Bekologist
11-01-07, 12:50 PM
joejack, choosing to get on the sidewalk because of a motorist is a sign of vehicular parity? :roflmao: yep. just act like a vehicle and all the drivers smile and wave.... :rolleyes:
View Full Version : I had a run in with a ragin' cager, and it made the news
Bekologist
11-01-07, 12:51 PM
'funnin' with the honking' interesting choice of words, head. Do you do that to bicyclists when you drive- fun with the honking? and you postulate I can't idfferentiate between friendly honks and manevolence because of 'experience I don't have"... plueaze, newbie. get off your soapbox, it's like weak, wet cardboard. You've just admitted you err on the side of caution- you must slow or get intimidated by motorists quite a bit.
what confusion by the 'act like vehicles' camp. act like a vehicle, but slow down or stop if motorists intimidate you. :roflmao: second class, boys. second class.
I have a whole quiver of road tools to deal with ragin' cagers, and the nuance I execute is situationally dependant and includes smiles and waves, ignoring them, staying the course, moving further left, slowing or stopping, using the opposing lane, passing on the left, riding slower, using sidewalks, changing route, making a u-turn on a one way street, etc.
but the simpleminded admissions of helemt head, noisebeam, and joejack just above of ' I act like a vehicle- but have slowed down, stopped or gotten on the sidewalk because of angry motorists' showcases the fallacy of the 'vehicular parity' of the VC camp.
what confusion by the 'act like vehicles' camp. act like a vehicle, but slow down or stop if motorists intimidate you. :roflmao: second class, boys. second class.
I have a whole quiver of road tools to deal with ragin' cagers, and the nuance I execute is situationally dependant and includes smiles and waves, ignoring them, staying the course, moving further left, slowing or stopping, using the opposing lane, passing on the left, riding slower, using sidewalks, changing route, making a u-turn on a one way street, etc.
but the simpleminded admissions of helemt head, noisebeam, and joejack just above of ' I act like a vehicle- but have slowed down, stopped or gotten on the sidewalk because of angry motorists' showcases the fallacy of the 'vehicular parity' of the VC camp.
Helmet Head
11-01-07, 12:55 PM
'funnin' with the honking' interesting choice of words, head. Do you do that to bicyclists when you drive- fun with the honking? 'experience I don't have"... plueaze, newbie. get off your sopabox, it's like weak, wet cardboard.
It's time that you learn the value of being able to distinguish between harmless honking and serious threats, Beck.
It's time that you learn the value of being able to distinguish between harmless honking and serious threats, Beck.
The Human Car
11-01-07, 01:06 PM
FWIW My favorite thing to say in a confrontation:
If you think I am doing something illegal, call the police. If you take the law into your own hands, I call the police and you risk spending 90 days in jail.
If you think I am doing something illegal, call the police. If you take the law into your own hands, I call the police and you risk spending 90 days in jail.
Bekologist
11-01-07, 01:06 PM
but, head, i already know the difference between harmless tootles and angry motorists unceasingly laying on the horn when i'm taking the lane.
but your attempts at chastisement are hilarious! :roflmao: okay, head swami. And the scenario as described in the newsstory? harmless honking or manevolence? Do you even know what a 'serious threat' in traffic is, Helemt head? given your lack of experience, I doubt it.
do you honk at bicyclists when you drive? 'funning with the honking' Head?
but your attempts at chastisement are hilarious! :roflmao: okay, head swami. And the scenario as described in the newsstory? harmless honking or manevolence? Do you even know what a 'serious threat' in traffic is, Helemt head? given your lack of experience, I doubt it.
do you honk at bicyclists when you drive? 'funning with the honking' Head?
Helmet Head
11-01-07, 01:43 PM
but, head, i already know the difference between harmless tootles and angry motorists unceasingly laying on the horn when i'm taking the lane.
but your attempts at chastisement are hilarious! :roflmao: okay, head swami. And the scenario as described in the newsstory? harmless honking or manevolence? Do you even know what a 'serious threat' in traffic is, Helemt head? given your lack of experience, I doubt it.
do you honk at bicyclists when you drive? 'funning with the honking' Head?
Pardon me for being so slow, but I finally realized Carusowi is absolutely right. This thread has nothing to do with safety or advocacy, and is merely about childish bragging. Beck is boasting for crying out loud! He's boasting that something that happened to him got covered in a paper. How pathetic is that?
In the mean time, still no story from Beck. Nothing about how exactly he reacted when he was initially confronted. Nothing.
but your attempts at chastisement are hilarious! :roflmao: okay, head swami. And the scenario as described in the newsstory? harmless honking or manevolence? Do you even know what a 'serious threat' in traffic is, Helemt head? given your lack of experience, I doubt it.
do you honk at bicyclists when you drive? 'funning with the honking' Head?
Pardon me for being so slow, but I finally realized Carusowi is absolutely right. This thread has nothing to do with safety or advocacy, and is merely about childish bragging. Beck is boasting for crying out loud! He's boasting that something that happened to him got covered in a paper. How pathetic is that?
In the mean time, still no story from Beck. Nothing about how exactly he reacted when he was initially confronted. Nothing.
invisiblehand
11-01-07, 01:54 PM
yep. second class road users all the way, boys. intimidated by motorists. oh well.
Hmmmm, I don't see it that way. I think that there is a civilized and uncivilized manner of responding and dealing with an aggravating driver.
We are all human beings and I can understand a more aggressive response, but in large, it produces worse results than a less aggressive response.
Hmmmm, I don't see it that way. I think that there is a civilized and uncivilized manner of responding and dealing with an aggravating driver.
We are all human beings and I can understand a more aggressive response, but in large, it produces worse results than a less aggressive response.
invisiblehand
11-01-07, 01:57 PM
FWIW My favorite thing to say in a confrontation:
If you think I am doing something illegal, call the police. If you take the law into your own hands, I call the police and you risk spending 90 days in jail.
I like this response better.
However, there are instances where the conflict can come to the point where you need to defend yourself.
If you think I am doing something illegal, call the police. If you take the law into your own hands, I call the police and you risk spending 90 days in jail.
I like this response better.
However, there are instances where the conflict can come to the point where you need to defend yourself.
randya
11-01-07, 01:59 PM
It's time that you learn...to distinguish between harmless honking and serious threats, Beck.
and how, exactly, are you supposed to do that?
and how, exactly, are you supposed to do that?
stevesurf
11-01-07, 02:04 PM
Once on North 35th Street, the bicyclist went eastbound, trying to reach Stone Way North. But the SUV driver slowed down "several times" and tried to hit the bicyclist and run him off the road, the report says.
