sad :-(

[tomg]

i am sad that this forum segregated vc from "advocacy and safety" in bicycle forums; did not review rants against this form (except a few about forester), but the technique needs to stand (with the law backing you). i don't understand why this legal method of road bicycling (and the only law following) was removed from an advocacy/safety section of bike inclusion. just venting some concerns,....thank you for explaining shift in advocacy!

[chipcom]

I don't think anyone has a problem with the techical concepts of vehicular cycling - operating a bicycle as a vehicle according to the rules of the road for vehicles, but some of the political aspects of vehicular cycling have caused heated debates - and I think those heated debates are what this subforum will consist of.

[N_C]

I don't think anyone has a problem with the techical concepts of vehicular cycling - operating a bicycle as a vehicle according to the rules of the road for vehicles, but some of the political aspects of vehicular cycling have caused heated debates - and I think those heated debates are what this subforum will consist of.

+1. It is not the idea of VC. It is that we are told we have to do it or should do it, by JF & his flock. Don't know about you. But I hate the idea of having someone tell me how to ride my bike unless I ask.

This is not meant for anyone in particular, just making a general statement here. So you thin skin folks can chill:

Don't tell me I'm doing it wrong when I tell you how I ride. You can disagree with how I ride, but don't tell me I should change because you think you are right & I am wrong & I should follow your doctrine on how to ride. In fact don't even tell me I should change how I ride period. What you can do is present the idea to me with suggestions on what may make for a better ride & let me make my own decision on how I should ride. Don't try to force your style down my throat. You do & I'll resist you at every turn, just to spite you.

[Bekologist]

to be blunt, if some specific poster didn't overlay their personal ideas in a pedantic, browbeating manner in the general A&S forum, perhaps this subforum wouldn't be needed.

I have no personal problems with the reasoned debate of riding techniques, but when one poster makes themselves out to be the traffic planner, the roads engineer, the seer, the accident analyst, the judge, jury, and the educator- dispensing their way as the only way to ride - it really chaps this cavemans' thick skin.

[N_C]

to be blunt, if some specific poster didn't overlay their personal ideas in a pedantic, browbeating manner in the general A&S forum, perhaps this subforum wouldn't be needed.

I have no personal problems with the reasoned debate of riding techniques, but when one poster makes themselves out to be the traffic planner, the roads engineer, the seer, the accident analyst, the judge, jury, and the educator- dispensing their way as the only way to ride - it really chaps this cavemans' thick skin.

+1. You forgot executioner.

[donnamb]

i am sad that this forum segregated vc from "advocacy and safety" in bicycle forums; did not review rants against this form (except a few about forester), but the technique needs to stand (with the law backing you). i don't understand why this legal method of road bicycling (and the only law following) was removed from an advocacy/safety section of bike inclusion. just venting some concerns,....thank you for explaining shift in advocacy!
Tomg, I know it's getting to be a long one, but if you wanted an idea about why the forum administrators did this, you can get it from this thread (http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=278098). Brian is one of our administrators, and has spent a lot of time explaining the reasoning behind this decision.

I feel sad about it, too, but short of shutting the A&S forum down altogether, no one had an alternative solution that didn't involve moderators spending nearly all of their personal lives policing threads. We like to ride our bikes as much as anyone else on this forum. :)

[sggoodri]

I don't think anyone has a problem with the techical concepts of vehicular cycling - operating a bicycle as a vehicle according to the rules of the road for vehicles, but some of the political aspects of vehicular cycling have caused heated debates - and I think those heated debates are what this subforum will consist of.

Here in North Carolina, there is a significant push for the designation of sidewalk-type facilities as bike paths. This is accompanied by plans to narrow the outside travel lanes, and in some cases to legally ban cyclists from the adjacent roadways. This is the "pedestrian on wheels" approach that vehicular cyclists here must advocate against, for their own safety and efficiency.

[bigpedaler]

i am sad that this forum segregated vc from "advocacy and safety" in bicycle forums; did not review rants against this form (except a few about forester), but the technique needs to stand (with the law backing you). i don't understand why this legal method of road bicycling (and the only law following) was removed from an advocacy/safety section of bike inclusion. just venting some concerns,....thank you for explaining shift in advocacy!

i check into this forum daily, and it's not removed from A & S -- it's a sub-category within A/S all its own! yes, it's a charged debate, with all the politics involved, and the real as well as perceived challenges to another's riding. it's equivalent to taking the riot out of the street and confining it to the alley -- collateral damage is minimized. it's still accessible.

