Positioning question when RTOL present
05-02-07, 11:42 AM
#26
Infamous Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 24,360
Bikes: Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
3 Posts
Originally Posted by noisebeam
I get the same feeling when in the same position in my SUV. Seriously.
Al
Al
__________________
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
05-02-07, 11:50 AM
#27
Banned.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by chipcom
Which has always been my point...being uncomfortable in many traffic situations is not some phobia, it's being human.
In this case Al provided the reasons for his discomfort - that motorists from behind are approaching very quickly without any indication of whether they are planning to cut right into the RTOL, or they're going to plow into him from behind. He has also noted his discomfort is the same whether he is on a bike or in his SUV.
When Forester talks about a phobia, he is talking about people expressing discomfort or fear for the safety of cyclists based on no reason. When asked in person, they stutter, or hem and haw. In forums like this, the posted questions remain unanswered. There is no reason. Those fears are irrational. That's why Forester refers to them as phobias.
Can you recognize and appreciate the difference?
05-02-07, 12:19 PM
#28
Infamous Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 24,360
Bikes: Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
3 Posts
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
The difference is whether the discomfort is based on rational assumptions about risk, or irrational ones.
In this case Al provided the reasons for his discomfort - that motorists from behind are approaching very quickly without any indication of whether they are planning to cut right into the RTOL, or they're going to plow into him from behind. He has also noted his discomfort is the same whether he is on a bike or in his SUV.
When Forester talks about a phobia, he is talking about people expressing discomfort or fear for the safety of cyclists based on no reason. When asked in person, they stutter, or hem and haw. In forums like this, the posted questions remain unanswered. There is no reason. Those fears are irrational. That's why Forester refers to them as phobias.
Can you recognize and appreciate the difference?
In this case Al provided the reasons for his discomfort - that motorists from behind are approaching very quickly without any indication of whether they are planning to cut right into the RTOL, or they're going to plow into him from behind. He has also noted his discomfort is the same whether he is on a bike or in his SUV.
When Forester talks about a phobia, he is talking about people expressing discomfort or fear for the safety of cyclists based on no reason. When asked in person, they stutter, or hem and haw. In forums like this, the posted questions remain unanswered. There is no reason. Those fears are irrational. That's why Forester refers to them as phobias.
Can you recognize and appreciate the difference?
I was having a little fun with Al, HH....freakin drop it and save it for another thread.
__________________
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
05-02-07, 01:39 PM
#29
Banned.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by chipcom
irrational defined by you and others with an axe to grind...oh yeah I know the difference.
I was having a little fun with Al, HH....freakin drop it and save it for another thread.
I was having a little fun with Al, HH....freakin drop it and save it for another thread.
Which has always been my point...being uncomfortable in many traffic situations is not some phobia, it's being human.
05-02-07, 02:49 PM
#30
Non-Custom Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 1,613
Bikes: 1975-1980 SR road bike
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
So... um... yeah.... that leftish position in the right-most through lane is coo'... (don't crack joke about phobias, don't crack joke about phobias)
05-02-07, 02:55 PM
#31
Infamous Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 24,360
Bikes: Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
3 Posts
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
I call BS on you trying to pull the "just kidding" card with respect to #26:
__________________
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
05-02-07, 03:19 PM
#32
Senior Member
Originally Posted by chipcom
Originally Posted by NB
I get the same feeling when in the same position in my SUV. Seriously.
Al
Al
In defense of John Forester, I think he's in a bit of a bad spot here - forced to defend a bad position. He coined the term to catch people's attention when he wrote "Effective Cycling." Back when I was learning, his use of that term caught my attention as well. What got me into cycling on the road was the thought I had one day (before I heard of JF or EC or anything like that), was that "drivers don't want to hit me." The collarary to this is "don't do anything that will force them to hit me." JF's writings reinforced this opinion.
It is a bit of what Robert Hurst noticed. People take John Forester too literally sometimes, both to oppose his ideas and to support his ideas. His riding style is sound and even his use of the term "phobia" is sound if you take it for what it is: a retorical teaching device to get people's attention. Saying this, to defend this retorical "phobia" too far is to do the concepts of vehicular cycling a grave disfavor. Just like in defending an analogy to the death, defending the use of this term as an actual medical condition is stupid. The use of "phobia", like the use of an analogy to explain a concept, is not a tool for discussion, but rather a tool for teaching. Once the discussion starts, all the cutsy retorical devices need to be dropped and the ideas bared of all their window dressings.
