Advocacy & Safety - Want to send drivers a message?

In less than 3 weeks, on May 18th, you have your chance.

The Ride of Silence is a worldwide memorial ride for cyclists killed or injured by vehicle collisions. It is an 8 to 12 mile, slow ride with no talking. We wear black armbands in memory of dead cyclists or red armbands if we have been injured by motorists. The sight of a large group of somber, quiet cyclists, riding through town, sends a very loud message to the people who see it.

There are events in cities all over the country. You can find a ride near you by going to the Ride of Silence web page (http://www.rideofsilence.org/main.php), and clicking on Locations. If there's not a ride near you, organize one. There are instructions on the site and there's still time. Even if you can get a few people to do a ride, it makes an impact. If you can participate in a really big ride, it will be an experience you'll never forget.

In Fort Worth, people are used to seeing our Critical Mass ride come through town and our Night Riders pub crawls every Sunday night. Both are rolling parties and the people on the streets and on patios and porches all over town cheer us on as we roll by. We always shout back and have a good time with them. I believe that the ride will have even more impact here because we'll be following many of the same streets and not making noise. It will be kind-of like seeing a friend who is always joking around with a frown on his face. They'll wonder what's going on and they'll ask questions.

I rode in the ride here last year and I felt it could be much bigger, so I decided to organize this year's ride. I designed and printed 3000 fliers and several posters and took them to all 18 bike shops in the county. I notified every bike club in the area; I negotiated with the city to ensure that we had any necessary permits. They agreed that we won't need to have a permit, but we're very close to needing one for several reasons. If we have over 500 people this year, we'll need a permit next year. I'm sending press releases to all the newspapers and TV stations this week. I'm also lucky that the ride started in Dallas. The founder, Chris Phelan offered to go with me to meet with any media people for interviews, etc.

This is OUR ride. We have charity rides for AIDS, diabetes, MS, disabled veterans, cancer and all sorts of other things. This ride is about bicycling. It's our chance to very politely and quietly ask drivers to please stop killing us.

Why would you need a permit if you have over 500 people?

I can see where a permit could be convenient, to get police to "cork" for you and such and turn it into a parade, but why would you need a permit if y'all are going to ride and obey all the laws? After all, one of first rules of the Ride of Silence is that the laws are obeyed.

[edit: ok, the local (Austin) organizers have said that, but the "official" web site doesn't. Still, it seems a logical part of the ride, that red lights won't be run and such. ]

Rush hour doesn't need a permit.

This is very touching, but unfortunately no non-cyclists is going to notice.

Why would you need a permit if you have over 500 people?


Requirements vary by locale. Over the years I've never heard of an instance in which government units, law enforcement in particular, were anything other than helpful. Riding through a intersection closed for the ride is not contrary to law so you need not loose sleep over that non-issue.



This is very touching, but unfortunately no non-cyclists is going to notice.

In real life that does not happen to be the case since news outlets often give these rides major play.

Requirements vary by locale. Over the years I've never heard of an instance in which government units, law enforcement in particular, were anything other than helpful. Riding through a intersection closed for the ride is not contrary to law so you need not loose sleep over that non-issue.

I agree that it doesn't make much sense that if all they're doing is riding and not holding up traffic in anyway that a permit shouldn't be needed, but as we know the laws/requirements do vary (and often vary widely) from locale to locale.


In real life that does not happen to be the case since news outlets often give these rides major play.

Exactly, and it would be nice if in all areas that those who are organizing the rides that they contact their local media outlets to help get the word out.

Fort Worth requires a permit for any gathering of over 500 people in a public place. It is mostly to make sure that police and fire departments are aware of the event and have proper resources available. If the event is a "First Ammendment Event" the permit requirements are very minimal and the notice time is only 3 days. They also require permits for any events that have vendors, porta-potties, require street closings or other facilities to be unavailable to other users.

I have 2 contacts in the police department that I am coordinating with. I am leaving it up to them whether we stop for every traffic signal or if they would prefer to direct traffic at the intersections so we can get through faster. Either way, we'll be riding legally. Last year, several FWPD bicycle-mounted officers noticed the ride and started escorting us through the rest of the ride. I'm hoping they'll do this start-to-finish this year.

Fort Worth requires a permit for any gathering of over 500 people in a public place. It is mostly to make sure that police and fire departments are aware of the event and have proper resources available. If the event is a "First Amendment Event" the permit requirements are very minimal and the notice time is only 3 days. They also require permits for any events that have vendors, porta-potties, require street closings or other facilities to be unavailable to other users.

