I believe inflated charges and mistreatment occur too often, and that this provokes contempt for the law. However, I think the focus of too many CM members is really on provoking law enforcement rather than promoting cycling.

You have the right to do many things, but in the real world you have to use your head. You have the right to walk by yourself on any public street whenever you want. However, if you go into certain areas, you will be robbed or much worse. If you insist on ignoring reality, few people will be sympathetic.

Aggravating people is a strange way to attract support for a cause. Have you ever changed your views to conform with somebody who intentionally p*ssed you off? Most people find ways to avoid or neutralize those who they perceive as threats. People are much more receptive to ideas when they're treated with respect and they believe they're understood.

CM and the cops both contribute to an unproductive cycle of conflict, but more people sympathize with the cops than CM because they don't appreciate being regarded as enemies or acceptable collateral damage just because they're on the roads. Regardless of who's right and wrong, it's in CM's interest to break the cycle.Actually, most social changes occur following a period of social friction. Protest and civil disobedience have often been effective tactics for change. Being nicey-nice almost never changes minds, mostly because people don't listen. Certainly it would be wrong to harm others to advance a political or social cause. But causing mere inconvenience is not real harm. And often, it is the only recourse for many groups who feel downtrodden. While CM may represent a less noble or less important cause, the precedents for inconveniencing masses of people include demonstrations for (and against) civil rights, anti-war movements, gay rights, feminism and, yes, both pro- and anti-abortion movements. While these movements do initially tick people off, as they persist over time they have frequently gained the changes they sought.

You seem to be the well meaning liberal type who hates to get anybody riled up. At any rate, you have failed to state your opinion about the issues behind CM, you have just opined on the tactics they use. Where do you stand on the actual issues?

Actually, most social changes occur following a period of social friction. Protest and civil disobedience have often been effective tactics for change. Being nicey-nice almost never changes minds, mostly because people don't listen. Certainly it would be wrong to harm others to advance a political or social cause. But causing mere inconvenience is not real harm. And often, it is the only recourse for many groups who feel downtrodden. While CM may represent a less noble or less important cause, the precedents for inconveniencing masses of people include demonstrations for (and against) civil rights, anti-war movements, gay rights, feminism and, yes, both pro- and anti-abortion movements. While these movements do initially tick people off, as they persist over time they have frequently gained the changes they sought.

You seem to be the well meaning liberal type who hates to get anybody riled up. At any rate, you have failed to state your opinion about the issues behind CM, you have just opined on the tactics they use. Where do you stand on the actual issues?

As far as CM goes, I'd favor issuing tickets first, but I'm OK with arrests if ticketing is ineffective -- I'd favor the same for people who purposely mess up traffic regardless of their cause. I understand why I come across like a milqetoast liberal in my posts, but I probably understand the reasons why CM members think it is necessary to resort to such actions better than you think.

I'm not against conflict, but I think battles must be chosen and planned carefully. It's true that Gandhi, MLK, and others very successfully used civil disobedience to provoke and to change. These people endured numerous hardships (Gandhi spent many years in prison), but they were also shrewd politicians and adapted their tactics to work with current social conditions. For example, Gandhi also successfully used hunger strikes to shape behavior. Anyone who tries that nowadays will starve to death.

Protests are useful for rallying supporters, but they tend to alienate most other people -- including many who agree with the protesters on the issues. I've seen too many protests that look like scenes from the 60's. Tactics need to evolve with the times. The abortion debate has gone nowhere because both sides rehash the same tired slogans rather than admit it's a complex ethical question that involves when people become humans and try to work themselves through a meaningful thought process. Gay rights and feminism have made huge strides because their advocates use the courts, legislative system, etc and present arguments that make sense to many people.

People really need to use the system if they want their ideas to be reflected in the collective consciousness. Someone jokingly mentioned trying to get the businesses in on the CM events, but I think that kind of thinking is more likely to get people thinking. After all, streets are blocked for parades, farmers markets etc. Why not something like this? Successful counterculture gets institutionalized over time -- consider rap, "alternative" music, tatoos, piercings, etc.

