Originally Posted by
crhilton
I didn't get snobbish or boorish from it. I didn't get that he thinks drunk middle class cyclists don't exist either. I got that he was saying:
1. Some cyclists are dirt poor.
2. Some cyclists aren't legally allowed to drive.
3. They pretty much get ignored when they die.
Can't say that I disagree with any of that. And I've seen cyclists who probably fit that description riding around. It's good to consider them, due to #1, when talking about things like lighting.
Well, that proves that each of us can read the same words and take different meaning from them, especially when words are written rather than spoken and we don't have the benefit of an audible clue to amplify the writer's intended tone. It is also certainly true (as evidenced by what Tandem expressed in his gracious apology which, in my view, goes beyond the call of duty) that one can write with the intent to convey one tone and, due to choice of words and that same absence of an audible clue, a tone totally different can come across to readers.
Apparently, an apology is due from me, also, since posts subsequent to mine (and Tandem's) indicate that my spirit of objectivity was misplaced. I, too, apologize, and am retiring from this thread.
Caruso