycling Community?
The incessant proselytization by a few individuals obsessed with interpreting/reinterpreting VC™ dogma has made Vehicular Cycling appear to be the ideology of zealots.

The overall Bicycling Community will be severely hampered if the general public ever associates Bicycling Advocacy with the loonier VC legal conjuring and wacky VC cycling techniques based on the power of alpha dog attitudes.

Last edited by I-Like-To-Bike; 01-14-06 at 11:21 AM.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-06, 11:18 AM   #3
sbhikes
Dominatrikes
 
sbhikes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Still in Santa Barbara
Bikes: Catrike Pocket, Lightning Thunderbold recumbent, Trek 3000 MTB.
Posts: 4,920
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I don't know if they've hurt or helped the cause of VC. I feel there has been a valuable clarification made recently of what the term VC actually represents when you use it here. And now that I know what it means, I can use the term better.
sbhikes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-06, 11:37 AM   #4
Helmet Head
Banned.
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Bikes:
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
The incessant proselytization by a few individuals obsessed with interpreting/reinterpreting VC™ dogma has made Vehicular Cycling appear to be the ideology of zealots.

The overall Bicycling Community will be severely hampered if the general public ever associates Bicycling Advocacy with the loonier VC legal conjuring and wacky VC cycling techniques based on the power of alpha dog attitudes.
The implied acceptability of VC in ILTB's rhetoric is new, and this alone indicates enormous advancement of the cause of VC.
Helmet Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-06, 11:44 AM   #5
-=(8)=-
♋ ☮♂ ☭ ☯
 
-=(8)=-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 40205 'ViLLeBiLLie
Bikes: Sngl Spd's, 70's- 80's vintage, D-tube Folder
Posts: 7,903
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
No difference.
Has this stuff changed anyones opinion on this subject, ever ?
__________________
-ADVOCACY-☜ Radical VC = Car people on bikes. Just say "NO"
-=(8)=- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-06, 11:59 AM   #6
DnvrFox
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
DnvrFox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Bikes:
Posts: 20,916
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
The implied acceptability of VC in ILTB's rhetoric is new, and this alone indicates enormous advancement of the cause of VC.
Grasping at straws?
DnvrFox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-06, 12:00 PM   #7
Roody
Sophomoric Member
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Bikes:
Posts: 23,385
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
I don't like the direction I see the discussions going, but I know that past discussions of VC helped me to become a better rider. I guess that means the discussions helped the community, to a small extent at least.

By it's original definition, VC was really the only sane and safe way to ride a bike in traffic. Newer definitions are conflictual, controversial and needlessly confusing.
__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"
Roody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-06, 01:19 PM   #8
randya
Senior Member
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Bikes: who cares?
Posts: 13,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The same discussion just keeps moving from thread to thread with the same limited number of participants. We get the idea, already!
randya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-06, 01:48 PM   #9
Treespeed
Warning:Mild Peril
 
Treespeed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Seattle Refugee in Los Angeles
Bikes: Cilo, Surly Pacer, Kona Fire Mountain w/Bob Trailer, Scattante
Posts: 3,171
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I still don't understand why everyone gets so bent about discussions on the internet about VC. It's not as if someone is riding with you, looking over your shoulder and telling you how to ride. If you don't like the discussion, change the channel. Serge puts VC into the title of the majority of his posts, and yet despite ILTB and the rest of the VC haters protests you'll find them replying to almost everyone of his posts. You'd think HH actually had the power to destroy bike lanes or enact legislation the way you folks complain about VC. It's sounds like one guy's interpretation of VC, besides Bek, Diane, Gene, and a few other names that escape me at the moment I don't see anyone else offering anything other than criticism. All this BS about censoring or moving the VC discussion is pathetic. No one is forcing anyone to discuss VC or keeping folks like dnvrfox from starting new threads. I for one have enjoyed the VC discussion, I don't always agree with everyone, but what would be the point of that?
__________________
Non semper erit aestas.
Treespeed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-06, 02:08 PM   #10
Mars
coitus non circum.
 
Mars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 2,495
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Treespeed
I still don't understand why everyone gets so bent about discussions on the internet about VC. It's not as if someone is riding with you, looking over your shoulder and telling you how to ride. If you don't like the discussion, change the channel. Serge puts VC into the title of the majority of his posts, and yet despite ILTB and the rest of the VC haters protests you'll find them replying to almost everyone of his posts. You'd think HH actually had the power to destroy bike lanes or enact legislation the way you folks complain about VC. It's sounds like one guy's interpretation of VC, besides Bek, Diane, Gene, and a few other names that escape me at the moment I don't see anyone else offering anything other than criticism. All this BS about censoring or moving the VC discussion is pathetic. No one is forcing anyone to discuss VC or keeping folks like dnvrfox from starting new threads. I for one have enjoyed the VC discussion, I don't always agree with everyone, but what would be the point of that?

