Search the web
Sign In
New User? Sign Up
chainguard · Bicycle Advocacy
? Already a member? Sign in to Yahoo!

Yahoo! Groups Tips

Did you know...
Show off your group to the world. Share a photo of your group with us.

Best of Y! Groups

   Check them out and nominate your group.
Having problems with message search? Fill out this form to ensure your group is one of the first to be migrated to the new message search system.

Messages

  Messages Help
Advanced
Messages 27482 - 27511 of 28284   Newest  |  < Newer  |  Older >  |  Oldest
Messages: Show Message Summaries   (Group by Topic) Sort by Date v  
#27511 From: Eric Vey <junker@...>
Date: Mon Jul 6, 2009 11:47 pm
Subject: Re: [CG] Safety & trolly tracks
ericvey
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Schubley@... wrote:

"A lot of people don't think very far ahead, and simply lack the ability
to plan a transition from in between tracks to outside of the tracks."

I must admit to being one of them. About a month ago I crossed some tracks at not a very high degree of angle.
My steed fell out from under me, I landed on my feet, picked up and went on, but still it surprised me.

When I watched the video, I saw her cross at less of an angle than I did.
I was surprised that what happened to me didn't happen to her.

#27510 From: John Forester <forester@...>
Date: Mon Jul 6, 2009 11:28 pm
Subject: Re: [CG] Safety & trolley tracks
biketransengr
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
I see, from John S's discussion below, that the safety of streets has to be evaluated on the basis of people who:
Don't think ahead
Can't plan to cross tracks as perpendicularly as possible
Have poor bike handling skills
Don't know how to ride in the dark
Don't know how to ride in rain
Are driven into making silly movements by the sound of a siren
And, presumably, have other collections of incompetencies that one would expect to accompany these.

Why should we competent cyclists be asked to evaluate roads for the incompetent? Do we do it better? Would any useful action be taken to implement our advice? For that matter, what do we know about the specific incompetencies of the incompetent?

I say that there is no way to make roads safe for the incompetent while still being useful for the competent. America approves of incompetent cyclists and designs for them, also without knowing their specific incompetencies. It is our task to arrange that the results of this design standard do not make competent cycling more dangerous or less useful. That means, largely, that we must be allowed to escape the designs for the incompetent.

You may think that this expresses callous disregard for the incompetent. Not quite. It expresses callous disregard for those who refuse to learn competence, and utter, complete abhorrence of those who advocate incompetence. Proper instruction has been available for thirty years, but our society is organized to abhor it, because our society wants the supposed results of incompetence.

We have far too much to do to waste time attempting to assist those who advocate incompetence. Let them stew in their own juice, for they would boil us in oil if they could.

Schubley@... wrote:

Hi all,

I realize I'm outnumbered on this, but I thought I'd 'splain my
reasoning anyway.

The question is: can the street in the Toronto video, or other,
similar streets, be ridden safely? Or can they be called safe streets?
Those are two very different questions.

I understand that cyclists who "get it" can ride between trolly tracks.
Like Kalle and Bob. Or myself.

But I don't see how they can be called safe streets.

If you tell people where to ride, many of them won't ride there. Or
they'll follow your instructions badly, and butcher the transition from
between tracks to outside of tracks.

A lot of people don't think very far ahead, and simply lack the ability
to plan a transition from in between tracks to outside of the tracks.
And many have poor bike handling skills. Throw in a dark, rainy night,
a few distractions (a siren approaching from behind, just for example),
and you are sure to overtax the abilities of someone who would be
reasonably safe on a normal street.

Again, I didn't intend to discuss what we on this list can do. I
intended to discuss safe cycling for the public at large.

Of course, after seeing all those stupid sidepath photos from St.
Petersburg, maybe the train tracks aren't so bad after all?

John Schubert
Limeport.org


-- John Forester, MS, PE
Bicycle Transportation Engineer
7585 Church St. Lemon Grove CA 91945-2306
619-644-5481 forester@...
www.johnforester.com

#27509 From: Schubley@...
Date: Mon Jul 6, 2009 4:48 pm
Subject: Safety & trolly tracks
schubertjd
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Hi all,

I realize I'm outnumbered on this, but I thought I'd 'splain my
reasoning anyway.