Sorry, just seeing this now; Bek, glad you are ok. It really surprises me that this happed in Fremont, an area that seems to take a special interest in alternative transportation. After I gave a seminar in Seattle this year, I had a conversation with the City of Seattle's Facility Manager who was very proud at how bike friendly the entire city is. It really seems like Seattle and Fremont are areas that have "dual personalities" and that seems to be part of the problem. Either you have the friendly motorist or the one that can cause you the most harm - real extremes.
Once we got a group together for some sushi up at Blue C in Fremont. The taxi driver on the way up drove pretty careful and was very courteous to cyclists. On the way down, I felt I had my life in my hands, let alone any cyclists that were out on the road.
At least on this coast, we know who is "the enemy" and what we need to do to survive.
Sorry, just seeing this now; Bek, glad you are ok. It really surprises me that this happed in Fremont, an area that seems to take a special interest in alternative transportation. After I gave a seminar in Seattle this year, I had a conversation with the City of Seattle's Facility Manager who was very proud at how bike friendly the entire city is. It really seems like Seattle and Fremont are areas that have "dual personalities" and that seems to be part of the problem. Either you have the friendly motorist or the one that can cause you the most harm - real extremes.
Once we got a group together for some sushi up at Blue C in Fremont. The taxi driver on the way up drove pretty careful and was very courteous to cyclists. On the way down, I felt I had my life in my hands, let alone any cyclists that were out on the road.
At least on this coast, we know who is "the enemy" and what we need to do to survive.
noisebeam
11-01-07, 02:09 PM
yep. second class road users all the way, boys. intimidated by motorists. oh well.
Is that what you see here?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1PWNBaRN1M
Al
Is that what you see here?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1PWNBaRN1M
Al
randya
11-01-07, 02:11 PM
you guys crack me up!
:lol:
:lol:
Bekologist
11-01-07, 02:24 PM
All the 'act like a vehicle and the motorists all smile and wave' vc 'vehicular parity' camp have completely discredited themselves in this page.
The Human Car
11-01-07, 02:27 PM
I like this response better.
However, there are instances where the conflict can come to the point where you need to defend yourself.
Agreed, I think for me about 90% of the time the interaction goes well enough and 10% it could have gone better (but hey, I’m human.) At a few times it got darn scary.
However, there are instances where the conflict can come to the point where you need to defend yourself.
Agreed, I think for me about 90% of the time the interaction goes well enough and 10% it could have gone better (but hey, I’m human.) At a few times it got darn scary.
noisebeam
11-01-07, 02:34 PM
All the 'act like a vehicle and the motorists all smile and wave' vc 'vehicular parity' camp have completely discredited themselves in this page.
I never heard anyone say that the motorists will smile and wave. I expect neutral treatment. As I said before I estimate 99.96% of drivers have treated me neutral to better than netrual. That is close enough to all in my book.
Al
I never heard anyone say that the motorists will smile and wave. I expect neutral treatment. As I said before I estimate 99.96% of drivers have treated me neutral to better than netrual. That is close enough to all in my book.
Al
The Human Car
11-01-07, 02:42 PM
Is that what you see here?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1PWNBaRN1M
That’s a good video show an annoying motorists as well as showing the idiocy of being annoyed about a “delay” but then going out of their way to delay themselves and other road users.
I had a situation like that and I just pulled into the other lane to go around the slow driver. And you should have heard the chorus of honking! A car going slower then a cyclist on purpose is in no way shape or form acceptable road behavior so the “teach a cyclist a lesson” driver gives up and resumes speed and I pull back to the right lane. Up ahead I see the “teach a cyclist a lesson” driver get caught by a light and the driver behind him gets out and has some words and the driver in the left lane also joins in. I really wish I heard what was said.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1PWNBaRN1M
That’s a good video show an annoying motorists as well as showing the idiocy of being annoyed about a “delay” but then going out of their way to delay themselves and other road users.
I had a situation like that and I just pulled into the other lane to go around the slow driver. And you should have heard the chorus of honking! A car going slower then a cyclist on purpose is in no way shape or form acceptable road behavior so the “teach a cyclist a lesson” driver gives up and resumes speed and I pull back to the right lane. Up ahead I see the “teach a cyclist a lesson” driver get caught by a light and the driver behind him gets out and has some words and the driver in the left lane also joins in. I really wish I heard what was said.
genec
11-01-07, 02:49 PM
I never heard anyone say that the motorists will smile and wave. I expect neutral treatment. As I said before I estimate 99.96% of drivers have treated me neutral to better than netrual. That is close enough to all in my book.
Al
I'd say I get about 90% compliance... But there are a couple places I can almost guarantee some sort of interaction...
I think the thing that really bothers me about the "ragin' cagers" is that they simply don't have a clue... And I think that can be fairly easily remedied with some well placed PSAs such as this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6OGZCQUayc
Al
I'd say I get about 90% compliance... But there are a couple places I can almost guarantee some sort of interaction...
I think the thing that really bothers me about the "ragin' cagers" is that they simply don't have a clue... And I think that can be fairly easily remedied with some well placed PSAs such as this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6OGZCQUayc
Allister
11-01-07, 03:01 PM
Easy to say. But failed at what? Consider my posts in this thread. Where have I failed to try to base my advice on experiences that I believe we already all have in common, and build on that with logic and reason?
I guess we have different definitions of 'logic and reason', but then again, you're known for making up your own meaning for words, and then wondering why everyone else 'misinterprets' you.
If you're so logical and reasonable, why do so many members here take issue with you? Maybe the problem is YOU Serge, not everyone else. (cue: further denial)
This is an internet forum. I have no way to prove what my experience is. All I can do is make claims which I have no way to prove.
Yeah. An internet forum. Not a court of law. You don't need to prove anything, Serge.
I have no desire to build credibility here.
Well you've certainly succeeded there.
I have no interest in reaching people who evaluate arguments based on some irrational "credibility" evaluation of whoever is presenting the argument. Frankly, I don't know how to reach people like that, and can't understand what persuades them, for it's obviously not what persuades me: arguments grounded in reason and logic that are based on reasonable explicit and implicit assumptions (which has nothing to do with who is presenting them, or the credibility or the experience of the presenter, by definition).
This is an internet forum. Not an evangelical crusade. Why do you think you have to reach anyone? And even if it is a worthwhile exercise, how many years of utterly failing to 'reach' all but the gullible minority is it going to take before you perhaps try a different approach?
But hey, if you want to think of BF as your personal crusade, have at it. Just don't feign surprise when you are subject to same mockery that any other bible-thumper gets here.
I guess we have different definitions of 'logic and reason', but then again, you're known for making up your own meaning for words, and then wondering why everyone else 'misinterprets' you.
If you're so logical and reasonable, why do so many members here take issue with you? Maybe the problem is YOU Serge, not everyone else. (cue: further denial)
This is an internet forum. I have no way to prove what my experience is. All I can do is make claims which I have no way to prove.
Yeah. An internet forum. Not a court of law. You don't need to prove anything, Serge.