That makes sense to a point, but as others have pointed out. Than why doesn't "rush hour" traffic have to apply for permits? In a LOT of areas there are way more than 500 people involved in rush hour traffic.


I have 2 contacts in the police department that I am coordinating with. I am leaving it up to them whether we stop for every traffic signal or if they would prefer to direct traffic at the intersections so we can get through faster. Either way, we'll be riding legally. Last year, several FWPD bicycle-mounted officers noticed the ride and started escorting us through the rest of the ride. I'm hoping they'll do this start-to-finish this year.

Sounds like it was a good and productive ride last year.

This is very touching, but unfortunately no non-cyclists is going to notice.

The ride in Honolulu has managed to get some news coverage.

That makes sense to a point, but as others have pointed out. Than why doesn't "rush hour" traffic have to apply for permits? In a LOT of areas there are way more than 500 people involved in rush hour traffic.

If someone invited 500 or more drivers to start and end their rush hour drives at a set point, the city would require the person who arranged it to get a permit. I know it's a bit picky, but the fact that we're gathering in the park at the beginning and end of the ride is where the permit becomes an issue. If we did a Critical Mass, posted the route and had 1000 people join in and leave at random points along the route, it probably would be a big deal. After the Ride of Silence, we might start getting over 100 peaople for CM.


Sounds like it was a good and productive ride last year.

It was. It made a really big impact for a ride with 48 people and practically no advance publicity.

They doing this in oklahoma too? Edit I see theres one in stillwater and broken arrow,ok. Should I ask my lbs if they want to help me start one in this area?

I could do one in my town seminole,recently theres been a lot of cyclists dieing.

Unfortunately, I imagine that the majority of people who hear about this or see it will have the reaction "Oh, that's terrible. So many people killed. Obviously the solution is to ban bicycles from the roads so that doesn't happen." Those that don't just say "so what, they deserved it" that is.

You're doing a great job arranging this, Scott.... way to go! :thumb:

I will probably see you there. And maybe at CM tonight, too.

I'm trying to get our local ride organizers to change the route to include someplace meaningful to a local traffic cop who was gunned down last week. The cop was a terrific person, the kind of man who takes a toothless meth addict to Taco Bell for soft burritos on the way to the jail. He was on his way home before heading out on a bike ride when a mentally ill motorist ran him off the road and then gunned him down. I spent most of this afternoon unsuccessfully choking back tears at his memorial service. Whatever the route, I'll be there.

The only thing about these rides that steers me away from them is the general public's usual response that bicycling is dangerous, not that cars are dangerous. If somehow the message can be sent that it's cars that kill and that bicycling, even now, is much safer than driving. Because it is.

Speaking of that, I also don't wnat to give the impression to those who don't cycle that cycling is dangerous, because compared to most other forms of personal transportation (motorcycles, cars, walking) it is safe. I've heard motorcyclists say they wouldn't ride a bicycle on the street. Really? I have to question where they are getting this view. Are we telling the public that they need to be aware of bicycles or are we telling them how "unsafe" cycling is? I would rather have the public see the fun rides, and encourage them in not only riding more, but joining us in working for more and better cycle infrastructure.

Just my 2 cents.

Nothing organized in Austin unfortunately. I'm wondering if some of our cycling groups and/or shops are aware. Seems they would be.

A little off topic but if this is something CM in Austin is involved with, I know many cyclistst who would steer clear. I don't know about other cities but seriously in Austin, the CM people are the ones who make it difficult if not impossible for cyclists in this town to ever get any support or compassion from motorist and police.

People are going to see the red and black armbands and think it's some kind of Nazi invasion.

No, seriously, I'm not joking.

Unfortunately, I imagine that the majority of people who hear about this or see it will have the reaction "Oh, that's terrible. So many people killed. Obviously the solution is to ban bicycles from the roads so that doesn't happen." Those that don't just say "so what, they deserved it" that is.

I wish you weren't right but I'm afraid you are. Rides like this one only communicate the message to those who already have it.

Nothing organized in Austin unfortunately. I'm wondering if some of our cycling groups and/or shops are aware. Seems they would be.Austin has it every year. Somebody will organize something, probably on Facebook and the local advocacy web sites.


