Living Car Free - Is it time for a name change?

I have never been settled with the title of this forum, and I won't detail the reasons now.

However, it seems to me that the subject matter in the forum has evolved well beyond just Living Car Free. Given that the panic over oil prices has subsided for now, the issues now seem to deal more with those of lifestyle rather than living without dependence on motor vehicles.

My feeling is that something along the lines of Cycling and a Sustainable Lifestyle might be good enough to get the conversation going.

I think cycling is an important component of the title -- it keeps the forum as a part of BikeForums, and is all-encompassing so that it doesn't matter if a poster rides a unicyle or a quad or some hybrid, there is room to participate.

But I also think sustainable is important too, as the decision to ride a bicycle as a form of transportation may well be part of a wider vision to achieving sustainability at a personal level as well as world-wide.

Discuss away! I am interested to see what shakes out of the suggestion.

I have never been settled with the title of this forum, and I won't detail the reasons now.


I think that Living Car Free is a great name. It succinctly delineates the core of this forum. We've already had the Utility Cycling forum split off. I don't see any problem with the name.

Name change? Lifestyle?

If you think gas price shock is gone think again. If you think there aren't people who would like to live car-free or at least car-lite but just don't know how, think again.

It is not so idealistic to use a car less or not at all.

I am now unemployed with no hope of a job. I just lost my company vehicle and cannot even drive around looking for work, much less get to a job if I can find one.

So, yes, there are people like me who WANT to be car-free but cannot survive without one. My family depends on one. But, I get ideas from here.

The good thing about this forum, is it gives people a glimpse into what can be done. Everyone's situation is different.

So, leave the title alone, it catches the eye and leads some of us into the forum to see what there is to this concept.

My feeling is that something along the lines of Cycling and a Sustainable Lifestyle might be good enough to get the conversation going.

I like this suggestion. I notice far too many new posters apologizing for using a car, or for asking car related questions in this forum... yet it is probably the best place on bikeforums to get good advice on how to put your car up on blocks, plan for low use maintenance, and in general make the car serve the driver rather than the other way 'round.

(now if only we could get a similar pool of knowledge going on things like line drying clothes in the face of hostile neighborhood associations...)

I think it would be good if we could keep our frugal, thoughtful focus on using less and spread it around a bit, so that people are not intimidated by the idea of taking the next step beyond commuting. If the Living Car Free name is keeping people out and discourages them from trying... it's not good. For us or for them.

Maybe call it "Bicycle>Car"

both car-free and car-lite would fit into the idea

I think this is actually a decent idea. After all, I'd wager many of us started posting in this forum before we were car free, as many currently do. I remember when I first joined bike forums, I saw "Living Car Free" and thought, "Whoa, I never thought about that before!" At the time I would never have guessed I could do it, but I have. But I've learned much, much more from this forum than simply how to get around without a car. A common theme here seems to be a simplified lifestyle, which is something I think a lot of people are beginning to yearn for. Here one can learn how to accomplish such goals, and I think that is quite valuable in these times. So yes, this forum has become much more than just discussion on living without a car.

I agree that the site involves more than a CF discussion, but I do like the succinctness of the title and, as someone pointed out, how it shows the possibilities of what can be done. Anyone who reads a few threads will realize there's plenty to talk about. I vote keep.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The name is fine.

I think the "Sustainable Lifestyle" thing is far too broad.

It would invite all sorts of non-cycling stuff like questions about electric cars, compost piles and solar panels.

I would also like to get "cycling" into the title, since we are part of bikeforums. However, "carfree" is becoming a brand, and I think it's something we can capitalize on over the coming years. "Sustainable" is overused, poorly defined and often misunderstood (I say that even though I'm one of the people who overuses it).

My vote is to change the name to "Carfree Cycling". I think this is a title that captures our unique identity and our common interests.

I have never been settled with the title of this forum, and I won't detail the reasons now.


Yes, I've noticed that you don't use the word carfree. You usually type "car-ownership-free." That seems cumbersome, but you say that you have your reasons. Would it not be germane to state those reasons now?

It's hard to beat "Living Car Free". It's simple and gets right to the point. Its only flaw is a vague suggestion that everyone here shares an anti-car, anti-motorist attitude.

Not everyone who posts here is green, sustainable, or simple-living. Some are, some aren't.

A while back, Brian kicked off a discussion about changing the forum name to something like "Bicycle Lifestyles". I thought there were good things about that idea, but just as not all of us are green, neither are we all urban hipsters.

