sad :-(
 

i am sad that this forum segregated vc from "advocacy and safety" in bicycle forums; did not review rants against this form (except a few about forester), but the technique needs to stand (with the law backing you). i don't understand why this legal method of road bicycling (and the only law following) was removed from an advocacy/safety section of bike inclusion. just venting some concerns,....thank you for explaining shift in advocacy!

I don't think anyone has a problem with the techical concepts of vehicular cycling - operating a bicycle as a vehicle according to the rules of the road for vehicles, but some of the political aspects of vehicular cycling have caused heated debates - and I think those heated debates are what this subforum will consist of.

+1. It is not the idea of VC. It is that we are told we have to do it or should do it, by JF & his flock. Don't know about you. But I hate the idea of having someone tell me how to ride my bike unless I ask.

This is not meant for anyone in particular, just making a general statement here. So you thin skin folks can chill:

Don't tell me I'm doing it wrong when I tell you how I ride. You can disagree with how I ride, but don't tell me I should change because you think you are right & I am wrong & I should follow your doctrine on how to ride. In fact don't even tell me I should change how I ride period. What you can do is present the idea to me with suggestions on what may make for a better ride & let me make my own decision on how I should ride. Don't try to force your style down my throat. You do & I'll resist you at every turn, just to spite you.

to be blunt, if some specific poster didn't overlay their personal ideas in a pedantic, browbeating manner in the general A&S forum, perhaps this subforum wouldn't be needed.

I have no personal problems with the reasoned debate of riding techniques, but when one poster makes themselves out to be the traffic planner, the roads engineer, the seer, the accident analyst, the judge, jury, and the educator- dispensing their way as the only way to ride - it really chaps this cavemans' thick skin.

+1. You forgot executioner.

Tomg, I know it's getting to be a long one, but if you wanted an idea about why the forum administrators did this, you can get it from this thread. Brian is one of our administrators, and has spent a lot of time explaining the reasoning behind this decision.

I feel sad about it, too, but short of shutting the A&S forum down altogether, no one had an alternative solution that didn't involve moderators spending nearly all of their personal lives policing threads. We like to ride our bikes as much as anyone else on this forum. :)

Here in North Carolina, there is a significant push for the designation of sidewalk-type facilities as bike paths. This is accompanied by plans to narrow the outside travel lanes, and in some cases to legally ban cyclists from the adjacent roadways. This is the "pedestrian on wheels" approach that vehicular cyclists here must advocate against, for their own safety and efficiency.

i check into this forum daily, and it's not removed from A & S -- it's a sub-category within A/S all its own! yes, it's a charged debate, with all the politics involved, and the real as well as perceived challenges to another's riding. it's equivalent to taking the riot out of the street and confining it to the alley -- collateral damage is minimized. it's still accessible.

That may be what happens, but it's also possible that it will just become what some other segregated places have become - a ghetto.

I think most of us would be right there on your side, Steve. ;)

Is the Road Racing subforum of Road Cycling a ghetto?

Perhaps rather like a mandatory bike lane: a gutter ghetto.

A ghetto is what the residents make it. If you want the VC subforum to be productive and useful, then... well, do stuff to make it productive and useful. If you want it to be relevent, then make it relevent. Regardless, the topic is prone to enflaming passions for well understood and less well understood reasons, and there are people who want a less rancorous place to post threads about less controversial topics. One of the problems that this subforum will solve is the tendency for less controversial topic threads to get lost and ignored amongst the 200+ post threads of the VC "debates."

Gosh, I thought that the state of Iowa tells you you how to ride your bike every day. You do have a vehicular code? If a cop stops you fo running a red light, are you going to shove his ideas down his throat? Vehicular cycling means following the vehicular code of your state or nation. If you don't want to do that you do have a choice: don't ride on the public roadways.

They tell me the laws I have to follow & give me the freedom of choice whether or to follow those laws & an understanding of the consequences of what may happen if I don't. But they do not tell me how to ride, that is my choice.

If JF had his way we would all ride how he says to, or else & with out any choice in the matter.

JF takes VC above & beyond what it is meant to be. He tells people they are wrong when they tell him their riding style. I imagine there are some people he has made afraid. Maybe afraid to ride bike any more. His style is far from tactful or respectful.

That is not acceptable.

thanks everyone!
it's alittle clearer now. it's still unbelievable that it had to come to this, seems some people like to argue for the perceived sport of argue.
advocate for what you believe is right, in the correct channels!
i guess this is the channel for now (for vc stories and advocacy)!

I drive my car down the sidewalk, run red lights and stop signs. I often drive at night without any lights and when cars are backed up I drive in the ditch around them and then take off when the light turns green.

Noone will tell me how to drive darn it!!!!!! :D :D :D :D


Sounds pretty stupid doesnt it?

So does most of the non VC cycling stuff I read.

I cycle legally & have done so professionally for many years. I did not however, come by this habit with any text beyond municipal, state & province road safety/highyway acts. I know of many who do the same, bicycle legally without the aid of Forester texts or LAB courses.

According to the Cultural Adoption section of Prof. Kim Pearson's article, the word ghetto in American usage originally described:

neat semantics trick, bruce! or should I say...sophistry?

using language to improperly define something for the benefit of your point of view, then quoting a reference that proves you misapplied the term.

impressive feat of sophistry. and people wonder why this subforum has been created. Its the "VC" crewe of bicyclists calling facilities ghettos and other misinformation tactics....

I'm not sad that there's a mandatory subforum for VC "debate." VC has turned into a big grey area between advocacy and politics. It needs its own subforum.

Ah, so you believe that there can't be real debate (without the quotes) about VC?
Welcome to the ghetto.

pathetic.

It's only a ghetto if you choose to percieve it that way.....

Or you could look at it as a forum with a specific focus!

the use of the word ghetto is imprecise. Bruce attempts to marginalize this subforum by its incantation.