__________________
Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
"If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --the tiniest sprinter
Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
"If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --the tiniest sprinter
05-02-07, 03:56 PM
#33
Banned.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Brian Ratliff
This makes more sense than labling it a "phobia" and using it as a battering ram.
In defense of John Forester, I think he's in a bit of a bad spot here - forced to defend a bad position. He coined the term to catch people's attention when he wrote "Effective Cycling." Back when I was learning, his use of that term caught my attention as well. What got me into cycling on the road was the thought I had one day (before I heard of JF or EC or anything like that), was that "drivers don't want to hit me." The collarary to this is "don't do anything that will force them to hit me." JF's writings reinforced this opinion.
It is a bit of what Robert Hurst noticed. People take John Forester too literally sometimes, both to oppose his ideas and to support his ideas. His riding style is sound and even his use of the term "phobia" is sound if you take it for what it is: a retorical teaching device to get people's attention. Saying this, to defend this retorical "phobia" too far is to do the concepts of vehicular cycling a grave disfavor. Just like in defending an analogy to the death, defending the use of this term as an actual medical condition is stupid. The use of "phobia", like the use of an analogy to explain a concept, is not a tool for discussion, but rather a tool for teaching. Once the discussion starts, all the cutsy retorical devices need to be dropped and the ideas bared of all their window dressings.
In defense of John Forester, I think he's in a bit of a bad spot here - forced to defend a bad position. He coined the term to catch people's attention when he wrote "Effective Cycling." Back when I was learning, his use of that term caught my attention as well. What got me into cycling on the road was the thought I had one day (before I heard of JF or EC or anything like that), was that "drivers don't want to hit me." The collarary to this is "don't do anything that will force them to hit me." JF's writings reinforced this opinion.
It is a bit of what Robert Hurst noticed. People take John Forester too literally sometimes, both to oppose his ideas and to support his ideas. His riding style is sound and even his use of the term "phobia" is sound if you take it for what it is: a retorical teaching device to get people's attention. Saying this, to defend this retorical "phobia" too far is to do the concepts of vehicular cycling a grave disfavor. Just like in defending an analogy to the death, defending the use of this term as an actual medical condition is stupid. The use of "phobia", like the use of an analogy to explain a concept, is not a tool for discussion, but rather a tool for teaching. Once the discussion starts, all the cutsy retorical devices need to be dropped and the ideas bared of all their window dressings.
Exactly.
I certainly agree it's inappropriate to interpret a rhetorical device literally, and I certainly agree that that's what anti-Foresterites do (including Chipcom when he says, "being uncomfortable in many traffic situations is not some phobia, it's being human" - to say "it's not some phobia" requires a literal interpretation of Forester's meaning, outside of the rhetorical context he intends), but I don't see where this mistake has been made in support of his ideas. Who has done that where?
05-02-07, 04:00 PM
#34
Banned.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by chipcom
WTF is your problem? The only BS around here is your inability to let two people have a conversation without butting your fat okole into it. Nobody was talking to you, the thread was nice for a change, then you gotta start your typical BS concerning something that was not even addressed to you. .
There is no such thing as "butting" in in a public forum like this. Everyone's comments should be welcome, and making them is subject to anyone else commenting on them too. Duh.
Go seek help, you have serious mental issues
05-02-07, 04:13 PM
#35
Senior Member
It is also not helpful to use a retorical device in the midst of a discussion amongst equals. Concern about traffic and comfort during traffic cycling is not to be dismissed in a discussion amongst equals, but rather talked about in neutral terms and broken down to its components and felt out. We are having a discussion amongst equals, are we not?
If "anti-Foresterites" are accused of interpreting a retorical device literally, then the "Foresterites" are accused of using this said retorical term to dismiss legitimate topics of discussion. One begets the other: If "Foresterites" use the term in a literal fashion, as in using the term to accuse member of having this condition as a justification for dismissing their ideas out of hand, then the "anti-Foresterites" have no choice than to interpret the term literally.
The term needs to be dropped in these discussions altogether. That means everyone.
If "anti-Foresterites" are accused of interpreting a retorical device literally, then the "Foresterites" are accused of using this said retorical term to dismiss legitimate topics of discussion. One begets the other: If "Foresterites" use the term in a literal fashion, as in using the term to accuse member of having this condition as a justification for dismissing their ideas out of hand, then the "anti-Foresterites" have no choice than to interpret the term literally.