In any case, I generally disagree with going after infrastructure as a tactic. It takes very few people and little skill to disrupt electricity, water, communication networks, transportation, etc on a local basis. If every group that wished to change society did this, we'd be paralyzed.

Besides, blocking traffic is a desperation tactic -- people do it because they can't think of anything else. That doesn't make it effective. Rather, it's important to understand and adapt to the environment. Sometimes when you go out to do a century, you may find a surprise 15mph headwind accompanied by rain. When this happens, you gotta come to terms with it. In other words, recognize progress will be slow and hard because failing to do so will set you back even futher.

If these people who were arrested went to CM with the intention to aggravate/cause confrontation with motorists for no good reason then they deserve to be arrested.

+1

..... he was totally surrounded by cyclists and a few behind the cop were showing U-locks and chains telling him ....


Hmmmmm! sounds kinky!

roughstuff

[. . .] I'm not against conflict, but I think battles must be chosen and planned carefully. It's true that Gandhi, MLK, and others very successfully used civil disobedience to provoke and to change. These people endured numerous hardships (Gandhi spent many years in prison), but they were also shrewd politicians and adapted their tactics to work with current social conditions. For example, Gandhi also successfully used hunger strikes to shape behavior. Anyone who tries that nowadays will starve to death.
Gandhi used hunger strikes late in his career. They were effective only because he had already established himself as a moral and political leader by organizing mass actions which disrupted and inconvenienced the British ruling class.


Protests are useful for rallying supporters, but they tend to alienate most other people -- including many who agree with the protesters on the issues. I've seen too many protests that look like scenes from the 60's. Tactics need to evolve with the times. The abortion debate has gone nowhere because both sides rehash the same tired slogans rather than admit it's a complex ethical question that involves when people become humans and try to work themselves through a meaningful thought process. Gay rights and feminism have made huge strides because their advocates use the courts, legislative system, etc and present arguments that make sense to many people.


I guess you lived in a different 60s than I did. In my opinion, mass demonstrations were effective in civil rights and the anti-war movement. Effective demonstrations for feminism and gay rights mostly occurred in the 1970s and 80s. Gandhi used them across the world in the early 20th century. And there was South Africa in the last decade of the last century. But you were saying that protests only worked in the 60s? Also, mass protests are not meant to convey complex ethical ideas. They are meant to compel action on simple issues, like cars strangling our cities and warming our atmosphere
.
People really need to use the system if they want their ideas to be reflected in the collective consciousness.
CM riders who were falsely arrested in New York just used the system and won a major court battle. I guess you didn't hear about it. But keep in mind that the system is cars, and the system is never interested in changing itself. Radical change within the system is not possible until a critical mass is reached in terms of either political power or public opinion.



Someone jokingly mentioned trying to get the businesses in on the CM events, but I think that kind of thinking is more likely to get people thinking. After all, streets are blocked for parades, farmers markets etc. Why not something like this? Successful counterculture gets institutionalized over time -- consider rap, "alternative" music, tatoos, piercings, etc.

I mentioned that and I wasn't joking. Critical Mass is about saving the city, so if city officials were not morons they would support it by making Friday evenings a carfree time to live, dine and shop in the city.
Enrique Penalosa (http://www.pps.org/info/placemakingtools/placemakers/epenalosa) did something similar to this when he was mayor of Bogota, one of the most car-strangled cities in the world.


In any case, I generally disagree with going after infrastructure as a tactic. It takes very few people and little skill to disrupt electricity, water, communication networks, transportation, etc on a local basis. If every group that wished to change society did this, we'd be paralyzed.

Besides, blocking traffic is a desperation tactic -- people do it because they can't think of anything else. That doesn't make it effective. Rather, it's important to understand and adapt to the environment. Sometimes when you go out to do a century, you may find a surprise 15mph headwind accompanied by rain. When this happens, you gotta come to terms with it. In other words, recognize progress will be slow and hard because failing to do so will set you back even futher.