+10
Mars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-06, 03:47 PM   #11
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 23,513
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
The implied acceptability of VC in ILTB's rhetoric is new, and this alone indicates enormous advancement of the cause of VC.
Dream on!
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-06, 05:14 PM   #12
CB HI
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Bikes:
Posts: 11,810
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
Dream on!
Yet you ride by so many of the VC principles, even while demonizing the use of the collective term.
CB HI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-06, 06:38 PM   #13
chipcom 
Infamous Member
 
chipcom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ohio
Bikes: Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
Posts: 24,366
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by CB HI
Yet you ride by so many of the VC principles, even while demonizing the use of the collective term.
Which goes back to the point I have made ever since I joined BF and got involved in these discussions - riding safely, predictably, according to the applicable rules or laws of the road, has been practiced since long before the term VC was coined. They are not VC principles, VC is a brand that attempts to take ownership of those principles as a basis for promoting additional wacky techniques, dogma and advocacy representing a minority of cyclists. The term itself is tame and nobody would have a problem with it, if it had not been used as the rallying cry of advocates who want to promote their own minority viewpoints, many times in opposition to the wishes of the majority of the cycling community.
__________________
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
chipcom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-06, 07:00 PM   #14
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 23,513
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by chipcom
Which goes back to the point I have made ever since I joined BF and got involved in these discussions - riding safely, predictably, according to the applicable rules or laws of the road, has been practiced since long before the term VC was coined. They are not VC principles, VC is a brand that attempts to take ownership of those principles as a basis for promoting additional wacky techniques, dogma and advocacy representing a minority of cyclists. The term itself is tame and nobody would have a problem with it, if it had not been used as the rallying cry of advocates who want to promote their own minority viewpoints, many times in opposition to the wishes of the majority of the cycling community.
Chipcom beat me to the punch. Cycling sensibly and adapting to the local environment with intelligence, is independent of accepting the extra baggage of the "VC ™educational" agenda and pseudo science/nutcase legal theorizing of the VC™ ideologues and their gullible/logicly disadvantaged acolytes.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-06, 08:03 PM   #15
sbhikes
Dominatrikes
 
sbhikes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Still in Santa Barbara
Bikes: Catrike Pocket, Lightning Thunderbold recumbent, Trek 3000 MTB.
Posts: 4,920
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Treespeed
You'd think HH actually had the power to destroy bike lanes or enact legislation the way you folks complain about VC.
Actually, a friend of mine told me he sits on some major state (California) committee on cycling. I mentioned his name to him and he immediately knew who he was and started going on and on about how much his efforts have done to hurt bike advocacy at the state level.
sbhikes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-06, 08:11 PM   #16
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by sbhikes
Actually, a friend of mine told me he sits on some major state (California) committee on cycling. I mentioned his name to him and he immediately knew who he was and started going on and on about how much his efforts have done to hurt bike advocacy at the state level.
Well, if that isn't depressing news....what an dipshizzle. Helmet Head doesn't even ride his bike very much, less than half the days. I've done the math.

So, a guy that admittedly does not ride for transportation the majority of the time, and

does not know how to position his bike on roads with bicycle accomodations,

is on a state committee on bicycling, and another CA bicyclist has stated to you HH has hurt bicycling advocacy at the state level?

Helmet Head is a real gem. sometimes blowhard know-it-alls should be disqualified from seeking public positions.... I read something like that in Thomas More's 'Utopia'...people seeking public office would be prohibited from doing so....

Last edited by Bekologist; 01-14-06 at 10:26 PM.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-06, 08:13 PM   #17
chipcom 
Infamous Member
 
chipcom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ohio
Bikes: Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
Posts: 24,366
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist
sometimes blowhard know-it-alls should be disqualified from seeking public positions.... I read something like that in Utopia once...people seeking public office would be prohibited from doing so....
I'm your proof to support that statement!
__________________
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
chipcom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-06, 09:40 PM   #18
buzzman
----
 
buzzman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Newton, MA
Bikes:
Posts: 4,570
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
The current VC discussions and multitude of postings have hurt the cause of VC in the Bicycling Community
I would rephrase that to: The current VC discussions and multitude of postings have hurt the Bicycling Community.
buzzman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-06, 09:43 PM   #19
DnvrFox
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
DnvrFox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Bikes:
Posts: 20,916
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzman
I would rephrase that to: The current VC discussions and multitude of postings have hurt the Bicycling Community.
Okay - do your own poll!
DnvrFox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-06, 11:40 AM   #20
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Chip, don't be so hard on yourself- let the other posters do that for you
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-06, 06:23 PM   #21
LCI_Brian
Senior Member
 