The question is:  can the street in the Toronto video, or other,
similar streets, be ridden safely?  Or can they be called safe streets?
  Those are two very different questions.

I understand that cyclists who "get it" can ride between trolly tracks.
  Like Kalle and Bob.  Or myself.

But I don't see how they can be called safe streets.

If you tell people where to ride, many of them won't ride there.  Or
they'll follow your instructions badly, and butcher the transition from
between tracks to outside of tracks.

A lot of people don't think very far ahead, and simply lack the ability
to plan a transition from in between tracks to outside of the tracks.
And many have poor bike handling skills.  Throw in a dark, rainy night,
a few distractions (a siren approaching from behind, just for example),
and you are sure to overtax the abilities of someone who would be
reasonably safe on a normal street.

Again, I didn't intend to discuss what we on this list can do.  I
intended to discuss safe cycling for the public at large.

Of course, after seeing all those stupid sidepath photos from St.
Petersburg, maybe the train tracks aren't so bad after all?

John Schubert
Limeport.org

#27508 From: Bruce Lierman <bugsyii@...>
Date: Mon Jul 6, 2009 1:08 pm
Subject: Re:Flowers in Toronto
newbecil
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
"The narrator gives no sign that she's hard core paint and path. She 
appears to be on board with getting cyclists to assume responsibility 
for their own safety.

She's the kind of person we could either.... turn on to our insights 
... or turn off with our venom.

Let (s)he who has never made a mistake in print toss the first stone.

This is a teachable moment. Someone can contact her and say, "We saw 
some real charm in your video, but there is one thing we think you 
ought to correct."

Bravo, John.

It's our choice, isn't it?  We sit on boards, attend meetings, and its up to us whether we're regarded as eye-rolling fanatics or neighbors with particular, well-informed point of view.

There is no them, there's only us.

Bruce Lierman

#27507 From: John Forester <forester@...>
Date: Sun Jul 5, 2009 10:12 pm
Subject: Re: [CG] Toronto Safe Cycling Video
biketransengr
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
In the San Francisco area I cycled a lot on streets with streetcar
tracks, and others with railroad tracks, but I don't remember regularly
using any as narrow as that one pictured, and we knew enough to avoid
crossing at a slight angle. It was rarely necessary, or desirable, to
cycle between the two tracks in one direction, but it was necessary and
desirable to cycle between the two sets of tracks when preparing for
left turns. However, at Grove and University, in Berkeley, there were
double streetcar tracks on both streets, with switches and turnouts to
allow practically any movement. I was making a left turn ahead of a
streetcar, and I think the tracks were not wet, but my rear wheel spun
out on that sheet of steel, and I was observing, at very close range, no
more than six feet away, what shall we call it, a cyclist catcher?


--
John Forester, MS, PE
Bicycle Transportation Engineer
7585 Church St. Lemon Grove CA 91945-2306
619-644-5481    forester@...
www.johnforester.com

#27506 From: Ryan Conrad <ryanridesabike@...>
Date: Sun Jul 5, 2009 9:39 pm
Subject: Re: [CG] Toronto Safe Cycling Video
ryanridesabike
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Looks like NW Lovejoy here in the P. It has a slight downgrade, maybe 1-2%, substandard DZBL crammed between streetcar tracks. At one point the BL takes you up onto the sidewalk into a crowded streetcar stop, then dumps you into the next intersection ready for a right hook. High crash potential IMO. I almost never ride on that road unless I'm riding my school bike with 26x2" tires (can still slip on the tracks after it rains, they get really slick when wet), and I ride between the tracks of course. As far as I know, no one has been knocked in front of a streetcar (which would likely be fatal, they weigh about 50 tons and take a while to stop), but I wouldn't be surprised if there have been at least a handful of right-hook crashes when cyclists role off the sidewalk into the intersection. I know that's a common way sidewalk cyclists get hit, carrying speed into the intersection and getting hit by a motorist not expecting anything moving that fast on the sidewalk. Overall a compromise in design I guess, but it does show the problems for cyclists when putting a streetcar line and stops in a narrow ROW and of mixing fast cyclists and (stationary) pedestrians.