A little off topic but if this is something CM in Austin is involved with, I know many cyclistst who would steer clear. I don't know about other cities but seriously in Austin, the CM people are the ones who make it difficult if not impossible for cyclists in this town to ever get any support or compassion from motorist and police.Yes, it's all CM. *eyeroll*.

CM in Austin is pretty tame, and it's size has been declining for about a year and a half now (probably more due to the success of the TNSR rather than anything else.) So perhaps that'll make you feel better about things. Yes, many of the CM riders will participate in the Ride of Silence, but the ride certainly doesn't have much in common with CM, except of course that "there's a bunch of bikes out in their road where they don't belong clogging up traffic" idea that some drivers have.

I don't recall it usually being organized by the CM riders, if that makes a difference to you.

Black armbands? It wouldn't show up against my black kit. Better if it was hi-vis yellow and reflective.

Black armbands? It wouldn't show up against my black kit. Better if it was hi-vis yellow and reflective.

Wear a shirt that is not black perhaps?

I appreciate the need to honor the fallen cyclists, and I believe drivers do not acknowledge their responsibility on the road.

A ride of silence addresses the first; as for the second, well, let's just say that's uncertain.

But we need to consider that a ride of silence also generates a third, powerful message — Ride your bike and you could die.

How does it not?

Ghost bikes do this, too, except the message never stops because the bikes never go away. Every day, a driver sees the sad white tribute and is reminded of one thing — Only fools ride their bikes. Cycling can kill you.

Once again, I understand the need, and I used to think this was a good thing to do. I've come to understand, however, that a ride of silence, if it gets in the paper or on TV, erases the good work of months, perhaps years, of cycling advocacy.

Cycling is not dangerous, so why hold a ride, and why seek attention to a ride, that all but shouts out loud, "Ride Your Bike And You Could Die!"

An alternative, perhaps, is to make a commitment to fight city hall, the county dumbkopfs, the state planners, whoever is not doing what should be done, and make a difference. Improve the infrastructure for cyclists. That's a better, and more lasting, honor for the dead.

Wear a shirt that is not black perhaps?

If that is his normal ridding kit, why should he change it for just one ride?

I appreciate the need to honor the fallen cyclists, and I believe drivers do not acknowledge their responsibility on the road.

A ride of silence addresses the first; as for the second, well, let's just say that's uncertain.

But we need to consider that a ride of silence also generates a third, powerful message — Ride your bike and you could die.

How does it not?

Ghost bikes do this, too, except the message never stops because the bikes never go away. Every day, a driver sees the sad white tribute and is reminded of one thing — Only fools ride their bikes. Cycling can kill you.

Once again, I understand the need, and I used to think this was a good thing to do. I've come to understand, however, that a ride of silence, if it gets in the paper or on TV, erases the good work of months, perhaps years, of cycling advocacy.

Cycling is not dangerous, so why hold a ride, and why seek attention to a ride, that all but shouts out loud, "Ride Your Bike And You Could Die!"

An alternative, perhaps, is to make a commitment to fight city hall, the county dumbkopfs, the state planners, whoever is not doing what should be done, and make a difference. Improve the infrastructure for cyclists. That's a better, and more lasting, honor for the dead.

What about all of those white crosses that people put up everywhere where a pedestrian or motorist was hit and killed? What message are they sending? I have one of those white crosses right across the street from the apartment complex that I live in. And I see them on almost every street these days. I mean one can't drive down any street without eventually seeing one or more of those white crosses.

I'm sorry, but this sounds stupid.

Why hasn't anyone setup something like this for motorists killed by other motorists in accidental collisions?

"It's our chance to very politely and quietly ask drivers to please stop killing us."

In other words, "Dear motorists, stop getting in accidents."

Never, ever going to happen. As much you wish with your heart, vehicle accidents aren't going to stop happening. If you are on the receiving end of a collision, and on a bicycle, you have almost no chance of survival. However, if you are in a car, and on the receiving end of a collision, unless you were hit head-on going 60mph, you're probably going to be ok.

It's an inherent risk we all take every time we get on the road and decide to share a lane with giant metal vehicles. Cyclists aren't any more or less likely to get an a vehicle collision than any other vehicle on the road. If it were so easy to correct all the things that cause accidents, we wouldn't have some of the most stringent vehicle safety standards in the world. Cars are designed to sustain heavy damage in crashes while keeping the passengers safe because accidents happen. They have always happened. Will always happen.