[Bruce Rosar]

... some of the political aspects of vehicular cycling have caused heated debates - and I think those heated debates are what this subforum will consist of.That may be what happens, but it's also possible that it will just become what some other segregated places have become - a ghetto.

[chipcom]

Here in North Carolina, there is a significant push for the designation of sidewalk-type facilities as bike paths. This is accompanied by plans to narrow the outside travel lanes, and in some cases to legally ban cyclists from the adjacent roadways. This is the "pedestrian on wheels" approach that vehicular cyclists here must advocate against, for their own safety and efficiency.

I think most of us would be right there on your side, Steve. ;)

[chipcom]

That may be what happens, but it's also possible that it will just become what some other segregated places have become - a ghetto.

Is the Road Racing subforum of Road Cycling a ghetto?

[kalliergo]

That may be what happens, but it's also possible that it will just become what some other segregated places have become - a ghetto.


Perhaps rather like a mandatory bike lane: a gutter ghetto.

[Brian Ratliff]

A ghetto is what the residents make it. If you want the VC subforum to be productive and useful, then... well, do stuff to make it productive and useful. If you want it to be relevent, then make it relevent. Regardless, the topic is prone to enflaming passions for well understood and less well understood reasons, and there are people who want a less rancorous place to post threads about less controversial topics. One of the problems that this subforum will solve is the tendency for less controversial topic threads to get lost and ignored amongst the 200+ post threads of the VC "debates."

[Roody]

+1. It is not the idea of VC. It is that we are told we have to do it or should do it, by JF & his flock. Don't know about you. But I hate the idea of having someone tell me how to ride my bike unless I ask.

This is not meant for anyone in particular, just making a general statement here. So you thin skin folks can chill:

Don't tell me I'm doing it wrong when I tell you how I ride. You can disagree with how I ride, but don't tell me I should change because you think you are right & I am wrong & I should follow your doctrine on how to ride. In fact don't even tell me I should change how I ride period. What you can do is present the idea to me with suggestions on what may make for a better ride & let me make my own decision on how I should ride. Don't try to force your style down my throat. You do & I'll resist you at every turn, just to spite you.
Gosh, I thought that the state of Iowa tells you you how to ride your bike every day. You do have a vehicular code? If a cop stops you fo running a red light, are you going to shove his ideas down his throat? Vehicular cycling means following the vehicular code of your state or nation. If you don't want to do that you do have a choice: don't ride on the public roadways.

[N_C]

Gosh, I thought that the state of Iowa tells you you how to ride your bike every day. You do have a vehicular code? If a cop stops you fo running a red light, are you going to shove his ideas down his throat? Vehicular cycling means following the vehicular code of your state or nation. If you don't want to do that you do have a choice: don't ride on the public roadways.

They tell me the laws I have to follow & give me the freedom of choice whether or to follow those laws & an understanding of the consequences of what may happen if I don't. But they do not tell me how to ride, that is my choice.

If JF had his way we would all ride how he says to, or else & with out any choice in the matter.

JF takes VC above & beyond what it is meant to be. He tells people they are wrong when they tell him their riding style. I imagine there are some people he has made afraid. Maybe afraid to ride bike any more. His style is far from tactful or respectful.

That is not acceptable.

[tomg]

thanks everyone!
it's alittle clearer now. it's still unbelievable that it had to come to this, seems some people like to argue for the perceived sport of argue.
advocate for what you believe is right, in the correct channels!
i guess this is the channel for now (for vc stories and advocacy)!

[mostatebears]

I drive my car down the sidewalk, run red lights and stop signs. I often drive at night without any lights and when cars are backed up I drive in the ditch around them and then take off when the light turns green.

Noone will tell me how to drive darn it!!!!!! :D :D :D :D


Sounds pretty stupid doesnt it?

So does most of the non VC cycling stuff I read.

[SamHouston]

i don't understand why this legal method of road bicycling (and the only law following) was removed from an advocacy/safety section of bike inclusion.


I cycle legally & have done so professionally for many years. I did not however, come by this habit with any text beyond municipal, state & province road safety/highyway acts. I know of many who do the same, bicycle legally without the aid of Forester texts or LAB courses.

[Bruce Rosar]

A ghetto is what the residents make it. According to the Cultural Adoption section of Prof. Kim Pearson's article (http://kpearson.faculty.tcnj.edu/Dictionary/ghetto.htm), the word ghetto in American usage originally described:
... an overpopulated, poor section of a city, usually inhabited by ... co-cultures as a result of economic or social pressures. Soon after the mainstream adoption of this meaning, the term also came to signify any mode of sub-standard living or working as the result of stereotype or biased treatment.

