Active & Cooperative Vehicular Cycling
05-08-10, 09:17 AM
#101
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,261
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4246 Post(s)
Liked 1,351 Times
in
937 Posts
...
I don't think you know what personal attack, or ad hominem is. It's attacking the person, not the argument. I'm not attacking you, I'm attacking your argument as deliberately misleading and loaded.
I don't think you know what personal attack, or ad hominem is. It's attacking the person, not the argument. I'm not attacking you, I'm attacking your argument as deliberately misleading and loaded.
05-10-10, 08:46 AM
#103
totally louche
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
9 Posts
It's amazing how far some posters push their petty semantics.
As to bicycling, I would like to differentiate 3 basic styles of vehicular cycling.
there is the active and cooperative vehicular cycling, there is dogmatic, uncompromising vehicular cycling, and there is "edge of roadway" effective cycling.
even curbhuggers can be riding vehicularily.
Cooperative
Dogmatic
Curbhugger
3 types of vehicular cycling.
As to bicycling, I would like to differentiate 3 basic styles of vehicular cycling.
there is the active and cooperative vehicular cycling, there is dogmatic, uncompromising vehicular cycling, and there is "edge of roadway" effective cycling.
even curbhuggers can be riding vehicularily.
Cooperative
Dogmatic
Curbhugger
3 types of vehicular cycling.
05-10-10, 08:55 AM
#104
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tempe, AZ
Posts: 2,968
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
rigid, inflexible and uncompromising (dogmatic) don't work in life and they don't work well in cycling either. I'm cooperative.
__________________
"Think of bicycles as rideable art that can just about save the world". ~Grant Petersen
Cyclists fare best when they recognize that there are times when acting vehicularly is not the best practice, and are flexible enough to do what is necessary as the situation warrants.--Me
"Think of bicycles as rideable art that can just about save the world". ~Grant Petersen
Cyclists fare best when they recognize that there are times when acting vehicularly is not the best practice, and are flexible enough to do what is necessary as the situation warrants.--Me
05-10-10, 05:58 PM
#105
Bicikli Huszár
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 2,116
Bikes: '95 Novara Randonee
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means. 
se·man·tic [si-man-tik]
–adjective
1.
of, pertaining to, or arising from the different meanings of words or other symbols: semantic change; semantic confusion.
2.
of or pertaining to semantics.
I understand it's sometimes hard to grasp logical fallacy and it's relation to debate. Many times we don't even realize we are engaging in it.
Alright, I'll bite. What exactly is your definition of "dogmatic, uncompromising" (as an aside, why don't you just say "bad" and stop beating around the bush?) cycling; and active, cooperative (i.e. "good") cycling? Would you consider riding in accordance to the law "dogmatic" or "cooperative" (i.e. "bad" or "good")?
se·man·tic [si-man-tik]
–adjective
1.
of, pertaining to, or arising from the different meanings of words or other symbols: semantic change; semantic confusion.
2.
of or pertaining to semantics.
I understand it's sometimes hard to grasp logical fallacy and it's relation to debate. Many times we don't even realize we are engaging in it.
As to bicycling, I would like to differentiate 3 basic styles of vehicular cycling.
there is the active and cooperative vehicular cycling, there is dogmatic, uncompromising vehicular cycling, and there is "edge of roadway" effective cycling.
there is the active and cooperative vehicular cycling, there is dogmatic, uncompromising vehicular cycling, and there is "edge of roadway" effective cycling.
05-10-10, 11:08 PM
#106
totally louche
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
9 Posts
I see, you feel compelled to correct me on the meaning of the word "semantic". 
Bicycling, anyone?
perhaps someone else would care to explain to sudobike how a person inflexibly following rules (never sharing substandard width lanes) versus a more cooperative approach can be correctly ascribed as having a "dogmatic" approach to vehicular cycling.
i didn't bring 'cooperative' into the discussion, it was in the title of the post, and the differentiation hinted at by the original poster-
doohickie posted he thought cyclists that ride inflexibly well into the road and never cooperate with other road users by moving safely right to share the road are the cyclists that reflect dimly on bicycling.
Following the LAW is different than the rules of the road and failing to share the road simply because the law states you can is dogmatic cycling. Simply following the letter of the law is not cooperative cycling, cooperative road users SHARE the road.
I'm not one to make much of a judgement call other than to opine that cyclists that CANNOT ride in a cooperative and dynamic manner, those that ride inflexibly 12 feet out in a 13 foot lane because they have the legal right to do so, are dogmatically addled.
Not cooperating with others in society faintly wafts of sociopath, doesn't it?
Last edited by Bekologist; 05-11-10 at 01:10 AM.
