--- In criticalmass2@yahoogroups.com, Amigiac <cm@a...> wrote:
> It's just that I feel bike safety is one of the important issues,
> perhaps there is a much greater cultural difference between our
> countries. I found the triad a bit too general for use over here.

TF: Let me guess about what the relevent cultural difference might
be: Based on both an article by John Forester that I read in the late
1980s (he's spent a lot of time in the UK; I haven't), and some
cycling that I myself did in the Bahamas during the same time period,
popular opinion in Great Britain and its colonies never stopped
thinking of bicycles as vehicles. (This is because, as I recall
Forester explaining in the article, cars took more generations to get
phased into the traffic mix there than in America.) More recent
snippets indicate that that difference between our country has faded
somewhat since the 1980s, but is it still _largely_ true? If so, then
I think I understand your point: The Triad _is_ too general for a
country where popular opinion _already_ thinks of bicycles as
vehicles. Note in the Triad where it says that the purpose is just to
correct the more common errors. So, yes, in a country or era
where/when the common errors are different, the Triad's two Codes of
Conduct would be different. Indeed, I once proposed the formation of
a Triadal Core Protection Board to discuss just that (but, alas, got
no response, although I do have a framed copy of a 1994 document in
which John Forester indicates support of the Triad as is). I made it
clear that that's all negotiable (and reviewable semi-centennially)
as long as the Bicyclist's Bill of Rights and Duties (which is the
Triad's sacred "Core" and which was the official freight of The Last
Bike Ride Out of the 20th Century http://photos.yahoo.com/TomFrostJr)
is non-negotiable, sacred, immortal and has no exceptions.