-Ryan


--- On Fri, 7/3/09, Kat Iverson <kat_iverson@...> wrote:

From: Kat Iverson <kat_iverson@...>
Subject: Re: [CG] Toronto Safe Cycling Video
To: chainguard@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, July 3, 2009, 10:09 PM

The flowers are an excellent touch. She's already prepared for her own
funeral. You don't need flowers on your bike, Keri.

Kat

Keri Caffrey wrote:
> This video contains the scariest thing I've ever seen someone do in a "bike safety" video. You'll know what I mean.
>
> http://www.thestar. com/videozone/ 638869
>
> If you'll excuse me, I need to run out to Michaels to get some flowers for my Surly.
>
>



#27505 From: Bob Sutterfield <bob@...>
Date: Sun Jul 5, 2009 7:49 pm
Subject: Re: [CG] Flowers in Toronto
bsut2002
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
John Schubert wrote:
> The street with the train tracks crowding cyclists into
> the door zone can't be ridden on safely.

Why not?  There are several streets in San Francisco where the tracks
look like this, leaving the choice of crowding parked cars, crowding
the yellow line, or traveling the middle of the lane.  I ride between
the rails, taking care to cross them more perpendicularly than she
did.

> She should tell cyclists to avoid that
> street and use a parallel route.

What if their destination is on that street?

#27504 From: "kalle.mustonen" <kalle.mustonen@...>
Date: Sun Jul 5, 2009 7:16 pm
Subject: Re: Flowers in Toronto
kalle.mustonen
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
--- In chainguard@yahoogroups.com, Schubley@... wrote:
>
>
> The street with the train tracks crowding cyclists into the door zone
> can't be ridden on safely.

Oh, yes they can. Just ride where the tram goes. I've done it a million times
and never delayed a tram, cause on streets like that trams have plenty stops and
never catch you. Never had a problem with motorists having to wait a bit, cause
they understand that the cyclist is between the tracks and stays between the
tracks. Yes, you have to be slow and carefull at intersections when the tracks
diverge, but that's life. Ban the trams, I say and get trolley buses instead,
but elected officials don't agree.

>She should tell cyclists to avoid that
> street and use a parallel route.
>
Would have never got home with that advice.

> But no, there will be no flowers on my bike.
>
Aero ones under handlebar tape maybe?

Speaking of Toronto, here's a link to Toronto Bicycle/Motor-Vehicle Collision
Study (2003):
http://www.toronto.ca/transportation/publications/bicycle_motor-vehicle/index.ht\
m

Kalle

#27503 From: Schubley@...
Date: Sun Jul 5, 2009 2:36 pm
Subject: Flowers in Toronto
schubertjd
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Hi all,

Let's not overreact to the Toronto video.

The video shows a bad mistake -- riding in the door zone on a street
where you can't ride out of the door zone without hitting those train
tracks.

BUT:

The narrator gives no sign that she's hard core paint and path.  She
appears to be on board with getting cyclists to assume responsibility
for their own safety.

She's the kind of person we could either.... turn on to our insights
... or turn off with our venom.

Let (s)he who has never made a mistake in print toss the first stone.

This is a teachable moment.  Someone can contact her and say, "We saw
some real charm in your video, but there is one thing we think you
ought to correct."

The street with the train tracks crowding cyclists into the door zone
can't be ridden on safely.  She should tell cyclists to avoid that
street and use a parallel route.

Also: I thought the flowers were cute, and I suspect they actually do
at least occasionally cause other road users to give her a bit more
attention and deference.  Let her have her personal idiosyncracies, for
goodness's sake.  As if the people on this list don't have personal
idiosyncacies!

But no, there will be no flowers on my bike.

