Originally Posted by invisiblehand

...

In regards to #2, from where do you have an estimate of the number of fatalities while cycling alone versus cycling in groups? Then where do you get the denominator from which to estimate the rate of fatalities; i.e., the number of miles/trips ridden alone versus ridden in a group? Then where do you find these figures broken out for the appropriate age groups?

Originally Posted by invisiblehand

...
Robert raises some interesting points. I frequently observe the selection of "safe" routes among the recreational riders. Writing about myself, Bek asked me a question regarding hugging the curb on narrow-high-speed roads a while back. If my memory is correct, I answered that while I never purposely hug the curb but that I would be a bad person to ask since my regular travel routes avoid such roads when alternatives are readily available.

But Robert, there could be a selection bias with respect to messengers as well. Specifically, people choose to become a bike messenger and, as time passes, the choice to remain a bike messenger. For instance, perhaps all of the dangerous bike messengers get smashed or scared early in their career and leave. Those that survive either have good intuition, reflexes, decision rules, peripheral vision, balance, timing, constitution, or some combination thereof that allowed them to proceed. Some of the aforementioned qualities would be difficult to transfer to a general population and, consequently, of little practical use. Note that one could similarly write that there is a selection bias to becoming a messenger; i.e., people that choose to become a bike messenger are those with good intuition, reflexes, decisions rules, ... and so on.
...
EDIT: Of course, LCI_Brian's comments about different survey methodology is appropriate. It is quite difficult to quantify the effects of survey differences.

Originally Posted by rando

Jeezus, Forester has called almost everybody an idiot, insane or stupid on this board at one time or another. why does HE get a pass? he should be warned too.

Originally Posted by rando

Jeezus, Forester has called almost everybody an idiot, insane or stupid on this board at one time or another. why does HE get a pass? he should be warned too.

Originally Posted by RobertHurst

Note that the statistics I refer to in this thread are based on accident surveys, and concern injuries but not fatalities. Dead men don't wear plaid, and they don't answer surveys.

Originally Posted by RobertHurst

Hey you are thinking on a deeper level than is even necessary to undermine this whole enterprise of considering and comparing bicycle accident stats. You need only scratch the surface and the whole thing falls apart. ILTB is quite right about that. That said there are some useful surveys with results that are meaningful if we can restrain ourselves from wild extrapolation.

Robert

Originally Posted by randya

He's more biased and arrogant than Helmet Head, he doesn't listen to what he's told, he's immune to logic and reason, and sometimes it seems like a discussion with a bag of hammers would have a more reasonable outcome.

Any reason not to put him on ignore (just like the most of the rest of the bicycling community did a long time ago)?

Originally Posted by alanbikehouston

The difference is, when John calls someone an idiot, insane, or stupid, it is because that person clearly IS an idiot, insane or stupid. The rest of us just toss those words around when we are upset with someone. HE is stated an obvious fact. The rest of us are merely engaging in name-calling.

Originally Posted by alanbikehouston

The difference is, when John calls someone an idiot, insane, or stupid, it is because that person clearly IS an idiot, insane or stupid. The rest of us just toss those words around when we are upset with someone. HE is stated an obvious fact. The rest of us are merely engaging in name-calling.

Originally Posted by Helmet Head

Calling a forum member a name like idiot, insane, or stupid is against the forum guidelines and is not justified no matter how true one may feel it to be. That's the whole point. Referring to something a member says, or to how a member is behaving, as being idiotic, crazy or stupid is fair game, however. The distinction is critical to fruitful and productive discussion and debate. At least that's what I get from reading the guidelines.

Originally Posted by Bekologist

I disagree.

Calling someone's behavior stupid is as insulting in tone and disrespectful and as much a violation of forum guidelines as calling you stupid.

not like jf's going to change his tone, however.

Originally Posted by Bekologist

I disagree.

Calling someone's behavior stupid is as insulting in tone and disrespectful and as much a violation of forum guidelines as calling you stupid.

not like jf's going to change his tone, however.

Originally Posted by Helmet Head

I don't see that in the guidelines, but I have no problem with this interpretation.

Originally Posted by The Human Car

Forum guide lines:

Originally Posted by alanbikehouston

The difference is, when John calls someone an idiot, insane, or stupid, it is because that person clearly IS an idiot, insane or stupid. The rest of us just toss those words around when we are upset with someone. HE is stated an obvious fact. The rest of us are merely engaging in name-calling.