The term needs to be dropped in these discussions altogether. That means everyone.
__________________
Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
"If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --the tiniest sprinter
Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
"If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --the tiniest sprinter
05-02-07, 04:40 PM
#36
Out fishing with Annie on his lap, a cigar in one hand and a ginger ale in the other, watching the sunset.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Florida
Posts: 16,056
Bikes: Techna Wheelchair and a Sun EZ 3 Recumbent Trike
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 22 Times
in
17 Posts
Originally Posted by Brian Ratliff
It is also not helpful to use a retorical device in the midst of a discussion amongst equals. Concern about traffic and comfort during traffic cycling is not to be dismissed in a discussion amongst equals, but rather talked about in neutral terms and broken down to its components and felt out. We are having a discussion amongst equals, are we not?
If "anti-Foresterites" are accused of interpreting a retorical device literally, then the "Foresterites" are accused of using this said retorical term to dismiss legitimate topics of discussion. One begets the other: If "Foresterites" use the term in a literal fashion, as in using the term to accuse member of having this condition as a justification for dismissing their ideas out of hand, then the "anti-Foresterites" have no choice than to interpret the term literally.
The term needs to be dropped in these discussions altogether. That means everyone.
If "anti-Foresterites" are accused of interpreting a retorical device literally, then the "Foresterites" are accused of using this said retorical term to dismiss legitimate topics of discussion. One begets the other: If "Foresterites" use the term in a literal fashion, as in using the term to accuse member of having this condition as a justification for dismissing their ideas out of hand, then the "anti-Foresterites" have no choice than to interpret the term literally.
The term needs to be dropped in these discussions altogether. That means everyone.
__________________
. “He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”- Fredrick Nietzsche
"We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." - Immanuel Kant
. “He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”- Fredrick Nietzsche
"We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." - Immanuel Kant
05-02-07, 04:50 PM
#37
Banned.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Brian Ratliff
It is also not helpful to use a retorical device in the midst of a discussion amongst equals. Concern about traffic and comfort during traffic cycling is not to be dismissed in a discussion amongst equals, but rather talked about in neutral terms and broken down to its components and felt out. We are having a discussion amongst equals, are we not?
I think they're useful in any context where people are trying to communicate meaning and concepts among each other, which is exactly what's going on here. Let's not forget that concepts are maintained in our minds and go through two translation processes when attempting to convey between people. The "sender" has to translate his concept into written English, and then the "reciever" has to translate the written English into a concept in his mind. Both translation points are imperfect (few concepts can be fully and accurately conveyed in ordinary written language - this is why technical areas, like math, law, medicine, computer science, etc,. have to have their own specific technical language) and prone to error. Written English is limited. It is very difficult to accurately translate a concept undamaged from one person to another through this process. Yet this is exactly what we must do in this forum, except when we can augment what we're trying to convey with photos or video clips, which is always a great help. But "rhetorical devices" are also useful, however imperfect, in improving this never-perfect process.
If "anti-Foresterites" are accused of interpreting a retorical device literally, then the "Foresterites" are accused of using this said retorical term to dismiss legitimate topics of discussion. One begets the other: If "Foresterites" use the term in a literal fashion, as in using the term to accuse member of having this condition as a justification for dismissing their ideas out of hand, then the "anti-Foresterites" have no choice than to interpret the term literally.
The term needs to be dropped in these discussions altogether. That means everyone.
The term needs to be dropped in these discussions altogether. That means everyone.
But those are reasons to not interpet literally and to not dismiss legitimate points; neither is a reason to stop using rhetorical devices altogether.
05-02-07, 05:02 PM
#38
Infamous Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 24,360
Bikes: Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
3 Posts
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
Talk about BS, if you want to have a two person conversation, use PM.
There is no such thing as "butting" in in a public forum like this. Everyone's comments should be welcome, and making them is subject to anyone else commenting on them too. Duh.
I suggest you worry about your own mental condition.
There is no such thing as "butting" in in a public forum like this. Everyone's comments should be welcome, and making them is subject to anyone else commenting on them too. Duh.
I suggest you worry about your own mental condition.
__________________
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
05-02-07, 05:06 PM
#39
Banned.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by chipcom
The thread was civil until you just had to open your big mouth, as always. You got control issues, pal, seek help.