John Schubert
Limeport.org

#27502 From: "kalle.mustonen" <kalle.mustonen@...>
Date: Sat Jul 4, 2009 11:04 pm
Subject: Re: Kid dead in Amsterdam.
kalle.mustonen
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
--- In chainguard@yahoogroups.com, "poteit0r" <poteit0r@...> wrote:
>
> I am at a loss here... the blog's author blames the accident on the truck's
blind spot.

As far as i understood, the truck turned left across the tram tracks and traffic
lane into a stationary cyclist on the bikelane. It was a T-intersection with no
leg to turn into where the truck turned into. That is just the accident type
that much paint and some traffic calming will decrease.


> Am I missing something here or is the guy just braindead?
>
Cycling issue is an idiot magnet. "We put some paint here and then many cyclist
will come and be safe cause it'll be safe when there is many cyclists." Anyone
with half a brain will not touch that mess with a ten foot pole. Damn, I wish I
hated cycling; it will be so fun to see the whole BS and just laught at it.


> http://amsterdamize.com/2009/06/23/cause-and-effect/
>
If you don't like the effect, stop producing the cause.

I posted a comment, tried to speak their language.

Kalle

#27501 From: "kalle.mustonen" <kalle.mustonen@...>
Date: Sat Jul 4, 2009 10:38 pm
Subject: Re: [CG] Toronto Safe Cycling Video
kalle.mustonen
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
That's the way practically everybody does in Helsinki; sharing a gap between a
tram and the doorzone(or curb) so small a gap that I don't even acknowledge it a
gap. (Never heard anybody actually being killed by it.) Got to respect the lane
sharing skills of the inferiority crowd, I don't have those superhuman skills so
I have to bike the easy way.

That was really one funny video until I realized it wasn't comedy. Are you sure
that they didn't edit out the part where the Can-Bike Crew crushes in, carries
out the clown (and her vegetive vehicle) and kicks some real knowledge?

Kalle

#27500 From: Serge Issakov <serge.issakov@...>
Date: Sat Jul 4, 2009 11:03 pm
Subject: Re: [CG] Kid dead in Amsterdam.
ljserge
Online Now Online Now
Send Email Send Email
 
In their paradigm motorists are responsible for never hitting
bicyclists, no matter what bicyclists are doing.  That's why they
focus on developing blind spot mirror systems for truckers rather than
on teaching bicyclists to avoid passing on the right.

Serge


On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 10:06 AM, poteit0r <poteit0r@...> wrote:
>
>
> I am at a loss here... the blog's author blames the accident on the truck's
blind spot. Am I missing something here or is the guy just braindead?
>
> http://amsterdamize.com/2009/06/23/cause-and-effect/
>
> Don't miss either this other post, in which he reports on his talk with a
spanish girl in Amsterdam...
>
> >
> > Maria continued to talk about how she loves riding
> > (and this bike in particular), but how she hates
> > riding around Dam Square finding her way to her other work,
> > because of what she considers bad bike lanes
> > (not completely segregated) (...)
> >
>
> Txarli
> http://bicilibre.wordpress.com
>
>

#27499 From: "poteit0r" <poteit0r@...>
Date: Sat Jul 4, 2009 5:06 pm
Subject: Kid dead in Amsterdam.
poteit0r
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
I am at a loss here... the blog's author blames the accident on the truck's
blind spot. Am I missing something here or is the guy just braindead?

http://amsterdamize.com/2009/06/23/cause-and-effect/

Don't miss either this other post, in which he reports on his talk with a
spanish girl in Amsterdam...

