Advocacy & Safety - Enough!

Please, no more threads debating the usefulness of debating VC. No more polls discussing if we need threads debating the usefulness of debating VC. No more posts discussing if we need polls debating the usefulness of threads debating the usefulness of VC.

Try to read some of these threads from the view of an outsider. Someone posts, and by the 2nd page, it's the VC debate. Over and over again.

VC proponents, please show a bit of restraint in your postings. Many people tend to tune out a long-winded or heavy handed delivery.

Everyone else, can we please minimize the debate, and stick to the topic of whatever thread you're posting in?


Thank you.

I'm sick of seeing thead *****ing about other threads..

" I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!"

http://ktheory.com/archives/network-beale.jpg

why all the clocks?

He's mad as hell in multible time zones. ;)

He's mad as hell in multible time zones. ;) :roflmao:


Ah you youngsters! That was a line and a scene from the movie "Network" (1976)

I'm sick of seeing thead *****ing about other threads..
Too bad

why all the clocks?
He needs them to help triangulate his correct Lane Position. :p

I'm sick of repeated debates, but then again -- if this stuff didn't keep popping up, how would noobs get up to speed on these? Yeah, they should read the stickies and they should learn to use search. But they don't usually do those things, do they?

I dunno, if you don't want to read a thread, don't read it. If you don't want to participate in 'endless' debates, don't post. Piece of cake.

Yeah, I'm all about it.

why all the clocks?

He's in a newsroom.

I'm pretty sure that's Peter Finch and he won an oscar for that role.

I've managed to avoid just about all threads debating vc and have usually managed to avoid the entire Advocacy and Safety forum altogether! It's pretty easy to do!

I've managed to avoid just about all threads debating vc and have usually managed to avoid the entire Advocacy and Safety forum altogether! It's pretty easy to do!

Is there a filter option to the Forums? If not, that would be nice !

jw

This is why I bowed out of the BL/VC debates last Friday. http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=2034926&postcount=1506
I saw this coming.
But it will pass and we will have fun again. Its important to keep active discussion on method of cycling safely in traffic - everyone should ignore the labels and focus on the methods, skills, experiences, etc.

Al

I've managed to avoid just about all threads debating vc and have usually managed to avoid the entire Advocacy and Safety forum altogether! It's pretty easy to do!

Yeah, when I first got here I became mildly interested in VC because it presented some compeling ideas on how to ride. It was pretty easy to figure out the important parts though, and now all of the threads are just so much yak, yak, yak. It's beyond me some times how people can get so emotional over internet arguments.

A&S is pretty much just VC talk with a few "look at this horrible accident" threads thrown in.

I move in and out of A&S. Sometimes, I'll leave it alone for days or even a month at a time. Of course, the debates wouldn't be "debates" if there weren't some hard core people who attack VC for the sake of attacking VC. And if people didn't post ideas about why they thought bike lanes were helpful, it would be harder to write criticisms of an idea no one espoused.

The debates often get mired down into personal attacks, not substantive arguments. In my admittedly biased view, the personal attacks usually (but not always) come from people who oppose VC. I used to point those out and (sometimes) respond in kind. I've tried to stop that. Putting the worst offender on my Ignore List made that easier.

That's another option. If a few forum members annoy you for whatever reason, put them on your Ignore List. If what they're saying as no persuasive value (like the posts of the person on my list), then you don't have to worry about other people believing their posts. But if what they're saying has persuasive value, respond to it with something more persuasive.

I think some of the most helpful posts are the examples of specific pieces of roadway with questions about how cyclists should traverse them or what kind of facilities (if any) are appropriate. That keeps the bike lane skeptics from talking about 25 mph roads and bike lane proponents from talkiing about cycling on freeways.

Each side of the debate should also work better to police itself. If you see someone you generally agree with cross the line into personal attacks or stupidly inflamed rhetoric, tell them either with a PM or a post.

When my criticisms of one anti-VC'er's personal attacks also got too personal, others pointed that out to me. I've done the same for other people on my side of the debate. In one extreme case, I even started a thread about why I thought analogizing segregated cycling facilities to Nazi policies was deeply offensive. Finally, don't give "atta-boys" to posts that contain a strong personal attack but no substance.

Sorry about the double post, the forum is having database problems and I couldn't tack this on to the end of my last post.

Before I started visiting Bikeforums.net, I was familiar with the concept of VC. But I had no idea that people would get so worked up over a topic that seems – to me anyway – rather mundane. I still can’t grasp why this stirs so much passion. Any theories?

Before I started visiting Bikeforums.net, I was familiar with the concept of VC. But I had no idea that people would get so worked up over a topic that seems – to me anyway – rather mundane. I still can’t grasp why this stirs so much passion. Any theories?