[Bekologist]

neat semantics trick, bruce! or should I say...sophistry?

using language to improperly define something for the benefit of your point of view, then quoting a reference that proves you misapplied the term.

impressive feat of sophistry. and people wonder why this subforum has been created. Its the "VC" crewe of bicyclists calling facilities ghettos and other misinformation tactics....

[SingingSabre]

I'm not sad that there's a mandatory subforum for VC "debate." VC has turned into a big grey area between advocacy and politics. It needs its own subforum.

[Bruce Rosar]

I'm not sad that there's a mandatory subforum for VC "debate."Ah, so you believe that there can't be real debate (without the quotes) about VC?
bias - a personal and sometimes unreasoned judgment
VC has turned into a big grey area between advocacy and politics.
sterotype - a standardized mental picture that is held in common by members of a group and that represents an oversimplified opinion, prejudiced attitude, or uncritical judgment
It needs its own subforum.
ghetto - any mode of sub-standard living or working as the result of stereotype or biased treatment.Welcome to the ghetto.

[Bekologist]

pathetic.

[Tom Stormcrowe]

It's only a ghetto if you choose to percieve it that way.....

Or you could look at it as a forum with a specific focus!
Ah, so you believe that there can't be real debate (without the quotes) about VC?




Welcome to the ghetto.

[Bekologist]

the use of the word ghetto is imprecise. Bruce attempts to marginalize this subforum by its incantation.

[Tom Stormcrowe]

the use of the word ghetto is imprecise. Bruce attempts to marginalize this subforum by its incantation.
I realize that, I was just kicking him under the table nicely!;)

[Bekologist]

And I think Bruce- a founding member of the North Carolina coalition for bicycle driving- realizes his attempts to marginalize this subforum are not going unnoticed ;)

[SingingSabre]

Ah, so you believe that there can't be real debate (without the quotes) about VC?

Welcome to the ghetto.

A VC subforum is nothing like what the poorest people live in, nor is it anything like what my ancestors lived in during WWII.

There is no real debate about VC, just mindless inane bickering. For reference, I refer you to every single thread about it on this forum. Every single intelligent thread was turned into a tirade against the previous dissenting poster.

VC "debate" and "discussion" needs a subforum due to its unique semipolitical nature.

[Daily Commute]

to be blunt, if some specific poster didn't overlay their personal ideas in a pedantic, browbeating manner in the general A&S forum, perhaps this subforum wouldn't be needed. . . .
I agree. It's too bad your inability to write a thoughtful post without personal attacks made this forum necessary.;)

Seriously, this forum could end up being a very good thing. The problem was not that VC was discussed, it was that a few posters got the vapors whenever HH posted something, and then dragged the thread down. VC topics are still discussed in A&S, but with more civility. If the heckler's veto (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler's_veto) crowd play their games, and the thread deteriorates into an argument we've had a thousand times, the thread will be moved here.

This subforum could be a very good thing. People who want to argue can do so in the A&S main forum. People who just want to throw junior-high-level insults can do so here.

This subforum should probably be retitled "The Doghouse." My sense is that is how it will operate in practice.

[chipcom]

DC knows, he was a fly on the wall during all of the moderators discussions concerning A&S over the last few months and took copious notes that he will now provide for us, won't you DC? I've worked with lots of spin doctors dude, you ain't even in the top 100.

I'll ask the ignored question again....is the Road Racing subforum of the Road Cycling forum considered a slum or doghouse? Perhaps I should go over there and take a poll, see what the members of that subforum feel so we can understand why they are not a bunch of whiners like we seem to have here.

For chris' sake, you'd think people would be happy the vehicular cycling now has a subforum all to itself that is displayed prominently at the very top of the A&S forum, but noooooo...all we hear is WWWWWWAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!! like a bunch of brats being weaned from their nipples. Sometimes I think this should be renamed the sissy forum, for all the crying and complaining I hear..."oh the bad man called me a name and isn't being NICE to me....MOMMY!!!! How do some of you manage to function in the real world?

My take in two simple words: GROW UP!

[I-Like-To-Bike]

DC knows, he was a fly on the wall during all of the moderators discussions concerning A&S over the last few months and took copious notes that he will now provide for us, won't you DC? I've worked with lots of spin doctors dude, you ain't even in the top 100.
Oh I don't know, give DC some credit. I NEVER heard anyone else spin the receipt of intense criticism and scorn in to a badge of honor the way DC does. The more criticism and scorn a wacky idea receives the more valid the wacky idea becomes when run through the DC spin cycle.

And DC ain't bad for spinning the words "personal insult" either.

