| |
Main
Date: 09 Aug 2006 11:24:22
From: donquijote1954
Subject: Do you feel intimidated by Traffic? Ole!
|
(I hope you see the need for a separate thread where the focus is
strictly bikes. Well, you may occasionally launch your tirades against
bad drivers like these...)
This is my original post...
I know, you only dare ride a stationary bike, or perhaps you are breve
enough to bike to work, but do you still feel intimidated by traffic?
Well, it's like asking the bullfighter if he feels intimidated by the
beast, only that you are not looking for trouble and that the beast we
are facing can absolutely be tamed --if only the government cared.
So is the cyclist out there a bit of a bullfighter? Do you feel that
black SUV charging at you like a raging bull? Ole!
http://webspawner.com/users/bikeforpeace
***
And this is the first response it drew...
Funny, I was thinking about posting today about an encounter I had this
morning with a motorist. I have nothing against motorists and in fact
on the weekend when going out with the family, I am one myself. What I
do have a problem with is ignorance.
This morning I am on a four lane, one-way street, taking up a good
portion of the right lane when a car comes behind me and honks. I don't
yell, don't curse, don't flash any vulgar signs, but I do wave in a "go
around me" sort of manner. Car decides to do that, but while passing me
decides to slow down and tell me that I should move to the side. Keep
in mind that this guy has 3 other perfectly good lanes to use, but he
*really* needs to use the one that I am in.
Two seconds later the guy is stuck at a red light so I pull up next to
him and our little conversation went something like this.
ACE: Hey buddy, by law I am allowed to use the entire lane.
Motorist: You don't have a mirror though do you?
A: No, I am not required to have one.
M: Just b/c you are on a ten-speed does not make you as fast as a car.
A: It is not a ten-speed, it is a single-speed. (I was on my fixed gear
Schwinn)
M: Whatever, you need to move to the side.
A: I have a right to the lane by law.
M: The law does not mean $H**. Get out of here, just go to your job.
A: I don't have a job.
M: Get the F**K OUT OF HERE.
At that point, I just took off b/c the driver was getting hostile and I
was starting to get a bit sarcastic which happens when the conversation
turns a bit circular and facts are being ignored. For my safety and all
those involved I felt moving on at that point was the right move.
***
And finally my comment on the bad driver...
Not to be rude, but that guy deserved to eat banana, I mean a good
middle finger, even if written on the back of a t-shirt. Something like
this...
http:/cafepress.com/peacebanana
(I do wear it all the time. Call it PREEMPTIVE STRIKE)
|
|
| |
Date: 16 Aug 2006 07:50:24
From: donquijote1954
Subject: Re: it's the excitement of getting gored
|
""Me too! I like to ride out there with the bullies. It's fast and it's
the excitement of getting gored anytime. Ole!""
"Quit tilting at windmills and take off that red cape! ("No capes!"-
Edna Mode)
You still riding that Speed SP ("Sancho Panza")?"
No, now DonQuixote is riding a hybrid and a Trek F400. The latter seems
particularly fitting to fight the bullies. It's most agile and easy to
run with.
The red cape I only use when I want to piss the stupid beast.
Otherwise, I use my banana shirts. They say, "You Can Eat My Banana."
Hope the bull eats banana.
|
| |
Date: 15 Aug 2006 08:15:25
From: donquijote1954
Subject: Re: it's the excitement of getting gored
|
""In Toronto, bicycles with a wheel size of 24 inches or less are
allowed to ride on the sidewalk.""
"While that is a convenience, it would be hard to go any appreciable
distance at any appreciable speed on the sidewalk. Also, apart from the
dangers to pedestrians, there is the risk of a car turning and striking
the cyclist crossing in the cross-walk. Car drivers seem not to expect
to find cyclists where pedestrians are suposed to be.
Also, it occurs to me that whoever made that rule was assuming the
smaller-wheeled bikes would be ridden by children, at low speeds and
probably under supervision. I'm clipping along on my 20"-wheeld cycle
at 15 to 20 MPH. That don't work on the sidewalk!"
Me too! I like to ride out there with the bullies. It's fast and it's
the excitement of getting gored anytime. Ole!
|
| |
Date: 14 Aug 2006 12:07:19
From: donquijote1954
Subject: Re: THE BICYCLE BULLY
|
(I'm quoting from Dahon commuting forum)
"I'm not actually against the idea of separate bike lanes, but I have
my doubts about them. A few points to consider.
Bike lanes which keep cyclists all the way to the right (or left for
our British friends) are useless when you need to make a left turn
(right turn in the UK ).
Cars are still going to make turns through the bike lanes, or try to
use them to edge around other cars waiting to make left turns. Simply
king the lanes won't help much if you don't have good police
enforcement of the laws concerning them.
Trash is still going to get swept to the side, louts are still going to
throw glass bottles out of car windows toward the side, the side of the
road is still going to be where the storm drains are. The difference is
that, when a bicyclist moves out of the bike lane to get around such
obstructions, he may now be breaking the law. He will certainly be
doing something that motorists don't expect, and may not be prepared
for.
The roads in many places, like my part of Connecticut, are too narrow
to k off a substantial portion as a separate lane. Cars and bikes
can co-exist as things are by exhibiting a little courtesy and
consideration, but making a new lane will involve widening the road.
Don't kid yourself that tax funds will be diverted from other, less
worthy, projects. Your taxes will go up.
By the way, concerning my rek about courtesy and consideration, I
find that most motorists are easy enough to get along with, even if
they have some strange ideas of how bicyclists "should" act.