I have no desire to build credibility here.
Well you've certainly succeeded there.
I have no interest in reaching people who evaluate arguments based on some irrational "credibility" evaluation of whoever is presenting the argument. Frankly, I don't know how to reach people like that, and can't understand what persuades them, for it's obviously not what persuades me: arguments grounded in reason and logic that are based on reasonable explicit and implicit assumptions (which has nothing to do with who is presenting them, or the credibility or the experience of the presenter, by definition).
This is an internet forum. Not an evangelical crusade. Why do you think you have to reach anyone? And even if it is a worthwhile exercise, how many years of utterly failing to 'reach' all but the gullible minority is it going to take before you perhaps try a different approach?
But hey, if you want to think of BF as your personal crusade, have at it. Just don't feign surprise when you are subject to same mockery that any other bible-thumper gets here.
Bekologist
11-01-07, 03:02 PM
It's kind of ironic.... This fella and a couple of other verbal ragin' cagers in the last couple of years have made claims of them "being bicyclists too" but it appears that rage behind the wheel at bicyclists taking the lane, and occasionally riding a bicycle for recreation are not mutually exclusive.
Judging by the comments made in this thread, Helmet Head endorses 'honking fun' and condones 'swerving to teach bicyclists a lesson' as long as the driver doesn't mean to hit the bicyclist. What an apologist.
anyway, what I see is general agreement, that despite riding like a vehicle, sometimes drivers are not going to respect your lane position. And motorists can affect riders into acting like second class road users, even joejack, helemt head, noisebeam, and others.
Like I said on the first page of this thread, i brought this newsstory to A&S as counterpoint to the often parroted 'just act like a vehicle and the drivers smile and wave' nonsense that gets bandied about in this forum by eager acolytes of the 'act like vehicles' camp.
Judging by the comments made in this thread, Helmet Head endorses 'honking fun' and condones 'swerving to teach bicyclists a lesson' as long as the driver doesn't mean to hit the bicyclist. What an apologist.
anyway, what I see is general agreement, that despite riding like a vehicle, sometimes drivers are not going to respect your lane position. And motorists can affect riders into acting like second class road users, even joejack, helemt head, noisebeam, and others.
Like I said on the first page of this thread, i brought this newsstory to A&S as counterpoint to the often parroted 'just act like a vehicle and the drivers smile and wave' nonsense that gets bandied about in this forum by eager acolytes of the 'act like vehicles' camp.
noisebeam
11-01-07, 03:03 PM
That’s a good video show an annoying motorists as well as showing the idiocy of being annoyed about a “delay” but then going out of their way to delay themselves and other road users.
I had a situation like that and I just pulled into the other lane to go around the slow driver. And you should have heard the chorus of honking! A car going slower then a cyclist on purpose is in no way shape or form acceptable road behavior so the “teach a cyclist a lesson” driver gives up and resumes speed and I pull back to the right lane. Up ahead I see the “teach a cyclist a lesson” driver get caught by a light and the driver behind him gets out and has some words and the driver in the left lane also joins in. I really wish I heard what was said.
I was so tempted to go around them, but I was also wary that they would then swerve into me or pull some other stupid stunt. I knew that the only thing that could come from me pulling next to me was an emotional argument with no winner possible. I also was concerned when the slowed they may suddenly hit the brakes, which is one reason I pulled left when behind them.
Al
I had a situation like that and I just pulled into the other lane to go around the slow driver. And you should have heard the chorus of honking! A car going slower then a cyclist on purpose is in no way shape or form acceptable road behavior so the “teach a cyclist a lesson” driver gives up and resumes speed and I pull back to the right lane. Up ahead I see the “teach a cyclist a lesson” driver get caught by a light and the driver behind him gets out and has some words and the driver in the left lane also joins in. I really wish I heard what was said.
I was so tempted to go around them, but I was also wary that they would then swerve into me or pull some other stupid stunt. I knew that the only thing that could come from me pulling next to me was an emotional argument with no winner possible. I also was concerned when the slowed they may suddenly hit the brakes, which is one reason I pulled left when behind them.
Al
noisebeam
11-01-07, 03:06 PM
And motorists can affect riders into acting like second class road users, even ..., noisebeam, and others.
Can you tell me straight up what I did in video that was acting as a 2nd class user.
Al
Can you tell me straight up what I did in video that was acting as a 2nd class user.
Al
Allister
11-01-07, 03:07 PM
All the 'act like a vehicle and the motorists all smile and wave' vc 'vehicular parity' camp have completely discredited themselves in this page.
But Serge has no desire to be credible, Bek
But Serge has no desire to be credible, Bek
Bekologist
11-01-07, 03:09 PM
didn't watch it, but being forced to slow down to defuse an angry motorist- is definetly not being treated like an equal on the roads, Al.
randya
11-01-07, 03:16 PM
I think the thing that really bothers me about the "ragin' cagers" is that they simply don't have a clue... And I think that can be fairly easily remedied with some well placed PSAs such as this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6OGZCQUayc
I dunno, how good do you think those videos really are? I think they are sort of cryptic w/ mixed messages that could be misinterpreted depending on your personal motorist / cyclist bias. do it better!
:)
I dunno, how good do you think those videos really are? I think they are sort of cryptic w/ mixed messages that could be misinterpreted depending on your personal motorist / cyclist bias. do it better!
:)
noisebeam
11-01-07, 03:19 PM
didn't watch it, but being forced to slow down to defuse an angry motorist- is definetly not being treated like an equal on the roads, Al.
I wasn't forced to slow down, I chose to. If I had chosen to pass the motorist it would have accomplished nothing, the motorist most likely would have either prevented a pass by increasing their speed (especially if I had used the adjacent lane) or responded by preventing me from passing by swerving if I had tried to squeeze in the same lane.
Passing would not have been a productive choice. That choice alone put me as a higher class user in that situation.
I acted as a full legal user of the road and my actions prevented me from being further treated as a secondary and possibly injured one. Note my question asked what I did that was acting as a 2nd class user, not if I was treated as one or not.
No one has ever claimed that acting as a driver of a vehicle ensures one will always be treated as one. The VC line is 'act as one and expect to be treated as one.' Even when I drive my SUV I am sometimes not treated with respect as a law abiding road user.
Al
I wasn't forced to slow down, I chose to. If I had chosen to pass the motorist it would have accomplished nothing, the motorist most likely would have either prevented a pass by increasing their speed (especially if I had used the adjacent lane) or responded by preventing me from passing by swerving if I had tried to squeeze in the same lane.
Passing would not have been a productive choice. That choice alone put me as a higher class user in that situation.
I acted as a full legal user of the road and my actions prevented me from being further treated as a secondary and possibly injured one. Note my question asked what I did that was acting as a 2nd class user, not if I was treated as one or not.