For the same reasons that the roadies get all riled up any time Shimano vs. Campy or Triple vs. Double or Steel vs. other material comes up. People in general will think that what they are doing/using is the best. They'll generally disagree with someone who states otherwise. Thus, the start of many debates. A lot of BS results from these disagreements but every once in a while something useful is stated. I usually read through the whole debate anyway even if I just read the same thing last week.

And please no one take offense to this. I'm just as guilty as any of the people I just described in terms of fueling the fire. Debating about bike is about 5% as fun as biking. And that's saying a lot. I'd rate driving somewhere in the .01% range.

Another reason that it riles people is that it's important. Bike lanes, depending on your perspective, can greatly increase or decrease the fun and safety or riding. For example, I can get through my downtown pretty quickly now. But if cops expected me to stay in bike lanes, it would both slow me down and put me in a more dangerous part of the road. Yeah, that gets me riled up.

Expat.
Maybe we can quit debating VC on the A&S forum after you get everyone on the BMX forum to spell correctly, the SS&FG forum to stop bashing Pistas, and the Road forum to go a whole day without talking about poseurs. Good luck with all that and then get back to us.

Expat.
Maybe we can quit debating VC on the A&S forum after you get everyone on the BMX forum to spell correctly, the SS&FG forum to stop bashing Pistas, and the Road forum to go a whole day without talking about poseurs. Good luck with all that and then get back to us.

Hmmm. Maybe I can get Osama Bin Laden to turn himself in too.

Yada, yada, warden! :p

Congratulations Expat, you have started the first thread about threads about polls about threads about VC! :p

Actually, reading the threads about VC here has made me a better cyclist and kept me safer on streets. i.e. I now completely avoid right-hooks by taking the lane at the light. I also avoid bike lanes which are painted in an unsafe manner. Etc.

VC is very relevant to Advocacy & Safety. If you don't like the topics, then don't read them. Maybe the "General Cycling Discussion" forum might be more to your liking.

Actually, reading the threads about VC here has made me a better cyclist and kept me safer on streets. .

Not me. The SUV that hit me left tire marks on the left seat stay, bending it and launching me into the field next to the road. If I was riding 6 inches to the left, I'd be in the passenger seat instead of the nice soft field of poison ivy. I'll stay to the right, thanks.

:o

jw

Actually, reading the threads about VC here has made me a better cyclist and kept me safer on streets. i.e. I now completely avoid right-hooks by taking the lane at the light. I also avoid bike lanes which are painted in an unsafe manner. Etc.

VC is very relevant to Advocacy & Safety. If you don't like the topics, then don't read them. Maybe the "General Cycling Discussion" forum might be more to your liking.

If VC works for you, that's good. I just don't think every A&S thread needs to turn into a debate about it.

Try to read some of these threads from the view of an outsider. Someone posts, and by the 2nd page, it's the VC debate. Over and over again.

Reading this original post from an "outsiders" view I have to ask. What is VC? I can tell you from an "outsiders" perspective this post makes no sense.

Reading this original post from an "outsiders" view I have to ask. What is VC? I can tell you from an "outsiders" perspective this post makes no sense.
The VietCong were excellent cyclists. Their style of riding in traffic is studied and debated endlessly on BikeForums.

I wondered the same thing a few months ago when I first started posting here. :)

For a more accurate and thorough explanation of VC, check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicular_cycling

Back in da 'Nam, in the old Corps, it was quite common for Charlie to come charging our postions on bicycles, hundreds of them, pedaling their little butts off screaming "Didi Mau, Didi Mau, GI Joe Muthafuukaaas". It was really a sight to see and I would have liked to have seen how it all turned out, except then the alarm went off and I got up to go to work. :p

Oh my, did I just start another VC debate?

Actually, Chip, I believe bicycles carried the majority of tonnage along the Ho Chi Mihn Trail for the North Vietnamese and VC,

and this contributes to my confusion about how I'm supposed to ride my bicycle even to this day...

Actually, Chip, I believe bicycles carried the majority of tonnage along the Ho Chi Mihn Trail for the North Vietnamese and VC,

and this contributes to my confusion about how I'm supposed to ride my bicycle even to this day...

Yes, and they had no bike lanes.

They didn't have soccer moms, cellphones, and SUVs, either.
But with almost everyone packing heat, I'll lay odds that roadrage was a real *****.

They didn't have soccer moms, cellphones, and SUVs, either.
But with almost everyone packing heat, I'll lay odds that roadrage was a real *****.
Depends on the cause of the problem; i.e. did it come unseen from 30,000 feet above or not.

