I'm not quite getting you, chip.

rebellion against many things have led to social developments in america, chip- it is part of our history. religious repression, taxation without representation, suffragism, discrimination, sexism...

notwithstanding that CM occurs in cities AROUND the WORLD, in america at least, being a rebellious force can enact change.

but what 'cm tactics' are you talking about? an open invitation for bicyclists to get together and ride en masse once a month? so some civil disobidience occurs. intersections are blocked momentarily. motorists that voice displeasure get the mob shout out. Its a far cry from the black panthers, dude!

While I agree that CM, at least what gets sent over the media is nothing more than bike thuggery from people who never matured past listening to their "Suicidal Tendancies" albums then proceeded to spray paint Anarchy symbols all over their school, I do not think they are the greatest cause of Automobile angst.
I do not believe the 20 seconds blurbs, 1 column articles, the spammed youtube videos are enough for an average human to hold a grudge 15 minutes later.

In CM, (speaking of S.F., since thats the area I am in) you are talking about a localized event, in a deep urban area, in a limited time frame. An area where there are more people than cars. So why do we (cyclist) feel the hate way out in the suburbs, or rural burbs. A place where cars outnumber people.

Do the people who cut me off, yell things at me etc. every day have a CM video on their iPhone, and just happened to watch it moments before they let their superior 4 wheel presence known to me?

I don't think so. Driver are pissed at cyclist. Not CM'ers, but everyday cyclist. I get pissed at cyclist. I am a cyclist, (Fixie, Roadie, XC MTB, Downhiller, family recreation, shopping/errands) I have 5 different types of bike and they are all ridden regularly.

This is what pisses drivers off:

Roadies.. blowing stop signs, riding 2 and3 across when there is a shoulder (and bike lane) not even slowing for right turns on red. Choosing to follow traffic regulations when it fancies them. I do the roadie thing less and less. I do not blow stop signs. That means I am dropped 2 blocks from the coffee shop where we start. In essence, the mentality of "I can be traffic when I want, or excercise pedestrians rights when I want." It is that behavior the average driver see's everyday. Most people never see a CM event.

Mountainbikers: Speeding, tearing up trails, riding illegal trails, trespassing, Blowing by walkers/hikers too close, too fast. Those hikers and walkers you just pissed off probably drove to the trail. Now they are drivers.

The non-cyclist-cyclist: On the clunky bikes (or nice bikes) low on skills, unpredictable, on the sidewalk, off the sidewalk, riding on the wrong side of the street (sidewalk) cutting diagonal through parking lots. riding past all the cars waiting in line at a redlight, just to then ride across the lanes in the cross-walk.

These are things people see everyday. CM is just the occasional cherry on top.

I can see why you would assume that I was referring to people who don't attend CM. That wasn't what I meant at all, I just meant all the people who can't be bothered to do anything, not just CM. They don't talk to their elected officials, form petitions, write articles in the local paper, work to get more people cycling, etc. A lot of people limit themselves to the occasional whining on the forums.

Also if you compare our protesting in general, it is pathetic compared to other countries; it makes Americans look like they have no will anymore. That is all I was saying.

And that is why no one will push back against CM (because they can't be bothered) except for the occasional pissed off police department.

Wow, chill out. Just be happy those newbs are cycling even if it is on the sidewalk until someone explains better ways of cycling in our terrible cities.

I don't do any of those things (where cycling is concerned, anyway) because I don't feel any burning need to make sweeping changes. I just do the things I was taught to do when I started riding in the '60s: Try to stay in a two-foot-wide stripe on the far right as much as possible, stop at lights and stop signs, use hand signals, stay aware of traffic around me, and regardless of who has the right of way, always be ready to yield if a driver does something dumb. Except for keeping to the two-foot-wide strip on the right, that's pretty much the way I drive too. It's always worked for me, and I've never lived anywhere that had dedicated bike lanes except inside parks and recreation areas. None of the bike accidents I've had involved cars, and though I've had to slam on the brakes or run off the edge of road onto the grass to avoid cars a few times, it always appeared to be due to driver negligence or inattention rather than maliciousness. So as I said, I don't feel a need to be agitating for change (though it would be nice if some of the busier roads around here had shoulders wider than an inch or two, or in some cases, no shoulder at all).