No one has ever claimed that acting as a driver of a vehicle ensures one will always be treated as one. The VC line is 'act as one and expect to be treated as one.' Even when I drive my SUV I am sometimes not treated with respect as a law abiding road user.
Al
Bekologist
11-01-07, 03:24 PM
so we've all been harassed by motorists not respecting you as a road user? Even Joejack and little bigman?
The bike forums fallacy 'act like a vehicle and the motorists all smile and wave' has been rebuked.
The bike forums fallacy 'act like a vehicle and the motorists all smile and wave' has been rebuked.
noisebeam
11-01-07, 03:33 PM
The bike forums fallacy 'act like a vehicle and the motorists all smile and wave' has been rebuked.
I think the fallacy is in your head only.
Personally I don't have the looks or celebrity to even begin to expect all smiles and waves from anyone, let alone motorists.
But my cooperative behavior while cycling has resulted in many smiles and waves from motorists, far more than honks and unpleasant yells.
Al
I think the fallacy is in your head only.
Personally I don't have the looks or celebrity to even begin to expect all smiles and waves from anyone, let alone motorists.
But my cooperative behavior while cycling has resulted in many smiles and waves from motorists, far more than honks and unpleasant yells.
Al
The Human Car
11-01-07, 03:35 PM
I was so tempted to go around them, but I was also wary that they would then swerve into me or pull some other stupid stunt. I knew that the only thing that could come from me pulling next to me was an emotional argument with no winner possible. I also was concerned when the slowed they may suddenly hit the brakes, which is one reason I pulled left when behind them.
For sure, there is stuff you need to read into every situation and make sure your options are covered. There has been a time or two where I dived between parked cars and road the wrong way on a sidewalk to avoid some crazy in a car. (Backup lights are not a good sign.)
In my situation traffic was a bit heavy but was effectively “zippering” up to pass and unzipping after they passed so I was not impeding the flow at all. And my JAM disrupted the flow of traffic (in both lanes) to harass me, which I used to my advantage.
For sure, there is stuff you need to read into every situation and make sure your options are covered. There has been a time or two where I dived between parked cars and road the wrong way on a sidewalk to avoid some crazy in a car. (Backup lights are not a good sign.)
In my situation traffic was a bit heavy but was effectively “zippering” up to pass and unzipping after they passed so I was not impeding the flow at all. And my JAM disrupted the flow of traffic (in both lanes) to harass me, which I used to my advantage.
Bekologist
11-01-07, 03:46 PM
(Backup lights are not a good sign.)
no doubt.
I wonder if Helemt Head has ever had a motorist backing up to get em?
wait, it's just a good samaritian looking out for the bicyclist's welfare.... :roflmao:
no doubt.
I wonder if Helemt Head has ever had a motorist backing up to get em?
wait, it's just a good samaritian looking out for the bicyclist's welfare.... :roflmao:
joejack951
11-01-07, 03:48 PM
joejack, choosing to get on the sidewalk because of a motorist is a sign of vehicular parity? :roflmao: yep. just act like a vehicle and all the drivers smile and wave.... :rolleyes:
I stopped and stood on the sidewalk rather than sit behind this jack@ss at a standstill in the middle of a 45mph road. When he still didn't move, I got back on the road and continued, and of course, was repassed and the idiocy continued. At that point, I finally got fully smart and just ignored him from a good distance behind him and he left.
I hope you realize how much of an idiot you sound like every time you repeat, "just act like a vehicle and all the drivers smile and wave" as if ANYONE has ever claimed that.
I stopped and stood on the sidewalk rather than sit behind this jack@ss at a standstill in the middle of a 45mph road. When he still didn't move, I got back on the road and continued, and of course, was repassed and the idiocy continued. At that point, I finally got fully smart and just ignored him from a good distance behind him and he left.
I hope you realize how much of an idiot you sound like every time you repeat, "just act like a vehicle and all the drivers smile and wave" as if ANYONE has ever claimed that.
Bekologist
11-01-07, 03:53 PM
you don't like my paraphrasing the 'rosy glasses' school of bicycling into the 'smile and wavers'?
sorry, joe, but let's not sugar coat the road rage out there directed towards bicyclists.
you just got raged recently, sounds like. Onto the sidewalk, even?
and that ticket for taking the lane if i remember correctly... illegal, institutionalized 'road rage' and bicyclist harassment, eh?
sorry, there's a defined camp of 'rosy glasses ON!' bicyclists posting to A&S. this incident and thread serves as counterpoint to that position.
sorry, joe, but let's not sugar coat the road rage out there directed towards bicyclists.
you just got raged recently, sounds like. Onto the sidewalk, even?
and that ticket for taking the lane if i remember correctly... illegal, institutionalized 'road rage' and bicyclist harassment, eh?
sorry, there's a defined camp of 'rosy glasses ON!' bicyclists posting to A&S. this incident and thread serves as counterpoint to that position.
genec
11-01-07, 03:58 PM
I stopped and stood on the sidewalk rather than sit behind this jack@ss at a standstill in the middle of a 45mph road. When he still didn't move, I got back on the road and continued, and of course, was repassed and the idiocy continued. At that point, I finally got fully smart and just ignored him from a good distance behind him and he left.
I hope you realize how much of an idiot you sound like every time you repeat, "just act like a vehicle and all the drivers smile and wave" as if ANYONE has ever claimed that.
You're right it does sound dumb... and really, no one said it... However, HH had claimed in the past that he so rarely has altercations and the motorists on his commute do wave and smile at him. He has since indicated that he actually ignores honking motorists... and even finally he has had at least one "confrontation" which was moderated by a cop that just happened to be there... HH lives a charmed life, no doubt.
Meanwhile, most other cyclists have reports of issues with motorists... no matter how they ride... "further left" or not. So HH's claims that he was hassle free... well perhaps on further examination... perhaps his reports are not so "glowing."
I hope you realize how much of an idiot you sound like every time you repeat, "just act like a vehicle and all the drivers smile and wave" as if ANYONE has ever claimed that.
You're right it does sound dumb... and really, no one said it... However, HH had claimed in the past that he so rarely has altercations and the motorists on his commute do wave and smile at him. He has since indicated that he actually ignores honking motorists... and even finally he has had at least one "confrontation" which was moderated by a cop that just happened to be there... HH lives a charmed life, no doubt.
Meanwhile, most other cyclists have reports of issues with motorists... no matter how they ride... "further left" or not. So HH's claims that he was hassle free... well perhaps on further examination... perhaps his reports are not so "glowing."
Blue Order
11-01-07, 04:00 PM
I hope you realize how much of an idiot you sound like every time you repeat, "just act like a vehicle and all the drivers smile and wave" as if ANYONE has ever claimed that.Helmet Head has claimed that he gets smiles and waves when he acts like a vehicle.
randya
11-01-07, 04:02 PM
so he has. or was he just being rhetorical?
