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.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-15-06, 09:03 AM   #1
galen_52657
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
galen_52657's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Towson, MD
Bikes: 2001 Look KG 241, 1989 Specialized Stump Jumper Comp, 1986 Gatane Performanc
Posts: 4,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
More fodder for the bike lane/lane position debate

Guy was hit from behind and killed riding in the shoulder, 2' right of the fog line.

local cat1 killed by car
galen_52657 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 10:10 AM   #2
Brian Ratliff
Senior Member
 
Brian Ratliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Near Portland, OR
Bikes: Three road bikes. Two track bikes.
Posts: 10,065
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
No, but a good thread on the proper treatment of a death in the cycling community. Unlike how we tend to stone the dead guy here on this forum. Let the man rest in peace.

Nothing to see here. ***** happens sometimes. Accept it and move on. Don't treat a real person's death as "fodder" for a "debate." If you want a case study, remove the personal details of the person killed and then find the bare details of the accident so a real debate can occur. You guys insist on running the deceased up the flag pole to start a "debate." When you talk about "fodder," realize that "fodder" is the sh!tty food which you give to livestock to keep them alive. A deceased person is hardly "fodder" in any sense of the term.

Forum mods, if there are any decent ones left, please lock this thread before it gets going. There is already a thread about the death in the road cycling forum, and here, the intent is clearly to take a sensitive current event to turn it into "fodder" for a "debate." Please put a stop to this and make it clear that "case study" threads should not be emotionally charged by including the personal details of a death in the cycling community. The case studies should be allowed as they are instructive, but please lock any which include these sensitive personal details.
__________________
Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
"If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --the tiniest sprinter

Last edited by Brian Ratliff; 09-15-06 at 10:18 AM.
Brian Ratliff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 10:17 AM   #3
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:
Originally Posted by Brian Ratliff
No, but a good thread on the proper treatment of a death in the cycling community. Unlike how we tend to stone the dead guy here on this forum. Let the man rest in peace.

Nothing to see here. **** happens sometimes. Accept it and move on. Don't treat a real person's death as "fodder" for a "debate." If you want a case study, remove the personal details of the person killed and then find the bare details of the accident so a real debate can occur. You guys insist on running the deceased up the flag pole to start a "debate." When you talk about "fodder," realize that "fodder" is the sh!tty food which you give to livestock to keep them alive. A deceased person is hardly "fodder" in any sense of the term.

Forum mods, if there are any decent ones left, please lock this thread before it gets going. There is already a thread about the death in the road cycling forum, and here, the intent is clearly to take a sensitive current event to turn it into "fodder" for a "debate." Please put a stop to this and make it clear that "case study" threads should not be emotionally charged with including the personal details of a death in the cycling community. The case studies should be allowed as they are instructive, but please lock any which include these sensitive personal details.
Well said.
buzzman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 10:32 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 galen_52657
Guy was hit from behind and killed riding in the shoulder, 2' right of the fog line.

local cat1 killed by car
This appears to be "textbook" inattentional blindness leading to inadvertent drift into what cognitively seemed to be an empty shoulder to the driver.


The Livingston County sheriff's office said that Dechau was riding westbound on the shoulder of route 20 approximately two feet to the right of the white line. A sheriff's spokesman said a westbound vehicle driven by Sharon Cameron, 61, crossed the white line and struck Dechau from behind at approximately 45-50 mph, and Dechau died at the scene.

Cameron could not provide an explanation to police as to why her vehicle drifted from the travel lane to the shoulder. She freely submitted to a blood test as part of the accident investigation, and police do not believe she was under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Results of investigation will determine if charges will be filed against Cameron.

Last edited by Helmet Head; 09-15-06 at 10:38 AM.
Helmet Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 10:33 AM   #5
galen_52657
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
galen_52657's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Towson, MD
Bikes: 2001 Look KG 241, 1989 Specialized Stump Jumper Comp, 1986 Gatane Performanc
Posts: 4,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Nobody is stoning the dead guy. Nobody is disrespecting the dead. You obviously read what you want into things and carry your own bias.