LCI_Brian's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: in the hills of Orange, CA
Bikes:
Posts: 1,355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by chipcom
Which goes back to the point I have made ever since I joined BF and got involved in these discussions - riding safely, predictably, according to the applicable rules or laws of the road, has been practiced since long before the term VC was coined.
True, but there was an effort in California in the early 70s to provide bikeways and only allow cycling on them, prohibiting cycling on "normal" roads. As a result, it would seem that a name such as "VC" would have needed to have been created, in order to contrast with mandatory cycling on facilities.


Quote:
Originally Posted by chipcom
The term itself is tame and nobody would have a problem with it, if it had not been used as the rallying cry of advocates who want to promote their own minority viewpoints, many times in opposition to the wishes of the majority of the cycling community.
I know that Chip wants to advocate for all cyclists, and I agree with him on that. But it would be naive to think that we can "all just get along" in every instance.

As an example, in my area, there are the "casual" cyclists and the "road" cyclists. (There are other groups, but these are the two main categories.) Whenever a new housing development is proposed in my area, the neighborhood activists complain that there's not enough trails in the proposed development. I don't object to trails, but in one case the activists (representing the "casual" cyclists) wanted to eliminate the shoulders on an existing road in order to make room to install a two way sidepath. The "road" cyclists would rather retain the shoulders than a have a two way sidepath. For a number of reasons I support retaining the shoulders. Since there are more "casual" cyclists than "road" cyclists, in this case I would be advocating what could be considered a minority viewpoint. Do you see anything wrong with this?
__________________
-- I speak for myself only, not LAB or any other organization of which I am a member.
LCI_Brian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-06, 06:55 PM   #22
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 23,513
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LCI_Brian
There was an effort in California in the early 70s to provide bikeways and only allow cycling on them, prohibiting cycling on "normal" roads.
Can you provide some reference for this "effort" to permit cycling ONLY on bikeways in California and nowhere else, and how serious this "effort" was? My impression is that this "effort" is a conjured strawman argument originating in the fevered rhetoric of John Forester. If I am wrong, I will be glad to be enlightened.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-06, 07:04 PM   #23
chipcom 
Infamous Member
 
chipcom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ohio
Bikes: Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
Posts: 24,366
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LCI_Brian
As an example, in my area, there are the "casual" cyclists and the "road" cyclists. (There are other groups, but these are the two main categories.) Whenever a new housing development is proposed in my area, the neighborhood activists complain that there's not enough trails in the proposed development. I don't object to trails, but in one case the activists (representing the "casual" cyclists) wanted to eliminate the shoulders on an existing road in order to make room to install a two way sidepath. The "road" cyclists would rather retain the shoulders than a have a two way sidepath. For a number of reasons I support retaining the shoulders. Since there are more "casual" cyclists than "road" cyclists, in this case I would be advocating what could be considered a minority viewpoint. Do you see anything wrong with this?
If I were on the governing body, I'd tell you all to get your ducks in line amongst yourselves and report back with your recommendations, otherwise I'd have to opt for the wishes of the majority and/or the developers, within the existing planning/zoning regulations for subdivisions.
__________________
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
chipcom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-06, 07:19 PM   #24
LCI_Brian
Senior Member
 
LCI_Brian's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: in the hills of Orange, CA
Bikes:
Posts: 1,355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by chipcom
If I were on the governing body, I'd tell you all to get your ducks in line amongst yourselves and report back with your recommendations, otherwise I'd have to opt for the wishes of the majority and/or the developers, within the existing planning/zoning regulations for subdivisions.
This course of action is reasonable for a governing body. But as a cyclist what would you do?
__________________
-- I speak for myself only, not LAB or any other organization of which I am a member.
LCI_Brian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-06, 07:34 PM   #25
chipcom 
Infamous Member
 
chipcom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ohio
Bikes: Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
Posts: 24,366
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LCI_Brian
This course of action is reasonable for a governing body. But as a cyclist what would you do?
I'd do the same thing. I'd say, folks, we need to get together and come up with a unified recommendation that represents area cyclists as a whole and not fight this out in public. Doing that would require compromise...and if I were part of the minority, which I probably would be in this case, I'd realize that compromise was our only acceptable course of action, because in the end the majority is going to get what they want unless we want to be disruptive and present a public split in the cycling community. Doing so might get us what we want today, but it will hinder our efforts in the future where we might need that majority, whom we just got done screwing.
__________________
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
chipcom is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:29 PM.