The discussions here generally tend toward tolerance about personal transportation choices. There is an occasional pro-car / anti-car uproar but it's not all that common.

Hmmm... this again.

I will point that that "car-free" is a politically-loaded advocacy term. I'm not saying that's a good or bad thing for the forum name.

It's hard to beat "Living Car Free". It's simple and gets right to the point. Its only flaw is a vague suggestion that everyone here shares an anti-car, anti-motorist attitude.


+1. Every forum has threads that don't really fit under the forum title, but follow from it in some (often inscrutable) form of logic. 'Living Car Free' is a good starting point for the discussion even if it remains an ideal we cannot all realize.

Hmmm... this again.

I will point that that "car-free" is a politically-loaded advocacy term. I'm not saying that's a good or bad thing for the forum name.

I think that "carfree" has political connotations for only a small minority of the public. For example, few (if any) of my co-workers or relatives would have any notion of the political implications. But people hanging out at the progressive bookshop would probably get it.

It has very good connotations from a linguistic viewpoint: freedom, carefree.

Sorry, but I disagree that the title in incorrect. One of the goals of cycling is to
encourage people to NOT drive cars as much as possible. To do that the title must
be a no brainer to help folk's find the subject matter that will help them learn how
to accomplish a car-lite or car free lifestyle.

That said, my vote is leave well enough alone as it seems to working well now.

It would help the general public if you used terms they could understand and indeed use daily.
How about "Liberal, hippie, commie, pinko, subversive tree-huggers" ? :D

You betcha!

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1398/542389855_811a187e7b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1398/542389855_811a187e7b.jpg
Chipcom, I like yer new wig! That bouffant was sooo ... 60's.

Chipcom, I like yer new wig! That bouffant was sooo ... 60's.

I bet the sporty outfit is more practical on the bike.

But I'll sure miss the gold lame!

I think the "Sustainable Lifestyle" thing is far too broad.

It would invite all sorts of non-cycling stuff like questions about electric cars, compost piles and solar panels.

Aren't we there already?

Yes, I've noticed that you don't use the word carfree. You usually type "car-ownership-free." That seems cumbersome, but you say that you have your reasons. Would it not be germane to state those reasons now?

Rowan can probably explain it further, but it has to do with the fact that none of us are actually "car-free". The moment we buy something in the store, we've done something that depends on a motorized vehicle because whatever we bought didn't just materialize in the store by magic, it was delivered there.

Aren't we there already?
Hmm, I don't recall any threads about compost piles. What do ya wanna know about 'em?

But I also think sustainable is important too, as the decision to ride a bicycle as a form of transportation may well be part of a wider vision to achieving sustainability at a personal level as well as world-wide.


I know this topic pops up about every year on LCF, but I really like the above quote. I think the combination of folks adopting the bicycle as a means of sustainably transporting themselves is a big reason why many of us come to LCF. I get quite annoyed at the whole carfree/carlight definition. It almost like we are joining an exclusive club rather than defining a direction for humanity.

I disagree with Roody that the word "sustainable" is too widely used. In fact, I don't even think it is used enough. We really need to clarify what it means because... over time... it will become a very important part of our lives. [Although I know than many Prius owners think of themselves as supporting sustainable transportation... :(]

Rowan can probably explain it further, but it has to do with the fact that none of us are actually "car-free". The moment we buy something in the store, we've done something that depends on a motorized vehicle because whatever we bought didn't just materialize in the store by magic, it was delivered there.

but you have to admit that it makes a huge positive impact to not own/drive a car.

car drivers are buying those same products, so they take a double-hit, we (car-free) take only one 'hit' in that case. if this was the "oil free" forum, i think you'd be right though.

personally, i like the forum's title as it is - it gets the point across well enough.

but you have to admit that it makes a huge positive impact to not own/drive a car.

car drivers are buying those same products, so they take a double-hit, we (car-free) take only one 'hit' in that case. if this was the "oil free" forum, i think you'd be right though.



Well, of course ... but that's not the point.

Rowan chooses to use the term "car-ownership-free" rather than "car-free" because he doesn't own a car, but his life (like all of ours) is still influenced by cars.

Rowan can probably explain it further, but it has to do with the fact that none of us are actually "car-free". The moment we buy something in the store, we've done something that depends on a motorized vehicle because whatever we bought didn't just materialize in the store by magic, it was delivered there.

The language might be different in Canada and Australia, but here in the US goods are brought to stores in trucks. Cars are motor vehicles that are owned or leased by some individuals to transport themselves and their possessions. But this is just spoitting hairs, and that might be why Rowan didn't want to bring up the issue.