Everybody hates to hear about any cyclist getting injured or killed. And, things do just 'happen' all the time and there is nothing to be done about it.

Those facts in and of themselves do not preclude a thoughtful investigation of the facts surrounding the accident to see if anything can be learned.
galen_52657 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 10:36 AM   #6
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 Brian Ratliff
The case studies should be allowed as they are instructive, but please lock any which include these sensitive personal details.
What "sensitive personal details" were mentioned in the OP that warrants this comment in this thead?

Can we treat this thread as a case study, please? I am.
Helmet Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 10:37 AM   #7
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 galen_52657
Nobody is stoning the dead guy. Nobody is disrespecting the dead. You obviously read what you want into things and carry your own bias.

Everybody hates to hear about any cyclist getting injured or killed. And, things do just 'happen' all the time and there is nothing to be done about it.

Those facts in and of themselves do not preclude a thoughtful investigation of the facts surrounding the accident to see if anything can be learned.
Well said.
Helmet Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 10:39 AM   #8
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)
Any suggestions (besides what I "preach", or comments on why what I preach is not a good suggestion) on what cyclists can actively do while riding to not fall victim to inattentional blindness and inadvertent drift?

What I "preach" is:

That's why I take the lane even between intersections on roads like this (good shoulder or bike lane) except when I see faster approaching in my mirror, in which case I look over my right shoulder, then move into the roadway shoulder (or bike lane) about 5 seconds before they reach me (at a 30 mph closing speed that's over 200 feet), and stay there until they've passed me, then I look over my left shoulder and move back into the travel lane (until the next group of 1 or more vehicles is about 5 seconds behind me). It might seem like a lot of work, but, like anything else, once you get used to it it becomes effortless. And, I find it helps keep MY attention on traffic instead of drifting off...

But the main reason I take the lane between intersections on roads like this is to increase the probability motorists approaching from behind NOTICE my presence sometime during the minute or so before they reach me, and therefore, are cognitively aware of my presence up ahead, are watching me and paying attention as I look back and move into the shoulder, and are therefore much less likely to inadvertently drift into the "empty" shoulder as they are passing me.
Helmet Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 10:47 AM   #9
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,772
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 458 Post(s)
Wow, two feet to the right of the fog line... sure seems like some motorists really have a hard time controlling their vehicles.

I wonder if the motorist was asleep at the wheel and whether anything would have been noticed ahead by the motorist of this incident.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 11:19 AM   #10
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 genec
Wow, two feet to the right of the fog line... sure seems like some motorists really have a hard time controlling their vehicles.
Wow?

I suggest we stop being surprised about incidents of drivers drifting to the right across the road edge stripe. It happens all the time. Most of the time, of course, it's completely inconsequential (because shoulders are normally empty)... the driver briefly drifts into that "buffer space" while they're paying attention to something else, then something triggers and they correct themselves back into the lane. Happens all the time.

There are solid stripes on the roads that drivers regularly illegally/wrongly cross over without incident or mishap. They are accustomed to doing it. I see cops doing it. They have no idea they're doing it. Why? Because their purpose is to get from A to B without crashing or hitting anyone, and crossing a harmless painted stripe does not contradict that purpose. So they don't even notice they're doing it. So, for better or worse, the experience all drivers have is: crossing a solid white stripe is no big deal. It's not a big NO NO like running a red light. Conceptually in terms of "wrongness", it's more like rolling a stop sign when turning right: technically maybe illegal, but "give me a break".

Next time you're with someone who is driving, about a block after they go through a stop sign ask them whether they came to a complete stop, or rolled. I'll bet they're is only a 50/50 chance they'll be aware of what they did. Same with crossing a solid stripe (be it a shoulder stripe, a gore stripe, or, yes, a bike lane stripe).

So... Wow? No, I for one am not surprised at all. This is typical behavior for drivers, and I see no way to change that (just as I see no way to stop them from rolling across some stop signs). The only thing I see is a need to get them to realize that the shoulder or bike lane I'm in is NOT empty before they overtake me. And the only way I know to do that is to get their attention before they reach me, by being where they are paying attention, in their intended path up ahead, and, then, moving aside into the shoulder only after I have their attention.
Helmet Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 12:18 PM   #11
SSP
Software for Cyclists
 
SSP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Redding, California
Bikes: Trek 5200, Specialized MTB
Posts: 4,618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Several thoughts come to mind:

1) daytime flashers
With the advent of daylight visible flashers, I think some of the perception problems can be alleviated.