You'll never prevent inexperienced or careless people from getting behind the wheel of a vehicle. In a car, you can defensively maneuver yourself away from these people. On a bike, not so much.

An alternative, perhaps, is to make a commitment to fight city hall, the county dumbkopfs, the state planners, whoever is not doing what should be done, and make a difference. Improve the infrastructure for cyclists. That's a better, and more lasting, honor for the dead.

That's actually the only thing that will ever make it safer for cyclists on the road.

But we need to consider that a ride of silence also generates a third, powerful message — Ride your bike and you could die.Sure.

It's popular to say that cycling isn't dangerous, but of course there is a danger -- people are hurt, maimed and killed every day doing it. Saying it's not dangerous is basically a lie.

However, while there is an element of danger, it's low enough that it's still a pretty mundane activity -- the level of danger is comparable to other similar things that people do every day. I believe that it's somewhat more dangerous than driving, but only somewhat -- not enough that people should stop biking and start driving for the added safety.

But yes, "ride and you could die" is certainly true. Of course, "drive and you could die" and "sit on the couch and you could die" are similarly true.

Either way, the "ride and you could die" message happens with or without a ride of silence. Are you suggesting that rides of silence hurt cycling advocacy? Perhaps they do, but they're not going to stop simply because of that.

If that is his normal ridding kit, why should he change it for just one ride?

Assuming your question was serious...
- Why shouldn't he change "kit" for just one event (if he's participating)?
- If event's arm band is changed to yellow for looigi, what about those with yellow "kit"?
- "In some cultures the wearing of a black armband signifies that the wearer is in mourning or wishes to identify with the commemoration of a comrade or team member who has died. This use is particularly common when a group or team meets after having lost a member." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armband

Are you suggesting that rides of silence hurt cycling advocacy?

Yes — if the goal is to get more people riding, this is not how to do it. This discourages would-be riders. It reinforces all their fears.

Are you suggesting that rides of silence hurt cycling advocacy?

Yes — if the goal is to get more people riding, this is not how to do it. This discourages would-be riders. It reinforces all their fears.

I somewhat agree, though I'm of two minds about it.

On the one hand, I think that it's true that highly publicized cyclist deaths and public mourning of them probably does encourage some people not to try riding themselves. We have to remember that most non-cyclists are already predisposed to believe that cycling is an extremely risky activity, on par with "extreme sports" or something, because they often only consider the "passive safety" that their vehicles provide them rather than the "active safety" that comes from being alert and avoiding crashes. We had a highly publicized cyclist death here about a year ago, where a (right-way) sidewalk rider was killed by a right-turning driver as he left the sidewalk to cross a side street. Many non-cycling friends and acquaintances I have are STILL bringing this incident up as some sort of "proof" that cycling is inherently extremely dangerous and telling me I'm going to be killed unless I stop. I've tried to explain about how yes, sidewalk riding can be quite dangerous, especially if you pass large trucks with poor side visibility on the right while they are turning across your path and signalling their turn in advance. I also explain that this is why I almost always ride out in the traffic lane in that and similar congested areas: to minimize intersection conflicts and maximize my visibility. The non-cyclists just seem more horrified by that explanation, 9 times out of 10, because they aren't able to wrap their heads around the idea that riding in the street may be safer. I think they're usually thinking that the cyclist was actually doing everything right by riding on the sidewalk until I tell them this, which is why they're viewing it as some unavoidable tragedy. So I think it's true that media publicity of cyclist deaths does scare some people off in a way that publicity about car crashes doesn't: you have to add ignorance into the mix, because it's an activity that is more foreign to the experience of most people.

On the other hand, I don't think these rides of silence are really necessarily about "advocacy". Instead, I think they're more about mourning lost friends (or at least, friends in spirit) and catharsis for the people who participate in them. So I think they're a completely reasonable thing for cyclists to do for themselves, if they feel it's an appropriate way to honor the dead. I just don't think it should be viewed as an advocacy action.

I don't think the Ride of Silence, Ghost Bikes, or helmet laws are nearly as big a signal that riding bikes is dangerous as having some ******-bag swerve into your lane because he's texting while he's driving. Anyone with any common sense knows that it's dangerous to be on or near any public street, whether you're riding your bike, walking, or in an SUV. By doing the ride, maybe a few people will realize that there are more than 10-12 people on the road on bicycles and maybe they should pay attention. Direct mail advertising only generates about 1-5% return. People still find it profitable to send it. If 1 driver is paying more attention on 1 day and sees 1 cyclist he would have killed, it's worth the 100s of hours I've spent organizing and promoting this ride and worth those few people who think riding might be too dangerous for them.