>
> Maria continued to talk about how she loves riding
> (and this bike in particular), but how she hates
> riding around Dam Square finding her way to her other work,
> because of what she considers bad bike lanes
> (not completely segregated) (...)
>

Txarli
http://bicilibre.wordpress.com

#27498 From: Bob Shanteau <RMShant@...>
Date: Sat Jul 4, 2009 2:31 pm
Subject: Re: [CG] Toronto Safe Cycling Video
bshanteau
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Kat Iverson wrote:
> Keri Caffrey wrote:
>> This video contains the scariest thing I've ever seen someone do in a
>> "bike safety" video. You'll know what I mean.
>>
>> <http://www.thestar.com/videozone/638869>
>>
>> If you'll excuse me, I need to run out to Michaels to get some
>> flowers for my Surly.
> The flowers are an excellent touch.  She's already prepared for her
> own  funeral. You don't need flowers on your bike, Keri.

Gee, door zone, trolley tracks and flowers all at the same time:
<http://rmshant.googlepages.com/Yvonne.jpg>

And although she talks about cyclists having the rights of drivers of
vehicles, she doesn't say much about responsibilities. And she doesn't
say a thing about not passing right turning cars on the right.

Bob Shanteau

#27497 From: Kat Iverson <kat_iverson@...>
Date: Sat Jul 4, 2009 5:09 am
Subject: Re: [CG] Toronto Safe Cycling Video
vcadvocate
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
The flowers are an excellent touch.  She's already prepared for her own
funeral.  You don't need flowers on your bike, Keri.

Kat


Keri Caffrey wrote:
> This video contains the scariest thing I've ever seen someone do in a "bike
safety" video. You'll know what I mean.
>
> http://www.thestar.com/videozone/638869
>
> If you'll excuse me, I need to run out to Michaels to get some flowers for my
Surly.
>
>

#27496 From: "fred_dot_u" <fred_dot_u@...>
Date: Sat Jul 4, 2009 12:22 am
Subject: Re: Toronto Safe Cycling Video
fred_dot_u
Online Now Online Now
Send Email Send Email
 
I suppose this means if someone can speak clearly, anyone can be an
expert on bicycling safety.  You are quite correct, Keri, the scariest
thing practically reaches out and grabs you. I know it did me!

Of course, suggesting colourful flowers for an assist to being visible
to motorists is useful advice too.

Sheesh.


--- In chainguard@yahoogroups.com, "Keri Caffrey" <keribird@...> wrote:
>
> This video contains the scariest thing I've ever seen someone do in a
"bike safety" video. You'll know what I mean.
>
> http://www.thestar.com/videozone/638869
>
> If you'll excuse me, I need to run out to Michaels to get some flowers
for my Surly.
>

#27495 From: "Keri Caffrey" <keribird@...>
Date: Fri Jul 3, 2009 12:36 am
Subject: Toronto Safe Cycling Video
trafficcivil...
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
This video contains the scariest thing I've ever seen someone do in a "bike
safety" video. You'll know what I mean.

http://www.thestar.com/videozone/638869

If you'll excuse me, I need to run out to Michaels to get some flowers for my
Surly.

#27494 From: "Keri Caffrey" <keribird@...>
Date: Fri Jul 3, 2009 12:39 am
Subject: Re: Portable bike lane?
trafficcivil...
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
--- In chainguard@yahoogroups.com, "Recumbent Bob" <anerobe@...> wrote:
>
> http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10274019-1.html
>
> Think of the paint we could save... ;)
>


I loved it so much, I wrote some ad copy for them:

Make your own door zone bike lane!

Don’t wait for incompetent facility design to direct you too close to parked
cars, strap on these lasers and do it yourself today! Want to make a left turn
from the right curb? Bring your own bike lane that does it with you!

..

It speaks volumes about our culture that the guy in the video is that clueless.

#27493 From: Jeff DelPapa <rjnerd@...>
Date: Thu Jul 2, 2009 2:10 pm
Subject: Yet another barrier bike lane promotion
rjnerd
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/07/zebra-bicycle-path-devider.php?dcitc=th_\
rss_cars

but its ok, its recycled materials...  Includes a reference to the
usual survey about how a barrier makes people feel safer.  The author
of the article can be reached at petz@...