2) road designs
Ideally, there would be some roadway "dots" or narrow rumble strip, to alert drivers when they're drifting into a bike lane.

3) Mirrors
I've met very few hard core cyclists that ride with a mirror. If the guy who was struck in the OP had been wearing one, he might have been able to take evasive action. Without one, it's likely he never knew what hit him.
SSP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 12:30 PM   #12
Brian Ratliff
Senior Member
 
Brian Ratliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Near Portland, OR
Bikes: Three road bikes. Two track bikes.
Posts: 10,065
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by galen_52657
Nobody is stoning the dead guy. Nobody is disrespecting the dead. You obviously read what you want into things and carry your own bias.

Everybody hates to hear about any cyclist getting injured or killed. And, things do just 'happen' all the time and there is nothing to be done about it.

Those facts in and of themselves do not preclude a thoughtful investigation of the facts surrounding the accident to see if anything can be learned.
You obviously missed what I was saying. Post a case study if you want. Just strip the personal details of who, when, and location. There is no point in having these details be part of your case study, except, perhaps, to inflame emotions of the cycling community and generate controversy. I won't answer to your case study, and nobody else should either, until you post the specific details sans any personal information which could lead to the slain cyclist being identified.

I have no problem with case studies - they can be very helpful as a teaching tool. I have a very real problem with using an intensely emotional (for some in the cycling community, obviously not yourself) event as "fodder" for a "debate."

Again, if you want this to be discussed by anyone else than HH; if you want this to teach anything to anybody; then repost your case study with details of the accident as it pertains to your teaching or discussion and sans any personal details of who was involved, when it happened, and where it happened. Instead of being lazy and saying "such and such road in greensville, OH," say: "on a 4 lane arterial road with shoulders but no bike lane around a gentle right hand bend...". This is how you describe a case study in neutral terms, so it can be studied free from emotional response.

Otherwise, I can only assume that your objective is to only inflame emotions and provoke controversy (which people of your ilk tend to confuse with "debate"), and is not to teach or analyze or study.

The moderators of this forum should kill any thread which seeks to capitalize on the deaths of real, identifiable, cyclists to "teach" or "study" or "debate" a subject. This forums has already gotten the reputation of being a not so very friendly place where all we do is shout, insult, and degrade each other. We can change that by making up some rules which case studies are posted. These rules should dictate that any post which seeks to capitalize on the death or serious injury of a real, identifiable, cyclist as a teaching or debating tool be immediately locked. Case studies should be allowed, and they can even be about current events, but they cannot identify the cyclist involved by either direct information, location, or time. The OP needs to be responsible for providing the details of the case study and not taking shortcuts such as simply naming an article in the paper or providing the cross street. This will ensure the discussion of the case study stays on track and the victim of the accident cannot be identified.

HH, galen, DC, and others who seem to prefer the emotionally charged way of teaching case studies; I'd suggest you work with me on this one. Every thread you fellows start with case studies are poorly thought out, poorly researched, and nearly always start with a clip from a news article. Every thread of this ilk veers off within the first page by people who are offended by your "discussion method." The common result is that there are 5 or 6 pages of insults, no discussion except by a few hard headed individuals such as HH or galen, and as a result, not discussion of the ideas the OP was trying to present. It doesn't help when the OP uses inflamatory language such as "another case of a bike lane killing another cyclist" (paraphrased, of course). As a result of there not being any discussion, there is no exchange of ideas, and no teaching. A newbe who happens upon one of these threads simply doesn't learn anything except that there is some sort of "controversy," and/or gets disgusted by the whole thing.

