Helmet Head

The following claim was made up in A&S:

I see a lot of the same old fights around here, and some new ones now and then, but whether JF is a god or a demon is not one of them.

But maybe JRA is right and I'm missing something. So I thought we'd have this poll. Also, can anyone point to a thread where the discussion could be characterized as a "fight over whether JF is a god or a demon"?

StrangeWill

I'm pretty sure he's a pet rock.

-=(8)=-

I try not comment on his gibberish because that dignifies it in a way,
but I would have to go with 'demon'. Developers are the biblical
plague of our society relatively speaking and transportation 'planners'
and such are really just shills for developers for the most part.
Thank transportation planner types for their help in what we suffer today.

JRA

Well, at least this thread won't degenerate into an argument over whether JF is a god or a demon.

Allister

You've set a new standard in pointless polls, Serge. My foam hat is off to you.

TRaffic Jammer

I'm sure he also didn't literally mean someone wrote JF is a God, or a Demon in a thread for that matter.
However, this is basically what A&S ends up boiling down to. I guess English Lit. wasn't a great class for you, whereas Composition was an "A. Again, please stop being so literal.

urban_assault

I voted god just to make things interesting.

gcottay

Yes, this poll does well demonstrate one of the problems encountered here.

Helmet Head

Of course not. But he must have meant that the discussion ultimately lead to debates about John Forester the person. But they don't. That's my point. The debates are about the ideas. To the extent that their is any discussion about Forester himself, that's brought on by the anti-VCers, not the VC advocates.

buzzman

wow. deep. this is deep. I, for one, will ponder this poll for a while before I even attempt an answer. I'm sure it's somehow a trick question. a talmudical conundrum. a zen koan. time has indeed stopped for me.

AlmostTrick

Since you don't have prophet or anti-christ as choices, should we just assume god and demon as the most appropriate answers respectively in these cases? lol

AliesterCrowley 

This has to be one of the most strange thread I've seen in a series of strange and weird threads by this Helmet Head dude I've seen in a while! Is he always like what I've seen, making gigantic mountains out of little ripples?

I see him post an P&R about no deity and here he is, worshiping at the altar of this Forester dude, and elevating him to deity status! Helmet, I think I now know who your God is!

Psycle chic

God, demon or human? Why are you even asking this? You say you see a lot of fights over this but you bring up a thread to start another one? Are you THAT bored?

Why don't you go ride a bike or something.

The Human Car

The first thing to come to mind and I am not exactly sure why, is what kind of bicycle rider's do we have; childish riding, macho riding or dude, I just want to ride my bike.

As far as th poll goes, I am looking for "all of the above." As we all have our good, bad and just human qualities.

Something to ponder:
Plato writes about what it takes to be a really bad or evil person and comes to the conclusion that it takes a lot of good qualities and just one bad quality to be good at being a bad person.

Bekologist

i would characterize john as an incompetant cyclist filled with prejudice. human? yep.

Helmet Head

Can you provide one single post of mine that would support your assertion that I worship "at the altar of this Forester dude"? Anything? What gives you this impression? I honestly want to know.

Helmet Head

I explained why I'm asking in the OP. Why are you asking as if that explanation is not provided? Did you read the OP? Can you read?

I said I DO NOT see a lot of fights over this, and I'm just asking to see if there is one here. By the way, I don't see a fight about whether Forester is a god or demon here either. Do you? Where???

Helmet Head

There is no fight here. Here are the poll results so far.

Jf is a god. ... KrisPistofferson, urban_assault 2 16.67%
Jf is a demon. ... -=Łem in Pa=-, mev, wsexson 3 25.00%
JF is a human. ... ChipSeal, derath, Helmet Head, JeanCoutu, noisebeam, PaulH, Tom Stormcrowe 7 58.33%

--------
All the VC advocates, and others, agree JF is a human.
No one in this thread or any other thread has argued in any post that JF is anything but.
There is no fight about John Forester.
Can we please put this ridiculous claim to rest now?

The fight is about the positions John Forester holds, particularly about bike lanes. And to the extent that the argument is about him, it's because those who disagree cannot refute his arguments, and so they focus on him. Disagree? Fine. Refute the arguments then.

Bekologist

...feeling the church crumble underneath you the more you read john's demogoguary, eh, head?

feeling a little insecure, need to bolster your belief system?

"a house built on a weak foundation, it won't stand for long
but stories told to all generations, they will stand for long"

Bekologist

we repeatedly discredit john's illogical prejudices and blather in this forum, helemt head. but despite all evidence to the contrary, he continues his pedantic blather as if he were preaching from a bully pulpit with no congregation.

you do realize john has been ostracized from mainstream bicycling advocacy for a coupleof decades, head? and that his bitter vitrolic makes him slightly less than human?

he's degenerated into bitter curmudgeon, an ambulance chaser and a auto/sprawl advocate, head. is he human? absolutely, and not a very nice one, either.

Helmet Head

What you do, Bek, is repeatedly make it about him rather than about the arguments that you cannot refute. Disagree? Fine, then address the arguments and not those who are making them. See if you can do that for even one post.

Bekologist

no, i refute his arguments regularily with facts and data and observations regarding the vehicularity of well provided bicycling infrastructure, and the benefits to bicyclists when commuties accomdate bicyclists as unique human powered vehicles.

I repeatedly reiterate the bonifide and mesurable results of increasing bicycling modal share and safety thru infrastructure and social enhancements, the vehicularity of well provided bike lanes, etc...... yet john consistently falls back on tired, pedantic sophistry to attempt to refute the world body of evidence supporting greater planning for bicyclists in the trasnportation grid.

Bekologist

and i thought this thread was about the demagogue and not his fallacious "message", helmet head! which one is it????

TRaffic Jammer

I'd like to see some real refuting from your camp. Sorry lads but 40 year old dogma isn't going to cut it anymore with me. I've been watching you bunch argue and you can't refute anything anyone says. You consistently ignore facts and published findings from within the industry, so it all becomes you didn't understand ... ooh ooh I meant this portion of LA etc etc... then when it still doesn't work out come insults... so drop the act and just be upfront about being bitter old guys. My grandpa was one too, and my stepfather is quickly on his way.... it's ok you know. Now that I see the VC crowd as Grumpy Old Men, they simply won't upset me anymore, the same way my grandad's tirades didn't get to me. New poll time? I have a new option.

HH please... I'm imploring you, step away from the Dark Side. We can't ALL be wrong all the time. It's statistically impossible.

John Forester

Your words, TJ, about "ignoring facts and published findings from within the industry", appear to refer to our criticism of papers such as Pucher's. The subject of the discussion is the effect of bikeways. On that subject, there is nothing in Pucher's paper to either ignore or refute. Pucher provides neither facts nor reasoning that link bikeways to the other social conditions that he has listed. He has provided no such facts, and has provided no reason to believe that bikeways could have produced the other conditions that he has listed. The criticism by vehicular cyclists surrounding Pucher's paper (and all the others like it) is not of the paper itself, but of the way that bicycle advocates have taken to quoting Pucher's paper as support for their ideological position that bikeways ought to produce these effects, both in Europe and, if implemented here, in the US.