Actually, reading the threads about VC here has made me a better cyclist and kept me safer on streets. i.e. I now completely avoid right-hooks by taking the lane at the light. I also avoid bike lanes which are painted in an unsafe manner. Etc.

VC is very relevant to Advocacy & Safety. If you don't like the topics, then don't read them. Maybe the "General Cycling Discussion" forum might be more to your liking.

That's a good point. I learned a lot about cycling from Serge, Al, DC and a few others too. And certainly NOBODY has yet come up with an alternative system other than VC. And at least half the blame for any excessive verbiage goes to the anti-VC dogmatists and their gang of lackey lapdog stooges. :D

Expat.
Maybe we can quit debating VC on the A&S forum after you get everyone on the BMX forum to spell correctly[...]

That wouldn't be hard at all. All he'd have to do is ban every user of that part of the board aside from himself, myself, BMXTrix, Dooley, and the guy from Santa Clara whose username eludes me at the moment.

If you're adventurous, it's possible to go to Vietnam and experience "VC cycling" firsthand:
http://www.mishalov.com/MountainBikeHoChiMinh.html

That wouldn't be hard at all. All he'd have to do is ban every user of that part of the board aside from himself, myself, BMXTrix, Dooley, and the guy from Santa Clara whose username eludes me at the moment.

Hypersnazz?

Yeah, that guy.

He hasn't been around for a while. Neither has a certain member from the other coast. But I don't know what Snazzy's been up to.

And at least half the blame for any excessive verbiage goes to the anti-VC dogmatists and their gang of lackey lapdog stooges. :D
If you include their trolling and all my posts taking the bait in response, that would probably account for 75% of the volume.

Depends on the cause of the problem; i.e. did it come unseen from 30,000 feet above or not.
That's definately true. Hails of napalm, chaingun bullets and artillary shells makes rush hour traffic with speedhappy drivers look like a ride in the park.

That's a good point. I learned a lot about cycling from Serge, Al, DC and a few others too. And certainly NOBODY has yet come up with an alternative system other than VC. And at least half the blame for any excessive verbiage goes to the anti-VC dogmatists and their gang of lackey lapdog stooges. :D

OIC - VC=Good, Everything Else=Bad How did anyone ever survive without 'the system'? :eek:

:roflmao: :roflmao: Now I went and dooded it!

If you include their trolling and all my posts taking the bait in response, that would probably account for 75% of the volume.


By "trolling" I assume you mean "posting to A&S"? The vast bulk of your posts (other than the threads and polls you start about yourself, in apparent search for validation) are in threads in which they serve no purpose whatsoever other than to disrespect the dead and / or second-guess the actions of the injured among us, usually from a strikingly uninformed stance with respect to the actual circumstances of the accidents you critique.

Well, we've reached the bottom.

. . . .And at least half the blame for any excessive verbiage goes to the anti-VC dogmatists and their gang. . . :D


OIC - VC=Good, Everything Else=Bad How did anyone ever survive without 'the system'? :eek:

:roflmao: :roflmao: Now I went and dooded it!
Point made.

What in God's name is "VC"?? :rolleyes:

What in God's name is "VC"?? :rolleyes:
I'll spare you the jokes (but others probably won't). It means vehicular cycling. Here's a wiki page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicular_cycling) on the subject.

I'll spare you the jokes (but others probably won't). It means vehicular cycling. Here's a wiki page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicular_cycling) on the subject.




Well, VC seems like a pretty common sense, no-brainer type thing . . how could anybody possibly have a problem with it? -I mean, if you run a red light and get caught, you should be fined and/or go to jail . . why should cyclists be given special rights or priviledges? :rolleyes:

Well, VC seems like a pretty common sense, no-brainer type thing . . how could anybody possibly have a problem with it? -I mean, if you run a red light and get caught, you should be fined and/or go to jail . . why should cyclists be given special rights or priviledges? :rolleyes:

I don't think most people here have a problem with most aspects of VC - I think it's primarily a problem with how VC is presented, and with the severe blame-the-cyclist attitude some of its preachers have adopted.

I practice VC for the most part, but when I'm eventually killed by a drunk driver behaving totally unpredictably and somebody here starts explaining that it's my own fault, I'm going to haunt the **** out of that VCist. You've all been warned.

Well, VC seems like a pretty common sense, no-brainer type thing . . how could anybody possibly have a problem with it? -I mean, if you run a red light and get caught, you should be fined and/or go to jail . . why should cyclists be given special rights or priviledges? :rolleyes:

The techniques wrapped up in vehicular cycling are fine; most of us ride somewhat in accordance with them. It is the political stance and tactics of a particular group of advocates (also known as vehicular cyclists, which causes a lot of confusion) which causes the trouble.