Or, are you saying that anyone who dons a logo on the bibs or jersey who's not being paid to is also a dork? I guess, if that's what you think then that's your opinion and I have no real problem with that; however, is it the interest of some to revolutionize the core apparel theme that is so indelibly integral to road cycling wear? There are myriad choices of jersey and bib designs: plain-jane, logos of the manufacturer, pro team/sponsored look, or something in-between. It's a big world. Many apparel choices for road cycling wear, some flashy, some racey, some conservative, some just outrageous. At the core, whatever your preference is, for most roadies it still boils down to lycra shorts (whether bibs or conventional shorts) and a jersey (whether logo'd down, plain-Jane, or something in-between). If that's what you are saying, then almost all roadies look like "dorks" when dressed for the road. Are you sure that "dorks" is the right word? I'm not getting how the racey look comes off as dorky. I can see if you described the kit crew as, maybe "showboats," even though I would disagree with the generalization. I can see non-cyclists saying the roadie look is dorky but not people that actually ride road bikes with some degree of seriousness.
Me, I won't ride the road bike unless I look like a racer (always bibs with manufacturer or pro team logos, tight/semi-tight race cut jerseys where the tail of the jersey is never below "belt level"). I don't race but I did for a decade in the 80s/90s. I just prefer the look of those tough guys who get paid to race a bike, and the look of my former years as a lowly amatuer racer. I know some feel as though it's the "billboard look," but most people driving and walking by have absolutely no clue who many of the names are plastered on the gear. I just don't get how those dressed in non-conservatibe cycling apparel might look like dorks to other road cyclists who might be a little more conservative...if that's what some are saying.