So, galen: Please, if your aim is to teach or discuss, repost this as a cleaned up case study which is self contained so we can have a proper discussion of traffic cycling technique and philosophy. I don't mind these (I don't think anyone minds these), and I've participated in several in the past.
__________________
Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
"If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --the tiniest sprinter
Brian Ratliff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 12:36 PM   #13
Brian Ratliff
Senior Member
 
Brian Ratliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Near Portland, OR
Bikes: Three road bikes. Two track bikes.
Posts: 10,065
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
I should add that there can be no such thing as "accident analysis" on the internet. There is, simply, no possible way enough information can be obtained to really analyze a real accident through the third and fourth hand information we get through the media. To do real accident analysis, you have to be on physically on scene of the actual accident (so you can see the subtlies of terrain, damage, and environment), and you have to be specifically trained to know what you are seeing as you see it.

All there can be, on the internet, are case studies, which are intended as teaching tools and, by definition, are self contained, provide limited information and are limited in scope.
__________________
Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
"If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --the tiniest sprinter
Brian Ratliff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 12:45 PM   #14
Brian Ratliff
Senior Member
 
Brian Ratliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Near Portland, OR
Bikes: Three road bikes. Two track bikes.
Posts: 10,065
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
And one last thing: posts which are posted here which do include personal information and do identify the cyclist who was killed, should be limited to expressions other than ones which attempt to analyze, rationalize, or say that "who and who would probably still be alive if they did this and this..." (again, to paraphrase).

Keep the internet analyses to threads which are case studies and don't refer to individual, slain, cyclists.
__________________
Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
"If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --the tiniest sprinter
Brian Ratliff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 12:49 PM   #15
serpico7
Senior Member
 
serpico7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Raleigh, NC
Bikes:
Posts: 786
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
So... Wow? No, I for one am not surprised at all. This is typical behavior for drivers, and I see no way to change that (just as I see no way to stop them from rolling across some stop signs). The only thing I see is a need to get them to realize that the shoulder or bike lane I'm in is NOT empty before they overtake me. And the only way I know to do that is to get their attention before they reach me, by being where they are paying attention, in their intended path up ahead, and, then, moving aside into the shoulder only after I have their attention.
Good advice HH. With wind noise and hybrid vehicles, effective use of this technique would seem to require a mirror. I've been thinking about getting a mirror, and I think this death-from-behind incident seals the deal for me. Hell, I might need 2 mirrors because I always ride on the left side on one-way roads. What sort of mirror do you use HH?
serpico7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 12:53 PM   #16
mechBgon
Senior Member
 
mechBgon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Bikes:
Posts: 6,957
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm sure the fact that the old lady was driving head-on into the setting sun couldn't have had anything to do with her difficulty in maintaining her lane position. And even if it had, then if the cyclist had been using DLP, it would've magically made the sun stop glaring like that. Yep.

That's all the further I'm going to bother with this one. CYA.
mechBgon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 12:55 PM   #17
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 serpico7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
So... Wow? No, I for one am not surprised at all. This is typical behavior for drivers, and I see no way to change that (just as I see no way to stop them from rolling across some stop signs). The only thing I see is a need to get them to realize that the shoulder or bike lane I'm in is NOT empty before they overtake me. And the only way I know to do that is to get their attention before they reach me, by being where they are paying attention, in their intended path up ahead, and, then, moving aside into the shoulder only after I have their attention.
Good advice HH. With wind noise and hybrid vehicles, effective use of this technique would seem to require a mirror. I've been thinking about getting a mirror, and I think this death-from-behind incident seals the deal for me. What sort of mirror do you use HH?
Yes, a mirror is essential to most effectively employ this technique in most situations without being a rude boob.

But, if for some reason once in a while you don't move out of the way before they reach you, then the situation is no different from taking a lane because it is too narrow to be shared, or taking the lane because the shoulder or bike lane is obstructed, where you don't move out of the way either. In other words, it should be no big deal. I just don't do it when I don't have to to be considerate, not for safety reasons.
Helmet Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 01:04 PM   #18
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 Brian Ratliff
And one last thing: posts which are posted here which do include personal information and do identify the cyclist who was killed, should be limited to expressions other than ones which attempt to analyze, rationalize, or say that "who and who would probably still be alive if they did this and this..." (again, to paraphrase).