Bump! Only 5 days till the ride. Find one near you.

On the other hand, I don't think these rides of silence are really necessarily about "advocacy". Instead, I think they're more about mourning lost friends (or at least, friends in spirit) and catharsis for the people who participate in them. So I think they're a completely reasonable thing for cyclists to do for themselves, if they feel it's an appropriate way to honor the dead. I just don't think it should be viewed as an advocacy action.This.

Assuming your question was serious...
- Why shouldn't he change "kit" for just one event (if he's participating)?
- If event's arm band is changed to yellow for looigi, what about those with yellow "kit"?
- "In some cultures the wearing of a black armband signifies that the wearer is in mourning or wishes to identify with the commemoration of a comrade or team member who has died. This use is particularly common when a group or team meets after having lost a member." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armband

Yes, it is a serious question. From what I've read the only "official uniform" for this ride are the arm bands. So if a person who wants to take part in this ride normally wears a black or red cycling jersey. It is logical to presume that the majority of their jersey's/kit(s) are going to be either red or black. So again I ask why should they go out and buy a new jersey for one ride?

ScottStr organized a great Ride of Silence here in Fort Worth. I've been on several group rides through the city, and this was by far the biggest, yet most orderly crowd.

Why can't we have, say, a ride in honor of all of the CAR fatalities? A "Join us and stop the mayhem" ride?

Good idea... you should organize the first one!

Why can't we have, say, a ride in honor of all of the CAR fatalities? A "Join us and stop the mayhem" ride?

I liked the idea that someone had a while back. That anyone involved in an automobile crash have their license temporarily suspended pending a full investigation. Just like cops are either assigned to desk duty or temporarily suspended following a shooting.

Maybe if more motorists had their license suspended pending an investigation it would cause some of them to slow down and rethink their behavior while behind the wheel. And if they are found to be at fault they are fined, have to serve community service, have their license suspended for a longer period of time or revoked, AND take remedial driver's ed classes. If they have a subsequent crash(es) all of the above apply with jail time being added to the list.

I liked the idea that someone had a while back. That anyone involved in an automobile crash have their license temporarily suspended pending a full investigation. Just like cops are either assigned to desk duty or temporarily suspended following a shooting.


That just isn't true. And your idea is a great one. In a police state.


Maybe if more motorists had their license suspended pending an investigation it would cause some of them to slow down and rethink their behavior while behind the wheel. And if they are found to be at fault they are fined, have to serve community service, have their license suspended for a longer period of time or revoked, AND take remedial driver's ed classes. If they have a subsequent crash(es) all of the above apply with jail time being added to the list.

You're right... but there is never enough information (without video) to determine if the severity of somebody's carelessness was high enough to warrant license suspension. The vast majority of people simply cannot carry on without a vehicle.

We all know the risks associated with getting on the road with two ton speeding machinery all driving within feet of each other. Regardless of whose fault it is there will always be accidents. No matter how much of a police state you lobby for.

That just isn't true. And your idea is a great one. In a police state.



You're right... but there is never enough information (without video) to determine if the severity of somebody's carelessness was high enough to warrant license suspension. The vast majority of people simply cannot carry on without a vehicle.

We all know the risks associated with getting on the road with two ton speeding machinery all driving within feet of each other. Regardless of whose fault it is there will always be accidents. No matter how much of a police state you lobby for.

It's not my "idea" it's an idea that has been put forth by others at various times. And I don't see how temporarily suspending someone's driver's license after a crash pending a full investigation is going to lead to a "police state."

And given the proliferation of CCTV camera's, security camera's, ATM camera's, etc. "everywhere" these days, I am sure that most crashes are caught on at least one or more camera. The only possible exception would be out in remote rural areas. But as anyone who lives anywhere in the real world knows camera's are everywhere. And just because we don't see them doesn't mean that they aren't out there somewhere.

I went on my city's ride of silence yesterday. It was worse than pathetic. It started at a memorial for a child who was killed while walking his bike across a street mid-block in a school zone; one car stopped and the car in the next lane was speeding and did not stop. I don't see this as a cycling death, although the instrument of his death was the same one used to kill many cyclists. Our anti-bike mayor then said a few words about how we all needed to be safe before she drove off (breaking two laws in her first block).