I really have no quarrel with "Sustainable Cycling." As most of you know, sustainability is a key concept for me. I don't much like "Sustainable Lifestyle" because it sounds too hippy-dippy, with not one but two buzz-words right in a row.

And I would prefer to keep "carfree" in the title. I love that word! :love:

It can be named whatever suits, but I know there was a fair battle when they split it and Utility Cycling. I think most of us are generally like minded with the occasional exception of the people out to troll. We all have different perspectives on life and what works for one may or may not work for others. But that is what makes us individuals, however most of us appear open minded enough to respect another's opinion (trolls excepted:D ) and learn from one another. I know I have picked up quite a bit of useful information from this forum, and have changed my opinions on some things. None of us have the exact same living conditions; Machka lives in a high rent district due to industrial production and attends college, Roody is in a former industrial city and works in a hospital environment, Rowan lives half way around the world in an agricultural environment, others live in large cities, medium sized towns, etcetera. I live in a growing suburban hell and still own viable agricultural property, but work out of town on the road to keep the homestead financially viable. We are all individuals with an interest in cycling and how it enhances our lives, and appear to care about our environment and what it bodes for the future. We are a community of sorts, no matter how diverse and wide spread.

I doubt there is a single perfect name, Living Car Free is a goal or possibly a dream. With the way the current global market works very few if any of us is currently car free in the true sense of the word.

The general scope of the threads in here are revelant and quite often involve spirited debate but seldom fall into the name calling and rhetoric that happens to threads in other sections of this forum.

Aaron:)

The language might be different in Canada and Australia, but here in the US goods are brought to stores in trucks. Cars are motor vehicles that are owned or leased by some individuals to transport themselves and their possessions. But this is just spoitting hairs, and that might be why Rowan didn't want to bring up the issue.



I think of "car" as any motorized vehicle.

I think of "car" as any motorized vehicle.

I think of car as the compartment you sit in on a roller coaster. And I haven't been in one for years. :D

Well, time to leave this debate and go watch the Presidential debate. :eek:

I think that "carfree" has political connotations for only a small minority of the public.

I agree, just pointing it out. (And it may be meaningful for people who Google "car-free" and end up here.)

The language might be different in Canada and Australia, but here in the US goods are brought to stores in trucks. Cars are motor vehicles that are owned or leased by some individuals to transport themselves and their possessions. But this is just spoitting hairs, and that might be why Rowan didn't want to bring up the issue.

That's the way it is in *this* part of Canada, anyway! A "car" is a personal motor vehicle. And I don't think it is splitting hairs - those of us part of the car-free movement are not trying to banish motor vehicles. Buses, delivery trucks, ambulances, fire trucks.... there is a long list of motor vehicles that usually get the "car-free stamp of approval". However I would guess that ALL of those motor vehicles together add up to less than 10% of traffic on the roads.

We've just cancelled major road projects because we can't afford them. I wonder how much we could afford if we converted 4- or 6-lane roads to 2-lane? Might solve our municipal budget issues overnight.

That's the way it is in *this* part of Canada, anyway! A "car" is a personal motor vehicle.

Well, like I said ... I use the word "car" to describe any motorized vehicle. I may have picked it up from riding organized cycling events where cyclists yell "Car back!" to describe the approach of any motorized vehicle. We don't yell "Semi back!" or "Delivery truck back!" or "Bus back!" or "Tractor back!". :lol:

Just to ensure that no-one thinks I am trolling here, I did contact Roody via PM a short while ago with the proposal, and he suggested that I post something here to open the discussion.

I am glad it has been very civilised!

I'm not settled with the Living Car Free title because it has a number of weaknesses.

For me, "car" does include all forms of motorised vehicle. And remember, this is an international forum and is not just totally North American. To say that interpretations of others in foreign lands doesn't count is just a little bit self-centred, particularly as the issues being discussed are global.

I use car-ownership-free simply because no-one who subscribes to this forum could possibly live their lives totally car-free. Living on an island without contact with the outside world and living a truly sustainable lifestyle is car-free. Communities in some parts of Asia, Oceania, Africa and South America likely fall into the same category.

The title also carries with it the implication that motor vehicles are insidious; certainly they may be for one individual (or a group) in this snapshot of their lives, but for many others, they are not. As has been rightly pointed out, various forms of gasoline-powered vehicles are essential to the modern Western lifestyle. But to categorise cars alone in the gasoline equation is fraught with danger when it comes to oil and resource consumption -- remember, long-haul trucking probably consumes as much as the hoards of commuters each day.