--
-dp-
Founder, The New England Rubbish Deconstruction Society; The NERDS
http://www.the-nerds.org/

This planet needs a lot more kids who think taking a lawnmower apart is more
fun than playing a videogame

#27492 From: Jeff DelPapa <rjnerd@...>
Date: Thu Jul 2, 2009 3:06 pm
Subject: The hairnet helmet redux
rjnerd
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Remember those leather hairnets that predated actual design and
testing of helmets?  Well they have been re-incarnated.
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/07/folding-bike-helmet.php?dcitc=th_rss_car\
s

Second treehugger post on bicycles that praises form over actual function.

--
-dp-
Founder, The New England Rubbish Deconstruction Society; The NERDS
http://www.the-nerds.org/

This planet needs a lot more kids who think taking a lawnmower apart is more
fun than playing a videogame

#27491 From: "Recumbent Bob" <anerobe@...>
Date: Thu Jul 2, 2009 2:04 pm
Subject: Portable bike lane?
recumbent_bob
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
#27490 From: "kalle.mustonen" <kalle.mustonen@...>
Date: Wed Jul 1, 2009 7:14 am
Subject: Right-driving Cyclecraft out now
kalle.mustonen
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
North American edition of John Franklin's "Cyclecraft" can now be ordered from:

http://www.bernan.com/Online_Catalog/Title_Page.aspx?TitleID=81018864

Kalle

#27489 From: Wayne Pein <wpein@...>
Date: Tue Jun 30, 2009 10:46 pm
Subject: Re: [CG] Reactions to Long Beach Sharrows
wawa42p
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Michael Graff wrote:
>
>
>

> On the other hand, there are at least a couple positive things we
> could say about this design:
>
> This might be the first ever bikeway that was DELIBERATELY placed
> ENTIRELY OUTSIDE the door zone.

I'd be surprised if there aren't quite a few bike lanes that have
purposely been done as well as can be expected. We've got one here
purposefully out of the door zone due to my efforts (I tried to quash
the bike lane from being created but failing that made sure it was
good). Does Chapel Hill NC have the only non-DZ bike lane in the country?

Wayne

#27488 From: Michael Graff <michael.graff@...>
Date: Mon Jun 29, 2009 9:43 pm
Subject: Re: [CG] Reactions to Long Beach Sharrows
michaelgraff86
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
I suspect even the Wizard of Oz doesn't have enough green paint to
expand this design beyond a few token streets.

And I wonder about a few operational issues, like how do you prepare
for a left turn?

On the other hand, there are at least a couple positive things we
could say about this design:

This might be the first ever bikeway that was DELIBERATELY placed
ENTIRELY OUTSIDE the door zone.

This is also one of the rare cases where a sharrow was DELIBERATELY
placed in the CENTER of the travel lane.

On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 12:08, Peter Rosenfeld <jprosenfeld@...> wrote:
>
>
> Long Beach, CA has put in some interesting sharrows on a narrow lane with car
parking along the side.
>
> The sharrows are very wide green stripes that almost fill the lane with a bike
sharrow symbol painted in the middle. The idea is to get inexperienced
bicyclists to ride further away from the parked cars and thus reduce dooring.
>
> Picture and discussion by the blogger here:
> http://russroca.blogspot.com/2009/06/lbc-gets-sharrows-and-big-ass-green.html
>
> There's been some immediate negative criticisms by motorists about the
sharrows. This blogger reports on interviewing one upset resident before the
paint was even dry and points out that the sharrows have changed nothing
whatsoever - they change nothing about where bicyclists are allowed to ride nor
have they removed any rights or privledges from motorists, they simply point out
where a bicyclist SHOULD ride to be safe.
> http://russroca.blogspot.com/2009/06/not-everyone-is-sharrowing-love.html
>
> But what he is missing is that most people don't WANT bikes to ride safely  -
they want them to ride "out of the way". This includes many bicyclists.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

#27487 From: John Forester <forester@...>
Date: Sun Jun 28, 2009 6:26 pm
Subject: Review of Pucher & Buehler on education
biketransengr
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
My website host has fixed its problems and now displays my review of the
Pucher and Buehler paper on education. The review appears at:

http://johnforester.com/Articles/Social/Pucher%20Education%202.pdf

--
John Forester, MS, PE
Bicycle Transportation Engineer
7585 Church St. Lemon Grove CA 91945-2306
619-644-5481    forester@...
www.johnforester.com