We then walked across the street in the new crosswalk that was installed in response to the child's death. Even though there were less than fifty of us, some of the cyclists just couldn't stand to see any cars wait and waved them on between us. We then rode three blocks before entering a bike path which was where three-fourths of the ride was. If we were there to make a statement to motorists, we sure followed the least effective route. Three blocks past the end of the bike path, we stopped at a memorial for a cyclist killed while winning a door-prize, then we rode up a street with door-zone bike lanes to connect to another bike path (and the finish). Along the way we also passed a ghost bike for a cyclist who was killed turning left in front of a car that was going straight. In fairness, the car was likely going over 35 mph in a 25 mph zone, but that doesn't change the right-of-way law (or the laws of physics).

I know I sound harsh, but it seems stupid to have the parents of kids who died through their own fault organize the ride. They don't ride and their message was, understandably, that the issue here is cyclists doing stupid things, as opposed to motorists killing us while breaking the law. I guess I'll just have to organize one myself if I want it to send a different message.

By the way, there was even a crash on the ride. An older gentleman ran into the back of someone's bike and then blamed the person he ran into for stopping at the stop sign. I may have to reconsider why so many cyclists around here are getting into wrecks.:rolleyes:

It's not my "idea" it's an idea that has been put forth by others at various times. And I don't see how temporarily suspending someone's driver's license after a crash pending a full investigation is going to lead to a "police state."

And given the proliferation of CCTV camera's, security camera's, ATM camera's, etc. "everywhere" these days, I am sure that most crashes are caught on at least one or more camera. The only possible exception would be out in remote rural areas. But as anyone who lives anywhere in the real world knows camera's are everywhere. And just because we don't see them doesn't mean that they aren't out there somewhere.

The only cameras that are constantly capturing footage are ones on the interstate. ATM cameras aren't going to capture a car crash (really?) and intersection cameras only film when someone runs a red light. Maybe you live in a city that has cameras filming the streets 24/7 where you live but I've never seen anything like that in any of the cities I've lived in.

It is a step closer to a police state because you are essentially removing somebody's freedom before any proof of guilt is presented.

I know I sound harsh, but it seems stupid to have the parents of kids who died through their own fault organize the ride. They don't ride and their message was, understandably, that the issue here is cyclists doing stupid things, as opposed to motorists killing us while breaking the law. I guess I'll just have to organize one myself if I want it to send a different message.

It wasn't pathetic if it inspires you to take the reins and organize it next year. Even if the same group wants to do it next year, there's nothing stopping you from organizing another ride. This was ScottStr's first year doing the one here, and it was more successful, I think, than any of us hoped. Good luck with next year's ride. I bet if you PM ScottStr, he might be able to give some tips on how to organize it. ;)

The vast majority of people cannot carry on without a car....LOL!!!!!

Humans managed the first 5000 years OK.

Unless you block the streets,nobody that's driving is going to care about any of this.You'll be lucky if they notice between texting ,yacking on the phone,applying makeup,reading,eating breakfast,getting dressed,fighting the kids in the back seat,driving the dog around in their laps,ect. ect.

The only time drivers really pay attention is when they have to look up to make sure the coast is clear to run the stop sign or red light.

Humans managed the first 5000 years OK.

Are you comparing today's lifestyle with the lifestyle of humans 5000 years ago? You know how expensive it is to commute with a family in a city that isn't built for public transportation (majority of America)? You know how feasible public transportation is in rural areas?

You must live in a very small, uninformed world.

It wasn't pathetic if it inspires you to take the reins and organize it next year. Even if the same group wants to do it next year, there's nothing stopping you from organizing another ride. This was ScottStr's first year doing the one here, and it was more successful, I think, than any of us hoped. Good luck with next year's ride. I bet if you PM ScottStr, he might be able to give some tips on how to organize it. ;)
Yeah, it looks like put up or shut up time for me, so I'll have to organize one next year. There's lots of petty little political barriers to deal with here, but I may have just enough connections to deal with them.

Yeah, it looks like put up or shut up time for me, so I'll have to organize one next year. There's lots of petty little political barriers to deal with here, but I may have just enough connections to deal with them.

I'm so ashamed that cities can actually be "anti-bike". Such a strange mentality.