I think the title marginalises or eliminates entirely the potential participation of other BF members and guests because, while they may live certain lifestyles associated with "car-free" cycling (that I have mentioned), they have no intention of giving up use of their motor vehicle.

There was a thread still current that suggests lurkers participate in the forum. But then I know that Aaron (wahoonc) gets grief over his quite high use of motor vehicles, despite his respected opinions on other aspects of sustainable lifestyle.

And... compost should be kept moist but not wet, turned frequently to aerate it, and it can generate enough heat to kill many organism; it's ready for use when it has a rich, earthy smell and a moist, crumbly texture; it should never attract attention as a smelly corner of the garden if it is managed properly.

See... this forum is not just about LCF... it is much more. Retaining the LCF title limits its appeal to the broader audience that could enlighten and enrich our opinions so much more, while still leaving plenty of room to talk about going car-free or car-lite as a function of sustainable living.

And... compost should be kept moist but not wet, turned frequently to aerate it, and it can generate enough heat to kill many organism; it's ready for use when it has a rich, earthy smell and a moist, crumbly texture; it should never attract attention as a smelly corner of the garden if it is managed properly.
Yep. IMHO the above description is true for the Living Car Free forum as well.

Well, like I said ... I use the word "car" to describe any motorized vehicle. I may have picked it up from riding organized cycling events where cyclists yell "Car back!" to describe the approach of any motorized vehicle. We don't yell "Semi back!" or "Delivery truck back!" or "Bus back!" or "Tractor back!". :lol:

:lol: I don't recall ever being passed by a tractor...though I have passed a few in my day. Combines make a decent draft too:innocent:

Aaron:)

That's the way it is in *this* part of Canada, anyway! A "car" is a personal motor vehicle. And I don't think it is splitting hairs - those of us part of the car-free movement are not trying to banish motor vehicles. Buses, delivery trucks, ambulances, fire trucks.... there is a long list of motor vehicles that usually get the "car-free stamp of approval". However I would guess that ALL of those motor vehicles together add up to less than 10% of traffic on the roads.

We've just cancelled major road projects because we can't afford them. I wonder how much we could afford if we converted 4- or 6-lane roads to 2-lane? Might solve our municipal budget issues overnight.

Trying to find the statistics on heavy trucks. IMHO there are too many of them on the road and they are not particularly cost effective over the longer haul. There was an interesting comparison article on various forms of goods transport in either the WSJ or NY Times. Trains win hands down in the tons per gallon of diesel. The biggest reason trucks have the loin's share of goods transport today is due to a very strong trucking/oil lobby and the "just on time delivery" which was brought about by people figuring out they could save money by not having to warehouse things and order just what they had to have to keep a store stocked. However it does back fire on occasion when a component in the system breaks down or is delayed for various reasons.

I would like to see a return to movement of freight by rail with local distribution by smaller trucks. It will save on fuel and make our roads last longer.

Aaron:)

leave it alone

If I may chime in, I propose that the forum name not be changed, but the description of the forum be expanded a little to ensure that folks that do own cars, but make an active effort to drive them less, know that they are welcome to participate in the discussions here. This circles back to Roody's thread encouraging the lurkers to come out of hiding. In my opinion, this would help.

Just to ensure that no-one thinks I am trolling here, I did contact Roody via PM a short while ago with the proposal, and he suggested that I post something here to open the discussion.

I am glad it has been very civilised!
I'm glad to know that you received Roody's sanction for the proposal and discussion on this list. :lol:

I'm glad to know that you received Roody's sanction for the proposal and discussion on this list. :lol:

I don't remember giving you permission to speak. Go stand in the corner for 15 minutes.


:D

I don't remember giving you permission to speak. Go stand in the corner for 15 minutes.


:D

Emoticons are our friends, eh? :thumb:

Trying to find the statistics on heavy trucks. IMHO there are too many of them on the road and they are not particularly cost effective over the longer haul. There was an interesting comparison article on various forms of goods transport in either the WSJ or NY Times. Trains win hands down in the tons per gallon of diesel

I may not have been clear on my context, sorry. I was talking about urban roads and urban vehicle use. I am very pro-rail, but we can't run rail to every last corner store. (Why don't we have transporters yet?)