Keep the internet analyses to threads which are case studies and don't refer to individual, slain, cyclists.
Brian,

I think you're confusing something here.

The reason medical cases studies are anonymous is because they reveal personal details that are otherwise not publically associated with that person. The obituary might say John Doe died of cancer, but the case study may go into details of what he went through. Obviously, there is no reason to unnecessarily associate that with John Doe.

Here, all we do is talk about information that is already public. We don't add any personal details, because we don't know of any to add, besides that which is already public.

Now, if you have personal knowledge about some personal details about someone involved in an incident that has been made public, personal details that have not been made public, then I could see making those details public here not being appropriate.

But I just don't understand the blanket objection to discussing a known public actual tragedy, and, in particular, how to avoid similar tragedies in the future.

If I understand your argument correctly, I believe you're saying it would be inappropriate to refer to what happened in 9/11, and how, in a forum discussing how to avoid future terrorist attacks. I don't get it.
Helmet Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 02:33 PM   #19
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,772
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 458 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
Wow?
So... Wow? No, I for one am not surprised at all. This is typical behavior for drivers, and I see no way to change that (just as I see no way to stop them from rolling across some stop signs). The only thing I see is a need to get them to realize that the shoulder or bike lane I'm in is NOT empty before they overtake me. And the only way I know to do that is to get their attention before they reach me, by being where they are paying attention, in their intended path up ahead, and, then, moving aside into the shoulder only after I have their attention.
Two feet is a lot of drift. I see motorists crossing the lines, but not that much... but again I can't help but wonder what the underlying situation was in the example... The motorists I see drifting are generally doing it because they are poorly controlling a speeding car. Other reasons may involve sleeping motorists.

In the latter situation I doubt that the motorist would be aware of a cyclist anywhere on the road.

Two feet is a lot of uncontrolled lateral movement. That is why I say "wow."
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 02:35 PM   #20
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,772
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 458 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Ratliff
I should add that there can be no such thing as "accident analysis" on the internet. There is, simply, no possible way enough information can be obtained to really analyze a real accident through the third and fourth hand information we get through the media. To do real accident analysis, you have to be on physically on scene of the actual accident (so you can see the subtlies of terrain, damage, and environment), and you have to be specifically trained to know what you are seeing as you see it.

All there can be, on the internet, are case studies, which are intended as teaching tools and, by definition, are self contained, provide limited information and are limited in scope.
+10
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 02:46 PM   #21
galen_52657
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
galen_52657's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Towson, MD
Bikes: 2001 Look KG 241, 1989 Specialized Stump Jumper Comp, 1986 Gatane Performanc
Posts: 4,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Nobody missed what you where saying. I posted a link to a post in the Bike Racing subforum. In that link is a link to a post with personal information about the deceased, posted by friends. I have been completely dispassionate in my post, unlike you.

Thankfully, the mods seem to recognize that discussing collisions between motorists and cyclists are part and parcel for the A & S forum.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Ratliff
You obviously missed what I was saying. Post a case study if you want. Just strip the personal details of who, when, and location. There is no point in having these details be part of your case study, except, perhaps, to inflame emotions of the cycling community and generate controversy. I won't answer to your case study, and nobody else should either, until you post the specific details sans any personal information which could lead to the slain cyclist being identified.

I have no problem with case studies - they can be very helpful as a teaching tool. I have a very real problem with using an intensely emotional (for some in the cycling community, obviously not yourself) event as "fodder" for a "debate."

Again, if you want this to be discussed by anyone else than HH; if you want this to teach anything to anybody; then repost your case study with details of the accident as it pertains to your teaching or discussion and sans any personal details of who was involved, when it happened, and where it happened. Instead of being lazy and saying "such and such road in greensville, OH," say: "on a 4 lane arterial road with shoulders but no bike lane around a gentle right hand bend...". This is how you describe a case study in neutral terms, so it can be studied free from emotional response.

Otherwise, I can only assume that your objective is to only inflame emotions and provoke controversy (which people of your ilk tend to confuse with "debate"), and is not to teach or analyze or study.