05-11-10, 08:51 AM
#107
Bicikli Huszár
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 2,116
Bikes: '95 Novara Randonee
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Bicycling, anyone?
perhaps someone else would care to explain to sudobike how a person inflexibly following rules (never sharing substandard width lanes) versus a more cooperative approach can be correctly ascribed as having a "dogmatic" approach to vehicular cycling.
perhaps someone else would care to explain to sudobike how a person inflexibly following rules (never sharing substandard width lanes) versus a more cooperative approach can be correctly ascribed as having a "dogmatic" approach to vehicular cycling.
doohickie posted he thought cyclists that ride inflexibly well into the road and never cooperate with other road users by moving safely right to share the road are the cyclists that reflect dimly on bicycling.
Following the LAW is different than the rules of the road and failing to share the road simply because the law states you can is dogmatic cycling. Simply following the letter of the law is not cooperative cycling, cooperative road users SHARE the road.
I'm not one to make much of a judgement call other than to opine that cyclists that CANNOT ride in a cooperative and dynamic manner, those that ride inflexibly 12 feet out in a 13 foot lane because they have the legal right to do so, are dogmatically addled.
Not cooperating with others in society faintly wafts of sociopath, doesn't it?
I don't know if I'd go that far, but it certainly can mean your a jerk! Providing we don't blur the line between cooperation by yielding rights and obligation to yield rights, I'm on board pretty much.I actually agree a decent amount on the argument you've put forth in this thread. My main objection was/is to the dishonest debate tactics. Can we not just talk and discuss openly without resorting to logical fallacies?
05-11-10, 09:07 AM
#108
totally louche
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
9 Posts
i had no idea describing bicycling technique was subtextually a type of grouse hunting.so sudobike agrees substantially with me and his main objection is the 'tactics' of the 'debate' and he'd rather talk fallacies. (I swear i see the spirit, if not a sockpuppet, of helmet head poking his head in!)
sudobike substantially agrees with my position: there's a difference between dogmatic and cooperative lane positioning.
Fine.
Last edited by Bekologist; 05-11-10 at 09:25 AM.
05-11-10, 09:30 AM
#109
totally louche
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
9 Posts
those of us that have ridden a lot of miles in mixed conditions know full well that sharing four lane, lightly travelled roads with occasional ample shoulders does not dogmatically mandate riding a foot to the right of the inside lane stripe to ensure motorists pass safely or change lanes to pass.
I don't know about you guys, but cycling anywhere to the left of the right tire track on a four laner without a lot of traffic usually gets me full lane changes from motorists.
This may be an odd position for a cyclist like myself, someone that rides well left in the lane most of the time often 'holding up' motorists in unsafe to share road conditions, but inflexibly riding far left in a substandard width lane is dogmatic lane positioning, is not road sharing and is an affront to the adherence to the spirit of the rules of the road.
I'll go so far as to sever it from sensible and discard it in the sewer of ludicrousness as a cycling technique.
I don't know about you guys, but cycling anywhere to the left of the right tire track on a four laner without a lot of traffic usually gets me full lane changes from motorists.
This may be an odd position for a cyclist like myself, someone that rides well left in the lane most of the time often 'holding up' motorists in unsafe to share road conditions, but inflexibly riding far left in a substandard width lane is dogmatic lane positioning, is not road sharing and is an affront to the adherence to the spirit of the rules of the road.
I'll go so far as to sever it from sensible and discard it in the sewer of ludicrousness as a cycling technique.
Last edited by Bekologist; 05-11-10 at 09:37 AM.
05-12-10, 01:34 AM
#110
Bicikli Huszár
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 2,116
Bikes: '95 Novara Randonee
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
so sudobike agrees substantially with me and his main objection is the 'tactics' of the 'debate' and he'd rather talk fallacies. (I swear i see the spirit, if not a sockpuppet, of helmet head poking his head in!)
Sheesh, are you sure you've never worked at FOX News before?
sudobike substantially agrees with my position: there's a difference between dogmatic and cooperative lane positioning.
If by dogmatic you mean "Because I can, I should", I agree that is silly. However, as long as that isn't confused with a cyclist choosing a more dominant lane position due to his judgment of what is safest, then yes, I'm on board.
05-12-10, 06:32 AM
#111
totally louche
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
9 Posts
yippie...let's all sing kumbya and clap hands in bicycling solidarity for safety first before considerate road sharing instead of inflexible, uncompromising lane positioning under dogmatically addled SOPs.
Yea!
I wonder if sudobike has ever heard of the vehicular road positioning dictate of 'as far right as practicable ...?
the spirit of vehicular cycling embodies fair road sharing with overtaking traffic by riding as far right as practicable, even in states with no frap statute on the books. didn't franklin call it the 'secondary position'?
a cyclist like chip seal rides away from the vehicular cyclist pack with his inflexible and dogmatic road positioning.
Yea!
I wonder if sudobike has ever heard of the vehicular road positioning dictate of 'as far right as practicable ...?
the spirit of vehicular cycling embodies fair road sharing with overtaking traffic by riding as far right as practicable, even in states with no frap statute on the books. didn't franklin call it the 'secondary position'?
a cyclist like chip seal rides away from the vehicular cyclist pack with his inflexible and dogmatic road positioning.
Last edited by Bekologist; 05-12-10 at 07:34 AM.
