Offensive? I'm sorry if you read my post as being "offended". I just had some "hesitation" around some of the finer points of the blog.

Sure avoid the door zone etc.- nothing really new there and certainly nothing I disagree with nor find offensive. And I haven't met the guy yet. I intend to. My friend did and said he was quite amiable and seemingly, from my friend's POV, quite knowledgeable. Maybe I'll agree. I only know him from what he writes on the internet, and unlike Manti T'eo I don't count that as a real relationship.

But here is my concern. NYC is now at a new threshold of urban transformation. Bloomberg et al would like to shift the auto centric nature of the city to an even more pedestrian/cyclist friendly city and they'd like to do it with even more changes in infrastructure. But there is blowback from the status quo. Any excuse to blame cyclists and pedestrians for the rate at which they get killed and maimed in the city as opposed to blaming what has evolved into a poorly designed urban landscape feeds the status quo. And slows or blocks what many of us feel is necessary progress.

This does NOT by any means say that I am implying that cyclists and pedestrians should disregard traffic rules and not do everything they can do to be safe on the road and to be respected by others. BUT simply doing that is not a solution to the current transportation problems in the city and while it may save a life or two (no small thing and certainly worth the effort) it will not effect the safety of the larger percentage of bicyclists and pedestrians.

Therefore, my hesitation with this kind of bicycling "advice" is that it can be construed into saying "if we all followed the rules then the status quo would be sufficient" and this is something with which I strongly disagree. Now, if this blogger is saying, "No, we need to change the status quo BUT IN THE MEANTIME here are some techniques that MAY make you safer and depending on your skill level, confidence, assertiveness, how lucky you are and your fitness (basically- how fast can you go) will be of some help."

Probably 99% of the "Virtuous Bicyclists" advice is stuff I do any way. This style of riding works well for riders like me. I can hold a lane at 25 mph for some distance if need be. I can accelerate to cross lanes while holding the handlebars with one hand and signaling with the other. I'm 6'3" tall and make an imposing figure on the bike and am visible as I blend in with urban traffic. Well, good for me but not good for every rider. For some people moving at a speed any greater than 10 mph is a challenge. Some people ride a bike in NYC because they are physically challenged in ways that make it hard for them to drive, take the bus, walk, take the subway but they can ride a bike- maybe slowly, maybe holding on to the bars with both hands. Having some virtuous cyclist give them advice that implies maybe one day when you're as fit and fast as I am we'll let you play in traffic with the big boys but for the time being stick to the park or don't ride at all is not something I can get behind.

Granted I'm not sure that's what he's saying but there are plenty of NYC blogs for cyclists and many organizations stressing rider safety and responsibility. What, I'm wondering, makes this blog any different? Or is it just more of the same, and if so, I'm cool with that, too.