[rando]

The world is a Ghetto (War)

Walkin' down the street, smoggy-eyed
Looking at the sky, starry-eyed
Searchin' for the place, weary-eyed
Crying in the night, teary-eyed

Don't you know that it's true
That for me and for you
The world is a ghetto

Don't you know that it's true
That for me and for you
The world is a ghetto

Wonder when I'll find paradise
Somewhere there's a home sweet and nice
Wonder if I'll find happiness
Never give it up now I guess

Don't you know that it's true
That for me and for you
The world is a ghetto

Don't you know that it's true
That for me and for you
The world is a ghetto

------ long instrumental break ------

There's no need to search anywhere
Happiness is here, have your share
If you know you're loved, be secure
Paradise is love to be sure

Don't you know that it's true
That for me and for you
The world is a ghetto

Don't you know that it's true
That for me and for you
The world is a ghetto

Don't you know that it's true
That for me and for you
The world is a ghetto

Don't you know that it's true
That for me and for you
The world is a ghetto

(The world is a ghetto)
{21 times and fade}

[rando]

and then there's this one by Elvis:

"In the Ghetto"

(words & music by scott davis)
As the snow flies
On a cold and gray chicago mornin
A poor little baby child is born
In the ghetto
And his mama cries
cause if theres one thing that she dont need
Its another hungry mouth to feed
In the ghetto

People, dont you understand
The child needs a helping hand
Or hell grow to be an angry young man some day
Take a look at you and me,
Are we too blind to see,
Do we simply turn our heads
And look the other way

Well the world turns
And a hungry little boy with a runny nose
Plays in the street as the cold wind blows
In the ghetto

And his hunger burns
So he starts to roam the streets at night
And he learns how to steal
And he learns how to fight
In the ghetto

Then one night in desperation
A young man breaks away
He buys a gun, steals a car,
Tries to run, but he dont get far
And his mama cries

As a crowd gathers round an angry young man
Face down on the street with a gun in his hand
In the ghetto

As her young man dies,
On a cold and gray chicago mornin,
Another little baby child is born
In the ghetto

[Bekologist]

DC- are you sure it wasn't helmet head who got a case of the vapors and let his word count runneth over to quell all reasonable discussion that helped create this subforum?

I had never seen so much arguing about semantic definitions of words on a forum about bikes before.....

A overwhelming case of pedantic obfuscationism.

[I-Like-To-Bike]

Seriously, this forum could end up being a very good thing. The problem was not that VC was discussed, it was that a few posters got the vapors whenever HH posted something, and then dragged the thread down.
Seriously: http://www.majordickwinters.com/phpBB2/images/smiles/linda.gif

[Daily Commute]

DC knows, he was a fly on the wall during all of the moderators discussions concerning A&S over the last few months and took copious notes that he will now provide for us, won't you DC? I've worked with lots of spin doctors dude, you ain't even in the top 100.

No, I don't have access to the mod's PM's, but I did read this from the VC sticky (http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?p=4055412) in A&S:

If the mods want to move every such discussion to the VC forum, that's fine with me, but I suspect they will only do that if a thread degenerates into a standard set of bickering. Maybe the threat of having a thread moved will keep both sides more civil. If that happens, then the VC subforum will be serving a good purpose.

That's pretty much it. I was accused of calling all VC threads rubbish earlier. You can have a VC discussion in the VC forum, but if a regular A&S thread turns into a completely off-topic VC debate, that's where it's going. . . .

And this from chipcom's thank you thread (http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=278573):

As long as the regular A&S forums stay free of "anti-VC lunacy" there will be no problems.

Seriously, that is the key. If the Anti-VC'ers want the pro- and anti-VC debate to stay out of regular A&S forums, the anti-VC'ers will have to start showing some restraint in regular A&S threads.

If the anti-VC'ers use regular A&S threads to call ideas they disagree with "lunacy," or falsely accuse people of "worshiping" someone whom they have criticized, they can expect a response. If they support anti-VC positions (striped bike lanes on 25 mph downtown streets, the wholesale adoption of "Complete Streets," etc.), they likewise invite a response from a variety of perspectives.

Finally, name one person in this forum who "worships" Forester. I haven't seen anyone who has uncritically supported him. By contrast, a few of you do seem to "worship" white stripes of paint. (And if this kind of back-and-forth is where you want to take this thread, you're on the way.)

DC - thank you.

I'll ask the ignored question again....is the Road Racing subforum of the Road Cycling forum considered a slum or doghouse? Perhaps I should go over there and take a poll, see what the members of that subforum feel so we can understand why they are not a bunch of whiners like we seem to have here.