Here (Ottawa) one and only one road within urban limits is paid for by the province. Every other road is municipal. So are the schools, much of health care, welfare and many social services, libraries.... we've been juggling numbers for years. $10 million to re-build a road, or build a youth addiction treatment centre? $5 million for a new off-ramp, or hire new police officers? We have 100 year-old infrastructure crumbling, are dumping raw sewage in the river every time it rains, cutting garbage collection to save money, and begging for money for a $4 billion light rail system. Yet the biggest budget items are road repair and maintenance.

The above is the primary reason I am part of the car-free movement. While I no longer post here enough for my opinion to matter, my *only* interest in this forum is based on the definition of car-free I am used to from advocacy. Reducing and potentially eliminating private motor vehicle use in urban centres.

For me, "car" does include all forms of motorised vehicle. And remember, this is an international forum and is not just totally North American. To say that interpretations of others in foreign lands doesn't count is just a little bit self-centred, particularly as the issues being discussed are global.

if you want to start an "oil free" forum, i think that would be a good sub-forum to have. like you said, oil free & car free aren't the same thing.


The title also carries with it the implication that motor vehicles are insidious; certainly they may be for one individual (or a group) in this snapshot of their lives, but for many others, they are not. As has been rightly pointed out, various forms of gasoline-powered vehicles are essential to the modern Western lifestyle.

cars (& trucks, and planes) are indeed insidious, when it comes to the environment. buyt i think the reason we focus on (personal) cars is that it's:

a) the biggest thing we really have direct control over (in terms of fuel consumption/pollution)
b) the easiest way to stop consuming as much oil/gas as you used to (by ditching your personal "car", in favor of bus/bike/feet options)

and since our bikes are an alternative to owning a personal car, i think the "Living Car Free" moniker suits this forum just fine, since we exist on BikeForums.net.

--

either way, i'm glad that the LCF forum is very civilized, and actually has interesting posts & discussions in it. let's keep it up!

if you want to start an "oil free" forum, i think that would be a good sub-forum to have. like you said, oil free & car free aren't the same thing.



cars (& trucks, and planes) are indeed insidious, when it comes to the environment. buyt i think the reason we focus on (personal) cars is that it's:

a) the biggest thing we really have direct control over (in terms of fuel consumption/pollution)
b) the easiest way to stop consuming as much oil/gas as you used to (by ditching your personal "car", in favor of bus/bike/feet options)

and since our bikes are an alternative to owning a personal car, i think the "Living Car Free" moniker suits this forum just fine, since we exist on BikeForums.net.

--

either way, i'm glad that the LCF forum is very civilized, and actually has interesting posts & discussions in it. let's keep it up!

Oil Free won't happen until they pull the last drop out of the ground;) Very few people in this world are truly oil free.

Aaron:)

I think that the name is initially what drew me into the forum- but after reading discussions on other topics (voluntary simplicity-or whatever you so chose to call it-and other sustainable choices) leads me to believe that another title may embrace all ideas mentioned.

Here's the forum description: Did you give up your car for good? Is your bike and public transportation the only way you travel from point A to point B? If your only mode of transportation is your bike, discuss your car-free lifestyle here.

Ouch. I'd forgotten just how bad it is.

When I first hit bikeforums, I remember seeing that, and immediately assuming it had nothing to do with me. Why? Because I walked or took transit everywhere. And even after I got a bike, it didn't seem particularly relevant for quite a while. I'm kind of dense, but it didn't really dawn on me that I was car free til I'd been doing it for over a year.

The big problem with the description is the first question, IMO. "Do you want to get rid of your car?" would be better, because the new question makes it clear that we're talking about personal vehicles. It also makes it clear that owning a car is fine. And it doesn't say a damn thing about forever. It better expresses that not using a car is a personal goal, rather than a requirement.

The last sentence is awful too, and I have no idea how to fix it. It makes the whole thing self-contradictory, and really makes it seem like the forum is an exclusive club. And I'm *quite* sure that our lot of cranky hippy treehugger tightwads is not what most people think of as an exclusive club. (cranky covers damn near all of us... hippy and treehugger are optional ;) but tightwad is damn near all of us again...)

"Car-free" is an ideal, and like many ideals we fall short of them. But that does not mean that we don't continue to try living that way as best we can. The descriptor could probably change "discussion of eliminating or reducing your use of cars in everyday life" or something, but the name fits.

As I posted some time ago, if the forum's name is to be changed, I'd go with "Living Car Free/Car Lite".

Right now, our forum comes up as result #9 on Google searches for "car free" and result #11 for "carfree". That's quite impressive. It's not an advantage that should be thrown away lightly.

I agree that the forum description needs work.