I get it, you are Rambo and you like riding in the jungle. Not everyone likes being run off the road into grass. And not only that, but some of us want infrastructure not for ourselves, but infrastructure that will promote cycling to the less Rambo-like in our communities. Mothers with children, old people, children, even those who are just aren't quite as ballsy as you. Why is this good? Well I don't know, can you possibly see some benefit to more people commuting by bicycle instead of driving a car? Is there a reason this sub-forum is called advocacy and safety? Maybe because not everyone in communities feels as safe as you being ran off the road or biking down a 45mph road with no bike lane? And maybe that is something worth working towards?

Edit: before Barrack tries to rail me, this post does not imply that "working towards" refers to CM.

No, you don't get it. There's nothing in the least "Rambo-like" about me or my comments. I wasn't "run off the road," I chose to get off the road because it seemed safer; and those incidents have been very few and over a period of many years. My point was that I deal with the safety issues primarily by trying to stay out of the way of cars as much as possible, and take the responsibility for avoiding accidents instead of expecting the drivers to do so. Their vehicles are a lot bigger, faster and more dangerous than mine, and they vastly outnumber me, so I consider it polite as well as prudent to inconvenience them as little as I can. I don't consider it a "jungle," as the vast majority of the times I've ridden over the years have not involved any conflict with automobile traffic at all.

When I'm driving and encounter cyclists, I treat them as if they own the road. I stay far enough back from them to be able to stop if they hit a pothole and wipe out, and I don't pass unless I can give them plenty of clearance (usually a full lane's worth when possible.) I treat motorcycles the same way, for the same reason: They're a lot more vulnerable than I am in a car. By the same token, when I'm on my bike I treat cars as if they own the road, because I'm the vulnerable one in that situation.

As far as other people are concerned, if they want to ride recreationally or commute, fine, and if they don't, fine. I'd be glad to help anyone who wants to start riding, but I don't go out looking for new riders. It doesn't really matter to me if I start seeing hundreds of cyclists a month or continue seeing a handful a year, as I do now. I'm not greatly concerned with getting everyone interested in the same things that interest me. For instance, I recently joined an internationally-known scholarly society that has been in existence since 1830, yet my membership number is only 1528. It's not that they are exclusive (anyone who wishes may join); it's just that the average person neither knows nor cares about the field of study to which the Society is dedicated. That doesn't bother me one bit.

By the way, I'm 53, have asthma, have never been athletic, and until I began riding again recently led a very sedentary life for the last couple of decades. I get somewhat out of breath just from going up and down stairs in my home, and two months ago I fell over on my bike and broke my elbow in a 0 mph crash, so it's rather amusing to see myself compared to Rambo. I have more in common with those "old people" you mentioned than with Rambo.

Critical mass are the bicyclist making the news . That is John Q. public's image of a bicyclist, not moms with kids on bicycle . I don't have a problem with public awareness rides and would would take part but critical mass comes across as obstructionist that wouldn't use use bike facilities if they built them youtube videos of the critical mass group chanting F--- You does not help get bike lanes built so those among us not as confident about riding have a better place to ride
IMHO
Roy

Can someone explain it to me like I was 6? Thanks

Welcome to the last resort.

Keith, you know I'm gonna make fun of you tomorrow night for instigating this flamewar, right?

Come on! What does critical Mass mean? Is it a group? A mentality?

Also what does totally "Fed" mean?

Why the hell did you reply to me? I wasn't even talking about Critical Mass?

You are right, I didn't get it. Thanks for clearing it up; I just assumed that if you were posting in advocacy and safety you were actually concerned about advocacy and safety for cyclists.

OK, sounds like a "group" calling themselves "Critical Mass". Like PETA. I replied to this thread, not specifically you. The thread had activity so I chimed in again. Thanks very much for the info.

How about "totally Fred" **********???

As far as I can tell, you are contributing exactly zero to this thread...

"modern jackass" has a very specific definition, which apparently you are unfamiliar with.

modern jackass: a person that talks expertly about something he/she actually knows nothing about

google is your friend

Perhaps you should also read this article on internet trolls

Hi Randya - your little smiley does nothing to negate an ad-hominem attack. Nice try, though.


My points have been about how the perception of CM and their rides are affecting us - the rest of us. The title of this thread is "The Critical Mass Effect" - how CM is affecting us.