- TF



>
> I'm not discussing jym, I'm discussing the triad.
>
> Yeah brake fluid, its quite flammable as I remember, not a good
idea to
> mess around with.
>
> As for changing our name, that will never happen, we have been
Critical
> Mass for nearly 12 years! (next April is our birthday). The police
now
> ride mountain bikes and are quite friendly most of the time, I've
even
> see one plod telling someone where we meet and to make sure they
bring
> bikes. We have made a difference, mostly by not arguing between
ourselves.
>
> Misleading over the rear light advice, you can be fined £30 for not
> having one at night in London.
>
> The fact that you offer rules of equal harshness to motorists does
not
> make the cycle advice any more palatable, I don't know the answer,
but
> this is a discussion list, maybe someone else has a reasonable
suggestion.
>
> No I don't mean Jym, remember I'm discussing the triad, not jym.
>
> Those who need them, lets think, how about the elderly, disabled or
> people with stuff to move, also people in remote areas.
>
> What's with the rant at the bottom of your email? I was only
talking
> about the triad.
>
>
>
>
> bumpkinbubba wrote:
>
> >--- In criticalmass2@yahoogroups.com, "Amigiac [London, UK]"
> ><cm@a...> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Bubba, you really should re-think this to be more useful to
> >>
> >>
> >cyclists,
> >
> >
> >>how about advice for junctions/turning/changing lanes should we
> >>
> >>
> >have
> >
> >
> >>bell's air-horns water-pistols?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >TF: There are plenty of other resources out there - such as
> >http://www.JohnForester.com - for those that are sufficiently
> >sophisticated to be interested in such spelling out of details.
The
> >whole idea of the Triad, on the other hand, is to convey the
> >principles in a form that's sufficiently succinct to fit on a
leaflet
> >that Joe Six-Pack is likely to read.
> >
> >Furthermore, all of those details of which you speak (with the
> >exception of the water pistols) can also be found between the
Triad's
> >lines by any intelligent person. Many of them - such as whether a
> >cyclist must have a noise-making device or whether his/her ability
to
> >simply shout in emergency suffices as the equivalent of a car's
horn -
> > are open to interpretation, and that's the beauty of the Triad;
my
> >goal when cooking it up was to make it as uncontroversial as
possible
> >to everybody except the "_Jym_"s of the world.
> >
> >Now, about the water pistols: If you want to know what a really
> >deluxe (albeit illegal and untriadal) use of them is for a
cyclist,
> >get some perspective by working at an auto-repair shop. One that
> >works on parts other than the propulsion system. But I like the
> >finish on my motor vehicles and am therefore not going to divulge
the
> >secret on a C******* M*** list.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>Also the list is not specific to any one country, in the UK we
have
> >>
> >>
> >to
> >
> >
> >>use rear lights,
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >TF: And in New York too, I understand. Or, regarding another part
of
> >the Triad, some left-coast cyclists including some that could ride
> >rings around "_Jym_"/"Abe", keep on telling me that the law in
> >California doesn't define a bicycle as a vehicle. Well I've told
them
> >that that's irrelevant to the accuracy of the Triad since any law
> >that doesn't define a bicycle as a vehicle is in _violation_ of
the
> >Triad. Similarly, any local law that does or doesn't require a
> >taillight (an equipment item the importance of which is more open
to
> >interpretation than, say, the fact that a bicycle is a vehicle),
> >doesn't change the fact emphasized in the Triad that a taillight
is
> >both 1) recommended and 2) not a substitute for a headlight and
rear
> >reflector.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>and the police wave us through red lights on CM.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >TF: Very good. The Triad only says to wait at red lights at all
> >times "regardless of convenience", not "regardless of whether an
> >authorized marshal is waving you through". (Nor - to answer
another
> >common critique of the Triad - does it say, "regardless of whether
> >the signal loop is detecting you".)
> >
> >If your particular event is _generally_ being run as properly as
you
> >make it sound like it is (e.g. with _authorized_ marshals, as
opposed
> >to with plainclothes/spandex-clad road ragers calling
> >themselves "corkers"), then why don't you change the name of it to
> >something other than C******* M*** and thereby attract some real
> >cyclists to it?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>Your email does not go far enough to be useful and is misleading
> >>
> >>
> >for
> >
> >
> >>people outside of the US.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >TF: Misleading? How? (I mean besides in the nitpicking way that
I've
> >refuted above.) I was very careful to include you countries of
left-
> >side drivers, for example, by having the Triad say "same direction
as
> >the other vehicles on their side of the road" rather than "right
> >side".
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>Oh also this whole CYCLISTS SHALL business is
> >>really condescending, you should rephrase it to sound less
preachy.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >TF: The Triad is equally preachy to motorists as to cyclists (a
> >feature that I suspect is more obvious in the paper version, which
> >has the two Codes of Conduct side by side rather than one above
the
> >other; I don't know how to do that on the internet). But I
wouldn't
> >mind having it appear less preachy period. So, what headings would
> >you suggest as alternatives to "CYCLISTS SHALL" and "MOTORISTS
> >SHALL"?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>Try to celebrate bikes, we don't need to fit in, we need to take
> >>
> >>
> >over,
> >
> >
> >>leave the cars for those who really need them.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >TF: You mean like "_Jym_" when he borrows cars when _he_ "needs"
them
> >according to _his_ criteria of "need" to get to the airport? His
> >confession of this can be found by looking deep enough in the
CarFree
> >yahoo group archives, as can his subsequent unprovoked leap onto a
> >bandwagon of attacks on me for being allegedly less carfree than
him
> >and his fellow not-having-any-farm-to-run carfree-list-incrowd
> >members.
> >
> >Wake up and smell the coffee, ladies and gentlemen: Cyclists
> >_must_ "fit in" because C******* M*** _isn't_ _capable_ of "taking
> >over". I receive off-list fan mail, and it includes some from a
> >source on the left coast who informs me that the only way C*******
> >M*** even succeeds in taking over a few streets, for a few minutes
> >each, per month, in the CM capital of the world - San Fransisco! -
is
> >by having many participants from the Thule car-top rack crowd (you
> >know, the yuppies who motor to the starts of bike rides - and I
guess
> >they broke speed laws while doing it, based on what I've
consistently
> >observed of their east-coast, League of American Liberal
Bicyclists
> >counterparts) to participate in CM and thereby inflate CM's
numbers!
> >
> >
> >- Tom Frost Jr.
> >Captain and Sponsor, The Last Bike Ride Out of the 20th Century
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>bumpkinbubba wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>BICYCLISTS' RIGHTS TRIAD:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>