What specifically did I say, in which specific post, did you find to be uncivil?
05-02-07, 05:19 PM
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Crystal MN
Posts: 2,147
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
good point,AL
I go with the angle, I might place my front tire on the left side of the vheicle I am behind then angle my back tire toward the plate number. Also splitting the lane if the other lane is filled with cars which I do a reverse placing my front tire angled towrd the plate. Of course hand signals galore to all my motorists Issuing a stop signal for the car that want come up on you. Err behind you.
I have used both of these in other situations and yes a WOL that turns into a ROTL keeping the WOL portion.
I go with the angle, I might place my front tire on the left side of the vheicle I am behind then angle my back tire toward the plate number. Also splitting the lane if the other lane is filled with cars which I do a reverse placing my front tire angled towrd the plate. Of course hand signals galore to all my motorists Issuing a stop signal for the car that want come up on you. Err behind you.
I have used both of these in other situations and yes a WOL that turns into a ROTL keeping the WOL portion.
05-02-07, 05:35 PM
#41
Banned.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by chipcom
The thread was civil until you just had to open your big mouth, as always. You got control issues, pal, seek help.
Originally Posted by chipcom
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
The difference is whether the discomfort is based on rational assumptions about risk, or irrational ones.
In this case Al provided the reasons for his discomfort - that motorists from behind are approaching very quickly without any indication of whether they are planning to cut right into the RTOL, or they're going to plow into him from behind. He has also noted his discomfort is the same whether he is on a bike or in his SUV.
When Forester talks about a phobia, he is talking about people expressing discomfort or fear for the safety of cyclists based on no reason. When asked in person, they stutter, or hem and haw. In forums like this, the posted questions remain unanswered. There is no reason. Those fears are irrational. That's why Forester refers to them as phobias.
Can you recognize and appreciate the difference?
In this case Al provided the reasons for his discomfort - that motorists from behind are approaching very quickly without any indication of whether they are planning to cut right into the RTOL, or they're going to plow into him from behind. He has also noted his discomfort is the same whether he is on a bike or in his SUV.
When Forester talks about a phobia, he is talking about people expressing discomfort or fear for the safety of cyclists based on no reason. When asked in person, they stutter, or hem and haw. In forums like this, the posted questions remain unanswered. There is no reason. Those fears are irrational. That's why Forester refers to them as phobias.
Can you recognize and appreciate the difference?
I was having a little fun with Al, HH....freakin drop it and save it for another thread.
- the reference to "you and others with an axe to grind"
- the rolling eyes
- the "freakin drop it" comment.
05-02-07, 06:06 PM
#42
Infamous Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 24,360
Bikes: Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
3 Posts
Your insistance on injecting your pompus, know-it-all, patronizing opinion into every single converstation is what is uncivil. I was addressing Al and you just had to pipe in with your usual BS to pick a fight because you can't stand not to have the last word. I am serious, seek help, you have a major mental problem. Learn to STFU once in a while.
__________________
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
05-02-07, 06:10 PM
#43
Arizona Dessert
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: AZ
Posts: 15,030
Bikes: Cannondale SuperSix, Lemond Poprad. Retired: Jamis Sputnik, Centurion LeMans Fixed, Diamond Back ascent ex
Mentioned: 76 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5345 Post(s)
Liked 2,169 Times
in
1,288 Posts
Chip, we all have our personalities here. Learn to deal with them.
If you want me to be honest - your initial comment about 'dogma and politics' put me off a bit for reasons I can't articulate well, but if I try - mainly, why bring it up? also there is an implication its the vc folks with the politics/dogma, not you. Your later post sticking your tounge out at me did too. But I didn't complain as I know your online personality and while I recognized it as a bit of fun also felt it wasn't really needed.
Al
If you want me to be honest - your initial comment about 'dogma and politics' put me off a bit for reasons I can't articulate well, but if I try - mainly, why bring it up? also there is an implication its the vc folks with the politics/dogma, not you. Your later post sticking your tounge out at me did too. But I didn't complain as I know your online personality and while I recognized it as a bit of fun also felt it wasn't really needed.
Al
05-02-07, 06:15 PM
#44
Banned.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by chipcom
Your insistance on injecting your pompus, know-it-all, patronizing opinion into every single converstation is what is uncivil. I was addressing Al and you just had to pipe in with your usual BS to pick a fight because you can't stand not to have the last word. I am serious, seek help, you have a major mental problem. Learn to STFU once in a while.