:)
:)
Bekologist
11-01-07, 04:05 PM
I think its' actually come to light in this thread it's more akin to
"I think I get smiles and waves :rolleyes:, but some motorists will still try to run you off the road...be prepared to alter course"
"I think I get smiles and waves :rolleyes:, but some motorists will still try to run you off the road...be prepared to alter course"
The Human Car
11-01-07, 04:10 PM
But my cooperative behavior while cycling has resulted in many smiles and waves from motorists, far more than honks and unpleasant yells.
But that is not the contention of VC purists, the contention is Zero honks and Zero yells when one is riding properly.
I think all of us get more positive reinforcement then negative but that is not the point. The point is can Zero honks and Zero yells be attained under all riding conditions.
Since formally-trained traffic cyclists do not seem to share this problem,
I suspect the real problem here is that you have never taken any actual
classes in Advanced Traffic-Bicycling from an LAB-certified teacher.
- Lauren Cooper
http://sports.groups.yahoo.com/group/bicyclingadvocacy/message/11470
But that is not the contention of VC purists, the contention is Zero honks and Zero yells when one is riding properly.
I think all of us get more positive reinforcement then negative but that is not the point. The point is can Zero honks and Zero yells be attained under all riding conditions.
Since formally-trained traffic cyclists do not seem to share this problem,
I suspect the real problem here is that you have never taken any actual
classes in Advanced Traffic-Bicycling from an LAB-certified teacher.
- Lauren Cooper
http://sports.groups.yahoo.com/group/bicyclingadvocacy/message/11470
randya
11-01-07, 04:16 PM
It's the culture of motoring, and the physical limitations of the infrastructure (and I'm not talking bike-specific), it doesn't really matter what dogma you follow
Helmet Head
11-01-07, 04:24 PM
I guess we have different definitions of 'logic and reason', but then again, you're known for making up your own meaning for words, and then wondering why everyone else 'misinterprets' you.
Well, whether the conclusion of a given argument is supported logically or not is a separate question, and, has nothing to do with the credibility or experience of the argument presenter, unless at least part of the argument depends on either.
If you're so logical and reasonable, why do so many members here take issue with you? Maybe the problem is YOU Serge, not everyone else. (cue: further denial)
First, the problem is not ME. If anything, it's MY BEHAVIOR that's the problem. People are never problems, their behavior is what may be problematic.
I assume you recognize that a relatively small percentage of the population is able to consistently focus on logic and reason in an argument, and evaluate arguments objectively. That the vast majority tends to be swayed by personality and emotion. Agreed?
I have no reason to believe the distribution in the BF membership is much different from the general population in that respect. Do you? This is why I believe there is so much obsession with "credibility" and "experience" here, and so little objective focus on the actual meat of the arguments.
Yeah. An internet forum. Not a court of law. You don't need to prove anything, Serge.
What's the point of discussing anything if we're not trying to persuade each other of something? Case in point, you're, apparently, trying to persuade me that my credibility here should matter to me. If so, good luck with that.
This is an internet forum. Not an evangelical crusade. Why do you think you have to reach anyone? And even if it is a worthwhile exercise, how many years of utterly failing to 'reach' all but the gullible minority is it going to take before you perhaps try a different approach?
I take different approaches all the time. Again, I expect only a small percentage to be able to put their prejudices aside and actually evaluate what I have to say objectively. There are a few that I reach. Not many, but a few. It's been a while since I've had a poll to see about how many, but I'm confident the numbers are still there. But, now that you raise the issue, maybe it's time for another such poll, just to make sure. But reaching people is not my only goal. It's mostly about testing ideas for me, and testing how they're presented.
I don't care about my credibility here, because I know that does not matter to the type of people I'm trying to reach, I don't care if I'm annoying. I don't care if someone is "offended" by what I say, because what matters to me is whether what I have to say is persuasive, to those few who can objectively evaluate my arguments. So I don't hold back from saying things that are likely to be annoying or offensive. I don't say them in order to be annoying or offensive, but I normally don't refrain from making the point I want to make simply because I think someone might be annoyed or offended by it. Plus, I say a lot. No one will disagree that I'm very prolific here. So, there are plenty of opportunities for me to annoy and offend people.
By the way, if someone resorts to ad hominem attacks, or refuses to read my posts because he or she feels offended, or declares that I am not credibile, and or lack experience (as if that's relevant to the objective evaluation of my arguments), they are by definition not in a frame of mind to evaluate my arguments. Perhaps they are not capable of ever being in that frame. I don't know, and I don't care.
But hey, if you want to think of BF as your personal crusade, have at it. Just don't feign surprise when you are subject to same mockery that any other bible-thumper gets here.
Yeah, it's a crusade. The typical behavior of cyclists in America, including that of most experienced cyclists, is contrary to very many fairly simple best practices, and leads to unnecessary crashes, injuries and fatalaties, most of which could be avoided through changes in cyclist behavior alone. To tie in with this thread, behavior that defuses (smiling, waving, nodding, backing off) rather than escalates (flipping off, angry yelling, shaking fists) in a motorist-feels-a-need-to-educate moment are among those best practices that are typically not practiced.
This is a typical post of mine. I expect it to be evaluated by each person who has a chance to get anything out of it as if it was written by a total stranger, someone he knows nothing about. No idea what his experience is, or what his "credibility" is. I understand most of you are going to just skim it at best, and very few will give it serious thought. Especially that last sentence. Oh well. I hope someone will read it seriously, in the way I intend it to be read, objectively, and let me know what they think, pro or con, but objectively, without ad hominem attacks, and without resorting to irrelevant emotional nonsense.
Well, whether the conclusion of a given argument is supported logically or not is a separate question, and, has nothing to do with the credibility or experience of the argument presenter, unless at least part of the argument depends on either.
If you're so logical and reasonable, why do so many members here take issue with you? Maybe the problem is YOU Serge, not everyone else. (cue: further denial)
First, the problem is not ME. If anything, it's MY BEHAVIOR that's the problem. People are never problems, their behavior is what may be problematic.
I assume you recognize that a relatively small percentage of the population is able to consistently focus on logic and reason in an argument, and evaluate arguments objectively. That the vast majority tends to be swayed by personality and emotion. Agreed?
I have no reason to believe the distribution in the BF membership is much different from the general population in that respect. Do you? This is why I believe there is so much obsession with "credibility" and "experience" here, and so little objective focus on the actual meat of the arguments.
Yeah. An internet forum. Not a court of law. You don't need to prove anything, Serge.
What's the point of discussing anything if we're not trying to persuade each other of something? Case in point, you're, apparently, trying to persuade me that my credibility here should matter to me. If so, good luck with that.