The moderators of this forum should kill any thread which seeks to capitalize on the deaths of real, identifiable, cyclists to "teach" or "study" or "debate" a subject. This forums has already gotten the reputation of being a not so very friendly place where all we do is shout, insult, and degrade each other. We can change that by making up some rules which case studies are posted. These rules should dictate that any post which seeks to capitalize on the death or serious injury of a real, identifiable, cyclist as a teaching or debating tool be immediately locked. Case studies should be allowed, and they can even be about current events, but they cannot identify the cyclist involved by either direct information, location, or time. The OP needs to be responsible for providing the details of the case study and not taking shortcuts such as simply naming an article in the paper or providing the cross street. This will ensure the discussion of the case study stays on track and the victim of the accident cannot be identified.

HH, galen, DC, and others who seem to prefer the emotionally charged way of teaching case studies; I'd suggest you work with me on this one. Every thread you fellows start with case studies are poorly thought out, poorly researched, and nearly always start with a clip from a news article. Every thread of this ilk veers off within the first page by people who are offended by your "discussion method." The common result is that there are 5 or 6 pages of insults, no discussion except by a few hard headed individuals such as HH or galen, and as a result, not discussion of the ideas the OP was trying to present. It doesn't help when the OP uses inflamatory language such as "another case of a bike lane killing another cyclist" (paraphrased, of course). As a result of there not being any discussion, there is no exchange of ideas, and no teaching. A newbe who happens upon one of these threads simply doesn't learn anything except that there is some sort of "controversy," and/or gets disgusted by the whole thing.

So, galen: Please, if your aim is to teach or discuss, repost this as a cleaned up case study which is self contained so we can have a proper discussion of traffic cycling technique and philosophy. I don't mind these (I don't think anyone minds these), and I've participated in several in the past.
galen_52657 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 03:53 PM   #22
Brian Ratliff
Senior Member
 
Brian Ratliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Near Portland, OR
Bikes: Three road bikes. Two track bikes.
Posts: 10,065
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
That dispassion, along with the disclosure of the subject of your case study, which is your disclosure by way of posting the link with such information, is the reason why the mods should close this thread. Dispassion when studying a case study is okay. Dispassionate analysis about a real person from a person not in a position of authority to do that analysis, and, indeed, who doesn't even have access to the information needed to do such an analysis, is disrespectful.

Again, please. If your aim is to teach or discuss, repost this as a case study devoid of details (and devoid of any link posting to details) and provide enough details about the case you want to study to make the case study self contained. Otherwise you are simply trying to provoke controversy. This forum, obviously, is pretty much left alone by the mods. But there are enough people (aren't they your target audience anyway?) who agree with me on this point that you should follow this advisement simply as a way to get your point across.

Unless, that is, it is not your objective to teach and discuss, but only to provoke emotional controversy and use someone's death as fodder to win a debate point. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt for now...
__________________
Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
"If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --the tiniest sprinter
Brian Ratliff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 04:03 PM   #23
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 Brian Ratliff
That dispassion, along with the disclosure of the subject of your case study, which is your disclosure by way of posting the link with such information, is the reason why the mods should close this thread. Dispassion when studying a case study is okay. Dispassionate analysis about a real person from a person not in a position of authority to do that analysis, and, indeed, who doesn't even have access to the information needed to do such an analysis, is disrespectful.
It is disrespectful? How so? I really don't get this!

For the record, if I ever get killed in a bike-car collision, I'm sure Gene, John E and few others here will hear about it and pass it on, and I would HOPE and EXPECT all of you guys to analyze, speculate and do all you can with learning whatever you can about the cause of my death, and what cyclists may or may not do to avoid a similar fate in the future. If, in the process, my death leads you to discuss related but not necessarily directly connected cycling safety issues, so much the better. I don't understand the harm or "disrespect" in any of that.
Helmet Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 04:28 PM   #24
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)
I created a poll to see how everyone feels about whether this type of thread is appropriate.

Poll: Forum etiquette - cyclist death threads
Helmet Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-06, 04:55 PM   #25
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: 23,848
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
IMO all the posts on this thread other than Brian's are nauseating drivel from ghouls.
I-Like-To-Bike 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 05:50 AM.