I certainly don't presume to tell anyone else what they should do or how they should behave on this forum based on some vague subjective personal definition of what constitutes "uncivil" behavior. We have forum guidelines for that, and "don't butt in" is not among them.
05-02-07, 06:18 PM
#45
Arizona Dessert
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: AZ
Posts: 15,030
Bikes: Cannondale SuperSix, Lemond Poprad. Retired: Jamis Sputnik, Centurion LeMans Fixed, Diamond Back ascent ex
Mentioned: 76 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5345 Post(s)
Liked 2,169 Times
in
1,288 Posts
Left bias in the thru lane.
Lock the thread (I could give a rat behole if it is or not actually
)
Al
Lock the thread (I could give a rat behole if it is or not actually
)Al
05-02-07, 06:41 PM
#46
Infamous Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 24,360
Bikes: Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
3 Posts
I apologize Al...it was nice while it lasted, but I just have no more patience with HH and it is giving me a short fuse and making me overly cynical of anything A&S related. I'll just spend my time in other forums where I can enjoy myself, rather than get my blood pressure up over the same old subjects that will never get resolved, and the same old people who insure that will always be the case.
__________________
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
05-03-07, 10:12 AM
#47
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Missouri
Posts: 336
Bikes: Scott CR1-Gary Fisher Sugar-Litespeed Ultimate
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Just my observation........for what ever it's worth...
Can you recognize and appreciate the difference?
This was in response to CHIPCOM, but I felt like HH was talking down to all of us in the thread.
Like if the rest of us don't fully agree with HH, it must be because we are deficient in the abillity to recognize and appreciate the difference.
It takes two to tango, but at least CHIPCOM is man enough to apologise.
AL thanks for starting the thread, I learned a better way to safely possition myself in a situation like you described.
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
Can you recognize and appreciate the difference?
Like if the rest of us don't fully agree with HH, it must be because we are deficient in the abillity to recognize and appreciate the difference.
It takes two to tango, but at least CHIPCOM is man enough to apologise.
AL thanks for starting the thread, I learned a better way to safely possition myself in a situation like you described.
05-03-07, 10:20 AM
#48
Arizona Dessert
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: AZ
Posts: 15,030
Bikes: Cannondale SuperSix, Lemond Poprad. Retired: Jamis Sputnik, Centurion LeMans Fixed, Diamond Back ascent ex
Mentioned: 76 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5345 Post(s)
Liked 2,169 Times
in
1,288 Posts
Thanks Chip. We should all work to be a bit more constructive round here.
05-03-07, 11:09 AM
#49
Banned.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by chipcom
I apologize Al...it was nice while it lasted, but I just have no more patience with HH and it is giving me a short fuse and making me overly cynical of anything A&S related. I'll just spend my time in other forums where I can enjoy myself, rather than get my blood pressure up over the same old subjects that will never get resolved, and the same old people who insure that will always be the case.
Just a friendly suggestion.
05-03-07, 11:20 AM
#50
Banned.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BLIZZ
Just my observation........for what ever it's worth...
This was in response to CHIPCOM, but I felt like HH was talking down to all of us in the thread.
Like if the rest of us don't fully agree with HH, it must be because we are deficient in the abillity to recognize and appreciate the difference.
It takes two to tango, but at least CHIPCOM is man enough to apologise.
AL thanks for starting the thread, I learned a better way to safely possition myself in a situation like you described.
This was in response to CHIPCOM, but I felt like HH was talking down to all of us in the thread.
Like if the rest of us don't fully agree with HH, it must be because we are deficient in the abillity to recognize and appreciate the difference.
It takes two to tango, but at least CHIPCOM is man enough to apologise.
AL thanks for starting the thread, I learned a better way to safely possition myself in a situation like you described.
Further, Chip's own words, "I have always held... ", indicated this is nothing new, yet he continues to make this point without showing any recognition or appreciation for this difference.
Now, either he really doesn't understand, or he's intentionally being disingenuous. I chose to give him the benefit of the doubt, and tried to explain the difference to him, then asked if he understood.
I did not mean to "talk down". I need things explained to me all the time. Nobody understands everything. We all comprehend different concepts in different ways at different rates. Much of this stuff is not easy to explain in written English. I reject the notion that trying to explain something that appears to not be understood, and, after the explanation, asking if it was understood, is "talking down".