This is an internet forum. Not an evangelical crusade. Why do you think you have to reach anyone? And even if it is a worthwhile exercise, how many years of utterly failing to 'reach' all but the gullible minority is it going to take before you perhaps try a different approach?
I take different approaches all the time. Again, I expect only a small percentage to be able to put their prejudices aside and actually evaluate what I have to say objectively. There are a few that I reach. Not many, but a few. It's been a while since I've had a poll to see about how many, but I'm confident the numbers are still there. But, now that you raise the issue, maybe it's time for another such poll, just to make sure. But reaching people is not my only goal. It's mostly about testing ideas for me, and testing how they're presented.
I don't care about my credibility here, because I know that does not matter to the type of people I'm trying to reach, I don't care if I'm annoying. I don't care if someone is "offended" by what I say, because what matters to me is whether what I have to say is persuasive, to those few who can objectively evaluate my arguments. So I don't hold back from saying things that are likely to be annoying or offensive. I don't say them in order to be annoying or offensive, but I normally don't refrain from making the point I want to make simply because I think someone might be annoyed or offended by it. Plus, I say a lot. No one will disagree that I'm very prolific here. So, there are plenty of opportunities for me to annoy and offend people.
By the way, if someone resorts to ad hominem attacks, or refuses to read my posts because he or she feels offended, or declares that I am not credibile, and or lack experience (as if that's relevant to the objective evaluation of my arguments), they are by definition not in a frame of mind to evaluate my arguments. Perhaps they are not capable of ever being in that frame. I don't know, and I don't care.
But hey, if you want to think of BF as your personal crusade, have at it. Just don't feign surprise when you are subject to same mockery that any other bible-thumper gets here.
Yeah, it's a crusade. The typical behavior of cyclists in America, including that of most experienced cyclists, is contrary to very many fairly simple best practices, and leads to unnecessary crashes, injuries and fatalaties, most of which could be avoided through changes in cyclist behavior alone. To tie in with this thread, behavior that defuses (smiling, waving, nodding, backing off) rather than escalates (flipping off, angry yelling, shaking fists) in a motorist-feels-a-need-to-educate moment are among those best practices that are typically not practiced.
This is a typical post of mine. I expect it to be evaluated by each person who has a chance to get anything out of it as if it was written by a total stranger, someone he knows nothing about. No idea what his experience is, or what his "credibility" is. I understand most of you are going to just skim it at best, and very few will give it serious thought. Especially that last sentence. Oh well. I hope someone will read it seriously, in the way I intend it to be read, objectively, and let me know what they think, pro or con, but objectively, without ad hominem attacks, and without resorting to irrelevant emotional nonsense.
randya
11-01-07, 04:26 PM
why didn't you just post that one sentence in bold, without the rest of the rant? It would be much clearer and leave a more lasting impression
:)
:)
Helmet Head
11-01-07, 04:34 PM
But that is not the contention of VC purists, the contention is Zero honks and Zero yells when one is riding properly.
I think all of us get more positive reinforcement then negative but that is not the point. The point is can Zero honks and Zero yells be attained under all riding conditions.
- Lauren Cooper
http://sports.groups.yahoo.com/group/bicyclingadvocacy/message/11470
You've taken this quote out context, of course. This is typical straw man fallacy, albeit perhaps unintentional. The context you neglected to share is the words of the post to which Lauren is replying:
I've lost track of how many cagers have chased me, thrown things at me,
got of their cars and tried to assault me, etc. in Chicago and Northwest
Indiana.
It's pretty easy to trigger such actions. Just take a lane and wait (not
long!) for an impatient cager to get behind you and start laying on his
horn (100% of attackers in my case have been men, although women do
honk too).
Lauren, nor any other VC "purist" I know, did not say or imply anything about zero honks or zero yells.
When Lauren writes, "Since formally-trained traffic cyclists do not seem to share this problem,", by "this problem" she is referring to the apparently very high frequency of encountering "attacks" from motorists. That is the "the problem" that "formally-trained traffic cyclists do not seem to share", and I, for one, concur.
I think all of us get more positive reinforcement then negative but that is not the point. The point is can Zero honks and Zero yells be attained under all riding conditions.
- Lauren Cooper
http://sports.groups.yahoo.com/group/bicyclingadvocacy/message/11470
You've taken this quote out context, of course. This is typical straw man fallacy, albeit perhaps unintentional. The context you neglected to share is the words of the post to which Lauren is replying:
I've lost track of how many cagers have chased me, thrown things at me,
got of their cars and tried to assault me, etc. in Chicago and Northwest
Indiana.
It's pretty easy to trigger such actions. Just take a lane and wait (not
long!) for an impatient cager to get behind you and start laying on his
horn (100% of attackers in my case have been men, although women do
honk too).
Lauren, nor any other VC "purist" I know, did not say or imply anything about zero honks or zero yells.
When Lauren writes, "Since formally-trained traffic cyclists do not seem to share this problem,", by "this problem" she is referring to the apparently very high frequency of encountering "attacks" from motorists. That is the "the problem" that "formally-trained traffic cyclists do not seem to share", and I, for one, concur.
Helmet Head
11-01-07, 04:36 PM
why didn't you just post that one sentence in bold, without the rest of the rant? It would be much clearer and leave a more lasting impression
:)
Apparently because I suck at being effective in communicating on this forum.
Seriously, I wanted to address Allister's points and accusations, and decided to "un-derail" the whole thing by tying in an example that is actually relevant to the topic of this thread.
:)
Apparently because I suck at being effective in communicating on this forum.
Seriously, I wanted to address Allister's points and accusations, and decided to "un-derail" the whole thing by tying in an example that is actually relevant to the topic of this thread.
genec
11-01-07, 04:42 PM
You've taken this quote out context, of course. This is typical straw man fallacy, albeit perhaps unintentional. The context you neglected to share is the words of the post to which Lauren is replying:
Lauren, nor any other VC "purist" I know, did not say or imply anything about zero honks or zero yells.
When Lauren writes, "Since formally-trained traffic cyclists do not seem to share this problem,", by "this problem" she is referring to the apparently very high frequency of encountering "attacks" from motorists. That is the "the problem" that "formally-trained traffic cyclists do not seem to share", and I, for one, concur.
I have to laugh... as I was honked at while getting "Formally Trained..." Both in Road 1 and Road 2. :D
Lauren, nor any other VC "purist" I know, did not say or imply anything about zero honks or zero yells.
When Lauren writes, "Since formally-trained traffic cyclists do not seem to share this problem,", by "this problem" she is referring to the apparently very high frequency of encountering "attacks" from motorists. That is the "the problem" that "formally-trained traffic cyclists do not seem to share", and I, for one, concur.
I have to laugh... as I was honked at while getting "Formally Trained..." Both in Road 1 and Road 2. :D
Helmet Head
11-01-07, 04:43 PM
Helmet Head has claimed that he gets smiles and waves when he acts like a vehicle.