Nice try, attempting to equate CM with terrorism, but not very accurate. Like I said before: bikes don't cause traffic jams, cars do. And a little added inconvenience is not harmful. Many people already spend an hour a day commuting, they are fools to think CM or bikes can add significantly to that waste of time.

Besides, I am tired of adapting to a lifestyle and culture that does not make me feel happy or fulfilled. Time is precious and time is short. The rest of the world is now adopting American car culture. The planet is warming fast. Nonrenewable resources are dwindling quickly. Maybe some small amount of inconvenience now will help to avert larger crises later. A few traffic jams are a small price to pay to get these issues talked about.

Bannerjek--I really don't think that your beef with CM has anything to do with strategy. I think you are wholly enmeshed in car culture and want to see it preserved.

Bannerjek--I really don't think that your beef with CM has anything to do with strategy. I think you are wholly enmeshed in car culture and want to see it preserved.
I commute about 9,000 miles per year by bike in every kind of weather (this does not include utility riding to stores, recreational rides, etc). The roads I take are pretty dicey, so I rarely see a single cyclist. Last week, I saw one, but that was in town as I was locking up. I know many CM members might enjoy my commute, but I'll bet a lot would come up with excuses about dark and frozen fog if they had to do it year in and year out.

My beef with CM is absolutely about strategy. CM gives cyclists a bad name so that drivers regard cyclists as enemies rather than fellow commuters. CM's tactics get people into conflict mode, so no meaningful discussion can take place.

I don't act like a jackass on the road, so people treat me with respect rather than just dismissing me as a wacko. If cars are causing the jams, the bikes don't need to help.

I can see that we are not going to agree on this, so if I seem quiet on the issue, it's not because I'm mad, because I think I convinced you or vice versa. It's that there's no point. Go ahead, block the traffic and get arrested if you think it helps.

Meanwhile, I'll tell the people that real cyclists work with the cars since I suspect they will be around for awhile. BTW, I was profiled in an article kicking off the bike commute challenge earlier this year. In it, I listed a number of reasons why I thought people should bike. That kind of press probably helps cycling more than the kind CM typically gets.

'real cyclists'

LOL, how do you tell the real cyclists from the 'fake' ones?

I commute about 9,000 miles per year by bike in every kind of weather (this does not include utility riding to stores, recreational rides, etc). The roads I take are pretty dicey, so I rarely see a single cyclist. Last week, I saw one, but that was in town as I was locking up. I know many CM members might enjoy my commute, but I'll bet a lot would come up with excuses about dark and frozen fog if they had to do it year in and year out.

My beef with CM is absolutely about strategy. CM gives cyclists a bad name so that drivers regard cyclists as enemies rather than fellow commuters. CM's tactics get people into conflict mode, so no meaningful discussion can take place.

I don't act like a jackass on the road, so people treat me with respect rather than just dismissing me as a wacko. If cars are causing the jams, the bikes don't need to help.

I can see that we are not going to agree on this, so if I seem quiet on the issue, it's not because I'm mad, because I think I convinced you or vice versa. It's that there's no point. Go ahead, block the traffic and get arrested if you think it helps.

Meanwhile, I'll tell the people that real cyclists work with the cars since I suspect they will be around for awhile. BTW, I was profiled in an article kicking off the bike commute challenge earlier this year. In it, I listed a number of reasons why I thought people should bike. That kind of press probably helps cycling more than the kind CM typically gets.
I hope you didn't think I was questioning your chops as a cyclist. I wasn't. I'm just a fairly confrontational type, although I try to be a good Buddhist. I think confrontation is a useful tactic and morally OK, as long as nobody gets hurt. I see confrontation in the heart of the tactics of Gandhi and King, two of my non-cycling heroes :). But confrontation and rational discourse both have their uses. We are probably all more effective when we follow our temperaments. Thanks for the discussion.