#27486 From: chainguard@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sun Jun 28, 2009 6:20 pm
Subject: File - List Policies and Guidelines
chainguard@yahoogroups.com
Send Email Send Email
 
==================================
THE CHAINGUARD LIST IS NOT INTENDED AS A CHAT ROOM, FORUM OR BULLETIN BOARD FOR
BICYCLING CHIT-CHAT OR DISCUSSION OF BICYCLING EXPERIENCES.

The list was established for use by a what was assumed would be a relatively
small number of contributors for serious discussions of vehicular-bicycling
advocacy. The success of this list was never intended to be measured in terms of
number of members or number of postings.  There are many bicycle lists on the
net which have been created with a chat-room intent, and they serve a purpose.
If that is what you are seeking, please find one and use it.

DO NOT USE THE CHAINGUARD LIST AS A GENERAL CYCLING CHAT-ROOM OR FORUM.
THIS LIST IS FOR DISCUSSIONS OF VEHICULAR CYCLING ADVOCACY ONLY

There are many lists and forums on the net which welcome a chat-room styled
discussion of cycling anecdotes, and they serve a purpose for just that. Please
find one and use it.

The ONLY correct topic for posts to the Chainguard list is:

VEHICULAR CYCLING ADVOCACY ISSUES

That's ADVOCACY, with an emphasis on effective methods and ideas.
===================================

Chainguard is a forum for serious productive discussion and brainstorming by
vehicular cycling advocates of methods to best promote and protect vehicular
cycling.

The Chainguard list is for those who believe that bicyclists have the right,
should expect, and be prepared to demand, safe accommodation as vehicle
operators on EVERY road - the rights and concepts known as Vehicular Cycling.
The list is for those who have moved beyond debating vehicular-cycling rights as
compared to restricted lanes and separate pedestrian-bicycle facilities. If you
are using this list to debate the merits of Vehicular Cycling vs. "paint and
path" then you are on the wrong list and your posts will be deleted.


If you are an active vehicular cyclist or advocate, or someone wishing to learn
more about vehicular cycling and why we believe what we do, then stick around.

A final thought.  Like most any public gathering, this list has a wide range of
personalities and approaches to communication.  A select few have very little of
value to contribute, but insist on doing so with great generosity.  Their posts
are invariably negative in tone and often line-by-line, even word-by-word,
analyses of previous posts, seeking anything to challenge and often
reinterpreting the original author's meaning to accommodate their own always
self-righteous frequently fantasy-world viewpoints.   On most any topic they
will have thoughts to share and they must have the last word, so please- for all
our sakes give it to them immediately. They will never leave a response
unanswered and they communicate in a never-ending stream of disjointed chat-room
fragments. Do us all a favor and make an effort to ignore their posts just as
many of us have learned to do.  They are the yapping dogs of our online
neighborhood.

==================

Please use your real name when posting to the list, and not just a screen
name, email address or nickname. If you feel your views are so embarrassing to
yourself that you would rather remain "anonymouse" then you should post
elsewhere.

===========================
Why was my post rejected?

List activity is moderated using the following guidelines, however, exceptions
are based on individual note content and overall list activity.

All postings must be on topic and relevant to the discussion of vehicular
cycling advocacy. Postings which do not have direct bearing on the topic of
vehicular cycling advocacy will be deleted.

The list is not for discussion of cycling experiences unless somehow directly
related to ADVOCACY. This can include questions and discussion of proper VC
technique and principles which are to be advocated.

Continuing bickering between individuals will be deleted.  Do not impose your
ego on the other list subscribers. Summarize your viewpoint and take the rest to
personal email.

Posting activity is a maximum of three postings per day per subscriber.

Prolonged rants, flame-baiting, personal attacks, name calling, offensive
language, and any other pre-third-grade level communications will be deleted and
the member's subscription terminated.