05-24-10, 06:30 PM
#112
24-Speed Machine
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Wash. Grove, MD
Posts: 6,058
Bikes: 2003 Specialized Allez 24-Speed Road Bike
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
I think I've put my finger on my complaint with the VC disciple crowd. You hear a lot of talk about having rights and protecting rights and the whole thing becomes a fierce competition between cyclist and motorist. It's almost like one of those nature shows where the cyclists are the hyenas trying to get their share of a kill when a pride of lions is around. If the lions don't want the hyenas there, it's gonna be ugly.
The 'VC crowd' is, in a sense, fighting for the rights of ALL cyclists, not just a select few.
I agree that Chipseal has right to ride in the lane and I think and hope that his recent tickets for doing so will be dismissed. Since the first of the year, my commute now includes about a mile of country two-lane with no shoulder, so I've been thinking about navigating such roads with a more vested interest.
My first method was to "Chipseal" it: Stubbornly ride in the lane such that a car simply cannot pass without pulling into the oncoming lane. After all, I have a right to use it. While this is commonly viewed as the way to get the most passing distance, on this particular two-lane, the drivers seem to take it personally when I ride like that and try to passive-aggressively move me into my place on the side of the road by passing close to me, typically with two wheels to the right of the center dividing line, forcing me over to the right.
If they want to risk a head-on collision, that is up to them. I am just protecting my right to be on the road.
I refuse to try to squeeze over onto a non-existent shoulder. This will give me absolutely no room for error and invite cars to pass without any lane change at all. I've considered alternative routes, but they all involve very busy roads with lots of fast-food places with people suddenly giving in to cravings and making abrupt maneuvers. It's the route I take when I drive to work and it seems hazardous to me even in a car. So the two-lane is the only feasible route.
That is excellent!!!! Do not acquiesce to insolent, belligerent, and downright nasty, motorists!!!What I've come up with is this: First of all, when on this stretch I make it a point to know when traffic is approaching from behind by using a mirror. I pay lip-service to AFRAP by riding in the right tire track (or maybe just to the left of it). This gives me a safety factor to my right that I can use as if a car passes me too closely. It also allows me to use that space to help comunicate to the car behind that I know he's there, I know he wants to pass, and whether or not it's safe to do so.
If a car approaches from behind and there is no oncoming traffic, I move from that center-right position to a right position. If I'm riding the left edge of the right tire track, I'll shift over to the right edge of the tire track and hold my position very carefully. This tells the car that, yes, I know you're there, I know you want to pass, and I'm trying to accommodate you, but I still maintain a little bit of a safety margin by not moving all the way to the fog line. When cars pass under these conditions, an amazing thing happens: They move all the way over into the oncoming lane, and I have a boatload of clearance. It's almost like they show their appreciation for my minimal accommodation of their desire to pass by giving me extra space.
, except for EMS vehicles.If a car comes up behind me and there is oncoming traffic, I either maintain my lane position or move a few inches to the left. I put my left arm out and down, palm facing back, fingers outstretched. If I feel emphasis is needed, I pump the arm up and down a little. I think that even if a driver is frustrated by having to slow down, most appreciate that I am actively taking control of the situation and communicating with them. They just kind of give in to my will As soon as the oncoming traffic is past, I shift right and (if I'm in a passing zone) I wave the car around me. If there is a double yellow line, I still move to the right a little, but don't wave. Most drivers ignore the double yellow and pass me anyway, but I don't want to be construed as telling them to do something illegal; that's their decision. Either way, again, they usually give me ample space when they pass.
As soon as the oncoming traffic is past, I shift right and (if I'm in a passing zone) I wave the car around me. If there is a double yellow line, I still move to the right a little, but don't wave. Most drivers ignore the double yellow and pass me anyway, but I don't want to be construed as telling them to do something illegal; that's their decision. Either way, again, they usually give me ample space when they pass.All of this communication seems to foster at least a minimum level of cooperation between cyclists and drivers, and seems to result in fewer frazzled nerves and lower blood pressure. I think it also brings all parties to a single level- we're all just trying to get through this; we're all just trying to get along. Kumbaya.
Do I have the right to the lane? Yes. Should I simply throw away my mirror and trust drivers to do the right thing? In my case, the answer is not unless I want to get hit. Is ceding a little lane position to communicate to the car behind me a surrender of my sacred rights? Frankly, I don't care if it makes everyone get through the encounter happily.
I think the hard-headedness that I perceive in the VC crowd is self-defeating. They seem to insist on that hard-headed, strict version of their rights. But if drivers could care less about cyclist rights, the vehicular cyclist is both right and defeated. Maybe drivers would better accomodate cyclists if there was a little more non-confrontational communication and little more kumbaya.
' attitude, then I see them respecting cyclists' rights!!!! Until then, forget it!!!!!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
highsis
Road Cycling
58
10-10-15 07:46 AM
SecretSpectrum
Advocacy & Safety
18
12-16-12 01:27 AM