To call me "know nothing" is patently insulting and lowers, not my rep, but your own. If that's all you can do - insult someone who gives reasoned and thought-out posts - please go back to Facebook or Myspace. That's the appropriate venue for immaturity.

However, if you want to discuss this in an adult fashion, then try actually answering my points.

The REPUTATION and PERCEPTION of Critical Mass' aggressive activism is causing us, the normal, law-abiding, respecting, and non-aggressive riders, harm. Instead of promoting the good things about cycling, CM, by it's reputation and perception, is telling those with the ability to KILL US that we are nothing but thugs.

Answer that. . . Answer me how blocking all traffic in an already congested area - DELIBERATELY - does anything but turn away those who may be on the fence, those that we want to convert to our side. . . How does antagonizing someone CONVERT them? I will tell you - it converts me AGAINST you, just seeing it.


I don't have to RIDE in a CM ride to know the perception it gives people.


Here's a great analogy for you - you're in a group of people and SOME start acting like ass-hats. Using terroristic actions like pulling someone out of his car, like blocking all traffic, or even worse. Do you stand up against it? If not, then you're a PART OF IT - you're a part of the worst of it.

all of the innocents within your group get hurt because of what the perception to the rest of the world is of what YOU do.


Rather than call me "know-nothing" - why don't you actually DO SOMETHING.

the difference between you and me is that I've been on the rides and know that the response of most motorists to the rides is not as you percieve it to be, not is the intent of the rides as you percieve it to be, nor is the behavior of the participants as you percieve it to be; but that's because you have only the negative media hype and spin upon which to base your understanding of the rides, and thus the conclusions you draw from your limited knowledge are competely erroneous.

Actually, sweet Randya, I have the impressions of people around here. I have the impressions of people who drive on the streets on which I ride.

They read that negative coverage and transfer it to me since I look like a cyclist in my sexy lycra and nice alum bike.

I'm not going off what I read - I am going off what I directly see, hear, feel.

Unfortunately, you are working from a limited empirical scope. You are looking at CM and what you intend to do and not at what you are accomplishing. Obviously you are not provoking as much anger there in your town as CM is provoking in highly (and legendarily) congested areas like SF/Oak, or Seattle - both of which are ridiculously congested and both of which would benefit from people cycling.

You still haven't answered the impression and transferrence points. . . which are my MAIN POINTS.

I don't care what CM intends - I care about how their ACTIONS are interpreted and how that interpretation affects ALL OF US.

almost forgot -

Safety, yes; advocacy, no.

fine, then we can agree to disagree

I'm still pretty sure more motorists encounter - and are enraged by - weekly lycra-clad club fred cyclists blocking roads and impeding traffic in the suburbs and exurbs than by Critical Mass, but that's just my opinion.

I think the point several people here have been making is that the non-cycling public (including lawmakers) also has "only the negative media hype and spin upon which to base [their] understanding of the rides," so how can CM's activities have anything but a negative effect on public perceptions of cycling?

was the media spin on civil rights or anti-war rallies in the 60's all rosy and positive?

"Fred" seems to be cycling's nearest equivalent to "nerd" or "dork." It also seems to have two opposite definitions, depending on whom you ask:

(1) A person wearing lots of colorful Lycra riding clothing, on an ultra-expensive bike, and loaded down with every sort of flashy accessory that money can buy, but with no appreciable riding skills;

or

(2) A person wearing street clothes (likes jeans and a tee shirt), riding an old bike, and seemingly ignorant of the niceties of cycling culture, but with the skills to overtake all those proud "roadies" with their expensive bikes and leave them in the dust.

Myself, I'm somewhere in the middle. I look like (2) but don't have the riding skills to back it up, so I guess you'd call me an aspiring Type 2 Fred.

I think most people would see those issues as considerably more important than cycling, and place more importance on correcting misinformation. (And I never was a fan of the '60s anti-war rallies myself.)

1. I disagree completely. having motorists actually acknowledge that cyclists do have rights to the road, and acknowledging cycling as a means to the end of reducing our dependence on foreign oil are both important goals.

2. please tell us who was correcting media misinformation on civil rights and anti-war efforts in the 60s.

3. understandable that you don't like CM if you didn't like anti-war rallies. How did you propose to end the Vietnam war, or were you actually a hawk that wanted to continue fighting?