Indeed. But JoeJack's point is about Beck's typical absurd exaggeration regarding what I've said, in this case saying that I've claimed ALL drivers smile and wave at me.
joejack, choosing to get on the sidewalk because of a motorist is a sign of vehicular parity? :roflmao: yep. just act like a vehicle and all the drivers smile and wave.... :rolleyes:
I swear, there seems to be a high correlation between understanding VC and understanding English.
In the last few posts we've seen examples from Blue Order, Beck and The Human Car, all of whom made negative comments about vehicular-cycling or its advocates based on blatant misunderstanding or exaggerations of what has been clearly written.
Indeed. But JoeJack's point is about Beck's typical absurd exaggeration regarding what I've said, in this case saying that I've claimed ALL drivers smile and wave at me.
joejack, choosing to get on the sidewalk because of a motorist is a sign of vehicular parity? :roflmao: yep. just act like a vehicle and all the drivers smile and wave.... :rolleyes:
I swear, there seems to be a high correlation between understanding VC and understanding English.
In the last few posts we've seen examples from Blue Order, Beck and The Human Car, all of whom made negative comments about vehicular-cycling or its advocates based on blatant misunderstanding or exaggerations of what has been clearly written.
Bekologist
11-01-07, 04:43 PM
"VC-much more than just a method of bicycling- and motorists may STILL choose to try and run you off the road. Be prepared to alter course" :roflmao:
Blue Order
11-01-07, 04:46 PM
Indeed. But JoeJack's point is about Beck's typical absurd exaggeration regarding what I've said, in this case saying that I've claimed ALL drivers smile and wave at me.That's the impression you've given me as well. Have you explicitly claimed that ALL drivers smile and wave? I don't recall. But if you haven't explicitly claimed it, you've certainly implied it.
LittleBigMan
11-01-07, 04:55 PM
That's the impression you've given me as well. Have you explicitly claimed that ALL drivers smile and wave? I don't recall. But if you haven't explicitly claimed it, you've certainly implied it.
Drivers smile and wave at me sometimes.
"I see you all the time, I slow down and give a light tap on the horn to let you know I'm there, but not so loud as to startle you." --lady in little red compact.
"YaaaaaHHHH!!!!" --some overzealous guy on my commute cheering me uphill. (I thought he was mad at me, but when I looked his way, he was pumpin his arm up and down, like, "go man!" :beer:
"How far do you ride? I admire what you do." --lady in a jeep one cold morning downtown at a stoplight.
"Hooray!!!" --bunch of females in a van, part of cancer walk, cheering me on (no need, I was a block from home. :D )
"Blow your whistle!" --guy in a BMW convertible who saw me on the nearby path, smiling and waving (I've dropped the whistle since then.)
"I saw you [this morning, yesterday, etc.] on your bike. Was that you?" --numerous co-workers over the years.
Cops treat me well, too. (Except the one who buzzed me intentionally a few years back.)
"Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera..." --Yul Brenner, The King and I. ;)
We need to think about the people who are encouraged by what we do, more than the non-thinkers who occasionally want to rage about our lifestyle choices.
Drivers smile and wave at me sometimes.
"I see you all the time, I slow down and give a light tap on the horn to let you know I'm there, but not so loud as to startle you." --lady in little red compact.
"YaaaaaHHHH!!!!" --some overzealous guy on my commute cheering me uphill. (I thought he was mad at me, but when I looked his way, he was pumpin his arm up and down, like, "go man!" :beer:
"How far do you ride? I admire what you do." --lady in a jeep one cold morning downtown at a stoplight.
"Hooray!!!" --bunch of females in a van, part of cancer walk, cheering me on (no need, I was a block from home. :D )
"Blow your whistle!" --guy in a BMW convertible who saw me on the nearby path, smiling and waving (I've dropped the whistle since then.)
"I saw you [this morning, yesterday, etc.] on your bike. Was that you?" --numerous co-workers over the years.
Cops treat me well, too. (Except the one who buzzed me intentionally a few years back.)
"Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera..." --Yul Brenner, The King and I. ;)
We need to think about the people who are encouraged by what we do, more than the non-thinkers who occasionally want to rage about our lifestyle choices.
Helmet Head
11-01-07, 04:56 PM
That's the impression you've given me as well. Have you explicitly claimed that ALL drivers smile and wave? I don't recall. But if you haven't explicitly claimed it, you've certainly implied it.
Show me the words that you believe actually carry that ridiculous implication. Show me the words.
And if anyone ever said anything that I thought meant something so absurd, I would stop and reread it, and ask him or her about it. You guys apparently don't do that. You read something, it sounds totally absurd to you, but you accept that that was the intent, and move on. No rereading. No rethinking. No asking of questions. By the time that happens a few times in a row, no wonder you get the "impressions" that you get.
Show me the words.
Edit: I should note that JoeJack, reading the same words of mine, apparently was did not get that impression. He didn't see that implication in those words. Hmmm.
Show me the words that you believe actually carry that ridiculous implication. Show me the words.
And if anyone ever said anything that I thought meant something so absurd, I would stop and reread it, and ask him or her about it. You guys apparently don't do that. You read something, it sounds totally absurd to you, but you accept that that was the intent, and move on. No rereading. No rethinking. No asking of questions. By the time that happens a few times in a row, no wonder you get the "impressions" that you get.
Show me the words.
Edit: I should note that JoeJack, reading the same words of mine, apparently was did not get that impression. He didn't see that implication in those words. Hmmm.
noisebeam
11-01-07, 04:57 PM
Nothing will with certainty prevent a few jerks from acting aggressively towards another driver or person.
However different behaviors can help affect the frequency of such interaction and the outcome.
In my experience those behaviors which are more closely associated with VC tend more than other riding styles I've tried to reduce the incident of aggressive or rude behavior and tend to increase cooperative behavior.
Specifically in this thread we are talking about a non-sharable narrow lane situation. What I said previously (http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=5557869&postcount=196)stands in regard to behavior in this specific situation affecting frequency and outcome:
"2. When there is a unsharable narrow lane (in my experience) if one rides far right one will create more upset drivers and increase the chance of honking vs. if one rides centerish. The reasoning I believe is that if one rides centerish drivers can see in advance that the lane can not be shared and that passing will require a lane change. This results in a much greater number of drivers merging left/passing sooner while they are still at near traffic speed when passing is easier to do. The passing driver then opens up visibility to the cyclists so following drivers can see the situation sooner and pass sooner as well. If one is far right more drivers will approach the cyclist until they are just behind them and then realize they can not pass, at that point they are slowed to cyclists speed and driver behind them are too. This makes passing harder and create more upset drivers. So in summary riding VC on narrow laned (unsharable width) roads results in fewer aggressive encounters vs. riding far right.