For chris' sake, you'd think people would be happy the vehicular cycling now has a subforum all to itself that is displayed prominently at the very top of the A&S forum, but noooooo...all we hear is WWWWWWAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!! like a bunch of brats being weaned from their nipples. Sometimes I think this should be renamed the sissy forum, for all the crying and complaining I hear..."oh the bad man called me a name and isn't being NICE to me....MOMMY!!!! How do some of you manage to function in the real world?

My take in two simple words: GROW UP!
This would be a problem if any mention of VC were banned from A&S, but that's not what's going on. If the subforum were used the way you and a few others wanted, it would have the effect of banning half the conversation on issues like bike lanes, facilities, lane position, and "Complete Streets." But VC'ers are participating in A&S threads on those topics right now, and the comments remain. The biggest different is that the discussion is not devolving into name calling ("all we hear is WWWWWWAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!! like a bunch of brats being weaned from their nipples").

To my fellow VC'ers, give this a chance to work. Don't be afraid to voice your opinion in main A&S threads. Just be reasonable, avoid personal attacks (even in response to personal attacks), and stick to the thread topic. This change has the potential to make discussion of VC-related topics much more civil and to prevent a few people from using a heckler's veto to try to shout down arguments they don't agree with.

Edit: Quote from chipcom's thank you thread added.

[Bekologist]

I ride VC, and I hate the way the threads in A&S degenerate into some kind of pissing match, chestbeating and semantics debates about word usage versus the actual concepts being discussed.

unlike DC's mistaken impressions, vehicular cyclists CAN advocate for on-road bike infrastructure!

[rando]

I ride according to the rules of the road and I support and use bike facilities.

[Brian]

thanks everyone!
it's alittle clearer now. it's still unbelievable that it had to come to this, seems some people like to argue for the perceived sport of argue.
advocate for what you believe is right, in the correct channels!
i guess this is the channel for now (for vc stories and advocacy)!

Something had to be done, and this seems to be working so far.

DC knows, he was a fly on the wall during all of the moderators discussions concerning A&S over the last few months and took copious notes that he will now provide for us, won't you DC?

Actually, the moderators wanted to nuke A&S completely, out of frustration. Then Joe and I discussed just locking it down for a few days. But I think he had suggested before (he is a pretty smart guy) making a subforum in A&S for VC, so here we are. If nothing else, admitting the problem exists seems to have done some good. My singular description of the forums is "Community". If we cannot share ideas and respect other's opinions, we have no community. And if the moderators and admins had a mission statement, it would be something along the lines of preserving, maintaining, and growing our community.

[Brian Ratliff]

Something had to be done, and this seems to be working so far.



Actually, the moderators wanted to nuke A&S completely, out of frustration. Then Joe and I discussed just locking it down for a few days. But I think he had suggested before (he is a pretty smart guy) making a subforum in A&S for VC, so here we are. If nothing else, admitting the problem exists seems to have done some good. My singular description of the forums is "Community". If we cannot share ideas and respect other's opinions, we have no community. And if the moderators and admins had a mission statement, it would be something along the lines of preserving, maintaining, and growing our community.

I want to say... I am all for this change. I notice already new topics being brought up in the general A&S forum by new members which would have gotten no notice, or outright scorn, before the forum was split. I also notice that it hasn't stopped the VC discussions from moving right along either. I think this is a win-win situation for all involved.

[Helmet Head]

I want to say... I am all for this change. I notice already new topics being brought up in the general A&S forum by new members which would have gotten no notice, or outright scorn, before the forum was split. I also notice that it hasn't stopped the VC discussions from moving right along either. I think this is a win-win situation for all involved.
I agree, except for the "would have gotten ... scorn" comment.

[linux_author]

I drive my car down the sidewalk, run red lights and stop signs. I often drive at night without any lights and when cars are backed up I drive in the ditch around them and then take off when the light turns green.

Noone will tell me how to drive darn it!!!!!! :D :D :D :D


Sounds pretty stupid doesnt it?

So does most of the non VC cycling stuff I read.

- don't drive much down here, do you? this is exactly how drivers are acting nowadays in my neck of the woods...

- and why i will *never* use some of the roads down here...

[LittleBigMan]

Here in North Carolina, there is a significant push for the designation of sidewalk-type facilities as bike paths. This is accompanied by plans to narrow the outside travel lanes, and in some cases to legally ban cyclists from the adjacent roadways. This is the "pedestrian on wheels" approach that vehicular cyclists here must advocate against, for their own safety and efficiency.
But this could never happen in the 21st century, where concerns about global warming, health-consciousness, and enlightened acceptance of diverse people thrives.