Republishing copyrighted material, for example entire news articles, is
prohibited.  Use excerpts or links to copyrighted material.

=============================

Jack Taylor
Chainguard list Moderator

#27485 From: Schubley@...
Date: Sat Jun 27, 2009 6:11 pm
Subject: Pedestrian deaths
schubertjd
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Hi all,

My buddy Steve Schmitt quoted the following:

> fyi - from Roadbikerider.com:
>
> Cyclists in Victoria, Australia, now face 5 years in jail or a $68,000
> fine if they seriously injure or kill a pedestrian. The new law
> replaces a top penalty of $567.

and asked:

how does this compare with their penalties for seriously injuring or
killing
a pedestrian by motor vehicle?

To which I reply:

Obviously, there's no one answer to that.

The Australia information doesn't go into detail, but I suspect it's a
maximum penalty.  It'll be a while before anyone has a sense of how
much jail time perps actually serve for this violation.  I'd be
surprised if it comes close to five years -- but then again, you could
write a whole book about what I don't know about Australian criminal
law.

My casual observation has been that a motorist who causes the death of
another person through careless driving, when he gets prosecuted and
convicted (which isn't often enough), typically serves about a year in
jail.  Five years would be on the stiff side, and probably go to
someone who was a repeat offender, grossly drunk, said things that
offended the jury, etc.

This is an area that begs for lengthy nuanced discussion (but not in
today's e-mail!).  For example, the simple offense of operating while
drunk is a greater danger to society in a car than on a bicycle -- but
the danger is not completely absent for the bicycle operator.  Now:
when a drunken operator kills someone, should he get any slack because
he was "only" on a bicycle?  And should mere carelessness get a free
pass (as it so often does)?  Why should alcohol consumption (and, more
recently, cell phone use) be the only agent of carelessness that gets
tough criminal prosecution?

John Schubert
Limeport.org

#27484 From: "John Brooking" <john@...>
Date: Sat Jun 27, 2009 11:16 am
Subject: Re: [CG] Reactions to Long Beach Sharrows
johnbrooking4
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
--- In chainguard@yahoogroups.com, Wayne Pein <wpein@...> wrote:
> I doubt that much paint, guaranteed to wear off (to say nothing of its
> manufacture), is eco friendly.

Nor cheap.

#27483 From: "P. M. Summer" <pmsummer@...>
Date: Fri Jun 26, 2009 11:50 pm
Subject: Re: Reactions to Long Beach Sharrows
pmsummer
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Wayne, the cool thing is, when you mix ALL those colors together... you get
black.

--- In chainguard@yahoogroups.com, Wayne Pein <wpein@...> wrote:
>
> I think that gratuitous amount of paint elevates the paint is great
> syndrome to its illogical conclusion. But maybe not! Perhaps ALL
> roads/lanes should be painted some fun color to indicate some right or
> place to operate.
>
> Green=bicycles
> Blue=motorized wheelchairs, electric bikes, other low power MVs
> Purple=motorcycles
> Red=emergency vehicles
> Brown=heavy trucks
> Orange=cars and light trucks
> Yellow=submarines and other nuclear powered devices
>
> I doubt that much paint, guaranteed to wear off (to say nothing of its
> manufacture), is eco friendly.
>
> Wayne
>

#27482 From: Bob Sutterfield <bob@...>
Date: Fri Jun 26, 2009 10:15 pm
Subject: Re: [CG] Re: John's Analysis-- and what IS a well designed Shared Use Trail
bsut2002
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
 
Pete van Nuys wrote:
> That's the cool thing about educating cyclists,
> you teach them to deal with all of the hazards.

I tell people "We can teach you ways to improve your safety even on
such dangerous facilities as bike lanes and multi-use paths".  That
brings a mental double-take :-)

Messages 27482 - 27511 of 28284   Newest  |  < Newer  |  Older >  |  Oldest
Advanced
Add to My Yahoo!      XML What's This?

Copyright © 2009 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - Guidelines - Help