'real cyclists'

LOL, how do you tell the real cyclists from the 'fake' ones?
Easy, for BF purposes, a real cyclist is one who agrees with the BF poster. Every one else is a miseducated SOB troll.

I have far more problems with people giving me too much space, waiting for me when they have right of way, etc than I do with hostile morons who may be looped out on god knows what.

well said


Haven't ordered a pizza in well over 10 years so it will be a long wait ;) . I have yet to find a place that can make crust or sauce as well as me

mind sharing? :)

Haven't ordered a pizza in well over 10 years so it will be a long wait . I have yet to find a place that can make crust or sauce as well as me
mind sharing? :)

Crud, I don't use a formal recipie and I play it by feel as I make it. However I can tell you the basics.

For basic thick crust for a pair of 12" pies, a decent sized baking tray, or one 16":
1 cup milk
4 cups flour
about 2 tbsp olive oil
yeast
salt
sugar
some basil and grated parmesan for a little extra flavor

Knead and spread, and let rise as you would any dough. Bake for 10 min at 400-425 and let cool before putting toppings on.

If you prefer a more biscuity crust, use a flour and white corn meal mix at a ratio of 5:1 and use water instead of milk.

Do not grease pans. If you set the dough on a light dusting of corn meal and made it properly, it will not stick whether you use cast iron, stoneware, teflon, or whatever.

Note: my ratios are approximate, so you will need to adjust the dough to get the right consistency.

Sauce:

I prefer to use fresh ingredients and keep things simple (tomatoes, basil, oregano, a touch of honey, pinch of thyme and salt, healthy amount of pepper). However, you can start with canned diced tomatoes (drained) or mix tomato paste with water 1:2 as the base in a pinch. Simmer for at least 30 min, but let cool before using.

Taste as you mix to get the balance right, but remember that it takes a little time for flavors to penetrate the sauce. I realize this sounds like nothing special, but it tastes better than stuff you can buy because the ingredients are all fresh. I like to grow my own spices -- the storebought tends to taste like dust though you can buy decent stuff for extortionate prices. Most commercially produced sauces use too much salt and sugar.

Assembly:

Some ingredients (mushrooms, onions, green peppers, etc) contain a lot of water. If you apply a light layer of cheese (preferably a few different kinds to make the flavor more interesting), before applying these ingredients, the crust will behave better. Apply cheese and ingredients in a mixed fashion to prevent air pockets.

Easy, for BF purposes, a real cyclist is one who agrees with the BF poster. Every one else is a miseducated SOB troll.
Nahh, think of it like academia -- all the self proclaimed authorities define terms as they like on the fly :D

mmm, homemade pizza....

Nahh, think of it like academia -- all the self proclaimed authorities define terms as they like on the fly :D
Nah, BF is better. The self proclaimed authorities can award themselves "real" degrees in science, law, psychology, etc. or for whatever else they have a notion to pontificate. Better yet there is no need for the self proclaimed authorities ever having to produce any proof that they have a clue about their chosen field of expertise.

Nah, BF is better. The self proclaimed authorities can award themselves "real" degrees in science, law, psychology, etc. or for whatever else they have a notion to pontificate. Better yet there is no need for the self proclaimed authorities ever having to produce any proof that they have a clue about their chosen field of expertise.
I don't like to brag, but I do have a B.S. in pontifacology. And I'm a fantastic amateur chef.

To criticize Banarek's pizza dough recipe,

Banarek forgot to include to ratios of the most important ingredients, the yeast, sugar and the salt, in conjunction with the oil, the flour's 'hardness' and the temperature & humidity. These all play a crucial role in the big dough picture.

Too much sugar, the yeast over activates, too much salt and it never will. The oil might coat the yeast, preventing even fermentation and creating a crust both airy and dense, but in a bad way. A cold dough will rise, but tomorrow, not tonight.

Should it be prepared with the sponge method of dough preparation, or is it preferable to do it dry?

I personally go for the sponge method, but to each chef his own.
The proof is in the pudding. And it isn't always easy making pizza pie.