3. I've had a few negative encounters on the road. I have sometimes reacted badly in response, yelling back, waving arm, etc. Every single time I've done this instead of smiling or waving I have either felt bad about my response later or have escalated the interaction. Every time have waved or signaled intent the situation ended shortly after. I agree that the best course of action is to diffuse the situation, but I also agree this can be very hard to do in the moment. My track record in this regard is about 50/50."
Also I don't think there are many that suggest there is much of an alternative to riding in a centerish VC like position when having no other practical or safe choice than cycling on a road with a narrow outside lane. Bek was riding centerish for this very good reason.
Al
However different behaviors can help affect the frequency of such interaction and the outcome.
In my experience those behaviors which are more closely associated with VC tend more than other riding styles I've tried to reduce the incident of aggressive or rude behavior and tend to increase cooperative behavior.
Specifically in this thread we are talking about a non-sharable narrow lane situation. What I said previously (http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=5557869&postcount=196)stands in regard to behavior in this specific situation affecting frequency and outcome:
"2. When there is a unsharable narrow lane (in my experience) if one rides far right one will create more upset drivers and increase the chance of honking vs. if one rides centerish. The reasoning I believe is that if one rides centerish drivers can see in advance that the lane can not be shared and that passing will require a lane change. This results in a much greater number of drivers merging left/passing sooner while they are still at near traffic speed when passing is easier to do. The passing driver then opens up visibility to the cyclists so following drivers can see the situation sooner and pass sooner as well. If one is far right more drivers will approach the cyclist until they are just behind them and then realize they can not pass, at that point they are slowed to cyclists speed and driver behind them are too. This makes passing harder and create more upset drivers. So in summary riding VC on narrow laned (unsharable width) roads results in fewer aggressive encounters vs. riding far right.
3. I've had a few negative encounters on the road. I have sometimes reacted badly in response, yelling back, waving arm, etc. Every single time I've done this instead of smiling or waving I have either felt bad about my response later or have escalated the interaction. Every time have waved or signaled intent the situation ended shortly after. I agree that the best course of action is to diffuse the situation, but I also agree this can be very hard to do in the moment. My track record in this regard is about 50/50."
Also I don't think there are many that suggest there is much of an alternative to riding in a centerish VC like position when having no other practical or safe choice than cycling on a road with a narrow outside lane. Bek was riding centerish for this very good reason.
Al
Blue Order
11-01-07, 04:59 PM
Drivers smile and wave at me all the time.The difference is HH is always telling Bek "I don't know what you're doing wrong. When I act like a vehicle, I get smiles and waves."
That implies that Helmet Head DOESN'T get honks, the bird, and run off the road.
So maybe the truth is sometimes Helmet Head gets smiles and waves, and sometimes he gets the bird? If so, why tell others here "I don't know what you're doing wrong"?
That implies that Helmet Head DOESN'T get honks, the bird, and run off the road.
So maybe the truth is sometimes Helmet Head gets smiles and waves, and sometimes he gets the bird? If so, why tell others here "I don't know what you're doing wrong"?
Helmet Head
11-01-07, 05:00 PM
Nothing will with certainty prevent a few jerks from acting aggressively towards another driver or person.
However different behaviors can help affect the frequency of such interaction and the outcome.
In my experience those behaviors which are more closely associated with VC tend more than other riding styles I've tried to reduce the incident of aggressive or rude behavior and tend to increase cooperative behavior.
Specifically in this thread we are talking about a non-sharable narrow lane situation. What I said previously (http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=5557869&postcount=196)stands in regard to behavior in this specific situation affecting frequency and outcome:
"2. When there is a unsharable narrow lane (in my experience) if one rides far right one will create more upset drivers and increase the chance of honking vs. if one rides centerish. The reasoning I believe is that if one rides centerish drivers can see in advance that the lane can not be shared and that passing will require a lane change. This results in a much greater number of drivers merging left/passing sooner while they are still at near traffic speed when passing is easier to do. The passing driver then opens up visibility to the cyclists so following drivers can see the situation sooner and pass sooner as well. If one is far right more drivers will approach the cyclist until they are just behind them and then realize they can not pass, at that point they are slowed to cyclists speed and driver behind them are too. This makes passing harder and create more upset drivers. So in summary riding VC on narrow laned (unsharable width) roads results in fewer aggressive encounters vs. riding far right.
3. I've had a few negative encounters on the road. I have sometimes reacted badly in response, yelling back, waving arm, etc. Every single time I've done this instead of smiling or waving I have either felt bad about my response later or have escalated the interaction. Every time have waved or signaled intent the situation ended shortly after. I agree that the best course of action is to diffuse the situation, but I also agree this can be very hard to do in the moment. My track record in this regard is about 50/50."
Also I don't think there are many that suggest there is much of an alternative to riding in a centerish VC like position when having no other practical or safe choice than cycling on a road with a narrow outside lane. Bek was riding centerish for this very good reason.
Al
:beer:
Bravo. Beck, do you disagree with any of this?
However different behaviors can help affect the frequency of such interaction and the outcome.
In my experience those behaviors which are more closely associated with VC tend more than other riding styles I've tried to reduce the incident of aggressive or rude behavior and tend to increase cooperative behavior.
Specifically in this thread we are talking about a non-sharable narrow lane situation. What I said previously (http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=5557869&postcount=196)stands in regard to behavior in this specific situation affecting frequency and outcome:
"2. When there is a unsharable narrow lane (in my experience) if one rides far right one will create more upset drivers and increase the chance of honking vs. if one rides centerish. The reasoning I believe is that if one rides centerish drivers can see in advance that the lane can not be shared and that passing will require a lane change. This results in a much greater number of drivers merging left/passing sooner while they are still at near traffic speed when passing is easier to do. The passing driver then opens up visibility to the cyclists so following drivers can see the situation sooner and pass sooner as well. If one is far right more drivers will approach the cyclist until they are just behind them and then realize they can not pass, at that point they are slowed to cyclists speed and driver behind them are too. This makes passing harder and create more upset drivers. So in summary riding VC on narrow laned (unsharable width) roads results in fewer aggressive encounters vs. riding far right.
3. I've had a few negative encounters on the road. I have sometimes reacted badly in response, yelling back, waving arm, etc. Every single time I've done this instead of smiling or waving I have either felt bad about my response later or have escalated the interaction. Every time have waved or signaled intent the situation ended shortly after. I agree that the best course of action is to diffuse the situation, but I also agree this can be very hard to do in the moment. My track record in this regard is about 50/50."
Also I don't think there are many that suggest there is much of an alternative to riding in a centerish VC like position when having no other practical or safe choice than cycling on a road with a narrow outside lane. Bek was riding centerish for this very good reason.
Al
:beer:
Bravo. Beck, do you disagree with any of this?
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.