Camilo

Yea, plus his writing is awful - it's a favor to let him know. Unfortunately, in the more recent thread he started https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...child-s-safety, he showed he didn't learn anything or try to improve his writing. And, it seems his ideas have degenerated as well.

Chicago Al 

Actually a lot of people who post here use language very effectively; a few even manage a bit of wit. The OP's LTE is long-winded, meandering, and uses a lot of words and terms that he clearly does not understand, which confuses his meaning...to the extent that he had one. And the 'tone' (remember that from English class?) is a mixture of self-congratulation and self-pity. If anyone read to the end of his piece they were likely to want to smack the next cyclist they saw with an OED.

At least he did not overuse exclamation marks. That is a sure sign of someone who does not have a decent argument, but thinks that speaking more emphatically will be convincing.

I-Like-To-Bike

He's probably ready to join the fray on the helmet thread. He has all the qualifications to be a regular.

rolliepollie

First error is generalizing all motorists with having "feeble thought" in the matter. I'm a biker and a motorist, and that automatically sounds like an attack to me, intentional or not. Not good.

Second, the wording is inconsistent. First half, like some have pointed out, have somewhat flamboyant writing. The last paragraph ends more like a personal rant without supporting fact. Anecdotal evidence shouldn't be used alone to support a far-reaching conclusion.

In the end, you make cyclists seem like rebels who are as spiteful toward motorists as they are to us as you claim in an overdrawn rant.

brianmcg123

I stopped reading after the first sentence. Sounded too much like a "Frasier" episode.