Wait a second. let me get my stand in, the gorilla pizza chef. If I wanted to make points with some passive subliminal subtext in my sig, this is when I'd change it to (truth in advertising, folks!)

"Cooked lunch for Julia Child, shortbread once featured in Gourmet magazine."

Stop it you guys, you're making me hungry :p

To criticize Banarek's pizza dough recipe,

Banarek forgot to include to ratios of the most important ingredients, the yeast, sugar and the salt, in conjunction with the oil, the flour's 'hardness' and the temperature & humidity. These all play a crucial role in the big dough picture.

Too much sugar, the yeast over activates, too much salt and it never will. The oil might coat the yeast, preventing even fermentation and creating a crust both airy and dense, but in a bad way. A cold dough will rise, but tomorrow, not tonight.
Criticisms acknowledged. The problem is that I do most things by feel so I can't say the exact measurements except within a ballpark -- I don't typically work from a written recipies except when trying something new or copying something someone else does well (even in the copying case, my favorite way to learn is by assisting). Besides, you have to adjust for the characteristics of the specific ingredients and conditions. As you observe, there are many variables that can muck up the final result.

Thread hijack discussion belongs in foo...

Thread hijack discussion belongs in foo...

I've noticed nearly all threads get hijacked... some many times over :(

Lt. commented <snip> "We were hoping they (the cyclists) got the message last month, said the Lt.

Got what message?

That if you have a nice butt, and you are a minor male, he will do anything to get your msn nickname.

Sorry .... could not resist

Hello there. Whether or not you agree with Critical Mass, I welcome your response, but there are a few things I would like to clarify:

1. Critical Mass is different in each city. Many riders don't ride with the intention of obstructing traffic, but rather to call attention to the fact that they too are traffic (a well-known slogan for CM is "We're not obstructing traffic, we are traffic"). This doesn't mean that there aren't people who are intentionally confrontational with cars... but for the most part (at least in Spokane), people want to get along with drivers.

Spokane is a town that's horribly unfriendly to bicyclists. There are no bike lanes in the heart of the city, and it's illegal to ride on the sidewalks. This in itself makes things incredibly difficult and dangerous for bicyclists. That's a large reason that people have been motivated to participate in Critical Mass (as a reminder that the streets belong to bicyclists just as much as they belong to cars).

2. Most bicyclists were riding in the far right lane, with no more than two abreast (which is what is required according to RCW 46.61.770). Others had moved into the left lane in preparation for turning left, which was legal.

Even if a couple of riders had went into the left lane unlawfully, it wouldn't be the fault of all of the riders, and it isn't lawful to arrest the entire group.

3. The Spokane Police Department came to the meeting spot and read the laws for Disorderly Conduct before the ride began. It was pretty clear that they planned on making the arrests well ahead of time, and that they had conducted research to find something that they could charge the cyclists with other than simple violations of bicycle laws (which would only receive citations).

4. Some of the bicyclists were tackled to the ground, even though they were cooperating. 22 Officers were dispatched to make these arrests. Isn't that a little overboard to stop eleven riders?

Anyhow, thank you for reading. It's good to see that there's some constructive dialog coming from people who have many different views of CM. :)

love,
Spokane CM

p.s. For anyone in Spokane who would like to show support, the next ride will be on Friday, December 30. Riders will meet at 4:30pm in front of the Carousel at Riverfront Park.

Spokane--this police harrassment of CM has become all too common across the country. Riders were pulled off their tall bikes and taken to jail here in Lansing, MI also. As in Spokane, there were only a few riders involved--certainly not enough to seriously disrupt traffic. And many people (even a few cyclists!) make the laughable claim that CM is causing traffic jams and participants therefore deserve to be arrested, whether or not they have individually broken any laws. The car culture protects itself, constitution and human rights be damned. It seems that the only right we can be sure of is our right to get our cars and SUVs across town without being "inconvenienced" by slower traffic.

I'm glad that you and othes have decided to ride again in Spokane. That takes guts! Good luck and welcome to the forum.