Unfortunately, there is a large minority of ignorant &*%!!s, who
shouldn't be on the road.
Okay, I'll add this note. Some bicyclists are ignorant &*%!!s too, but
they're not quite as dangerous to others."
Howdy!
I agree there are problems with bike lanes, but they would have an
advantage far greater than its minuses: BRINGING PEOPLE OUT. All the
reports I've seeing cite SAFETY IN NUMBERS since those drivers holding
A LICENSE TO KILL (too many of those) then would be looking out for THE
LITTLE ONES (aka the cyclists). The current DARWINIAN ROADS we got
though are very intimidating for the little ones of the jungle.
Other than that we could do something like TAKING THE LANE, but it
would require some cooperation among the little ones. Like in the
movie...
THE ANT BULLY
In The Ant Bully, ants are like people - except better.
I mean, given the chance, most humans would execute or at least lock up
a genocidal maniac. But the ant queen merely makes Lucas hang out with
the animals he used to kill on a daily basis.
The ants have a complex society, religion and court of law. Their sense
of shared purpose and selflessness point to higher civilisation, even
if they love to eat caterpillar poop.
But people are ruthless and destroy them for no apparent reason.
There is a moral about teamwork in there somewhere...
http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/guide/story/0,4136,111416,00.html
PERHAPS WE OUGHT TO DRAW A MORAL OF THE STORY: THE BICYCLE BULLY IS NO
GOOD, AND IT MUST BE SHRANK TO SIZE.
|
| |
Date: 10 Aug 2006 14:48:07
From: donquijote1954
Subject: Re: Do you feel intimidated by Traffic? Ole!
|
Raptor wrote:
> > I wonder about the veracity of that last statement. What precentage of the
> > time is the error due to errors in judgment or inattention on the part of
> > the cyclist?
>
> Having no statistics - there probably being no statistics about such
> things - my statement means exactly what I say it means. :) One doesn't
> make the transformation from "person on a bike" to "cyclist" without
> accruing some good judgment. But mistakes happen: I've struck two
> vehicles on my bike, which is as many as have struck me.
>
> I'm holding 'em to a draw, so far!
So the bullfighter has punched the bull in the head and the bull was
dead then and there.
I'm still more concerned about the cars and SUVs hitting me!
|
| |
Date: 10 Aug 2006 14:44:44
From: donquijote1954
Subject: Re: Do you feel intimidated by Traffic? Ole!
|
Chuck Anderson wrote:
> Edward Dolan wrote:
> > "Raptor" <lawall@xmission.com> wrote in message
> > news:ebdn8d$kg9$1@news.xmission.com...
> >
> > [newsgroups trimmed]
> >
> Not sufficiently! Who are all you monkeys with keyboards?
> > [...]
> >
> Read the rec.bicycles FAQ, do what it says, and pick the ONE newsgroup
> your "discussion" belongs in.
Why don't you tell us where it does NOT belong?
|
| | |
Date: 10 Aug 2006 18:22:20
From: Pat in TX
Subject: Re: Do you feel intimidated by Traffic? Ole!
|
>> >
>> Read the rec.bicycles FAQ, do what it says, and pick the ONE newsgroup
>> your "discussion" belongs in.
>
> Why don't you tell us where it does NOT belong?
He wasn't talking to you--he was talking to the idiot troll Ed
something-or-other which we have all kill-filed.
>
|
| | | |
Date: 13 Aug 2006 00:07:56
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Do you feel intimidated by Traffic? Ole!
|
"Pat in TX" <Pat@nearnews.com > wrote in message
news:4k1tdqFabeqbU1@individual.net...
>
>>> >
>>> Read the rec.bicycles FAQ, do what it says, and pick the ONE newsgroup
>>> your "discussion" belongs in.
>>
>> Why don't you tell us where it does NOT belong?
>
> He wasn't talking to you--he was talking to the idiot troll Ed
> something-or-other which we have all kill-filed.
Pat in TX has never yet been up to speed on anything that is occurring on
any newsgroup, let alone RBM. He should stay in TX and not bother the rest
of us with his insanely stupid messages.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 10 Aug 2006 14:42:26
From: donquijote1954
Subject: Re: Do you feel intimidated by Traffic? Ole!
|
Jack May wrote:
> "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:12dm6qcoj3aal00@news.supernews.com...
>
> > I wonder about the veracity of that last statement. What precentage of
> > the time is the error due to errors in judgment or inattention on the part
> > of the cyclist?
>
> You didn't know that cyclist are perfect human beings with no faults and
> make no mistakes as they always loudly proclaim :-)
>
> That is why cyclist are inherently allowed to violate all traffic laws and
> blame any problems on those evil other vehicles that are required to follow
> the laws, just because they are evil.
Let me see. The polluting SUV crowd is the Religious Right (judging by
their godly bumper stickers) and the frugal cyclists are the evil
people. Pollution is good and nature and peace are bad. Isn't that
Republican language what Orwell called "Newspeak" or something to that
effect?
|
| |
Date: 10 Aug 2006 08:35:54
From: donquijote1954
Subject: Re: Do you feel intimidated by Traffic? Ole!
|
Raptor wrote:
> donquijote1954 wrote:
> > (I hope you see the need for a separate thread where the focus is
> > strictly bikes. Well, you may occasionally launch your tirades against
> > bad drivers like these...)
> >
> > This is my original post...
> >
> > I know, you only dare ride a stationary bike, or perhaps you are breve
> > enough to bike to work, but do you still feel intimidated by traffic?
> > Well, it's like asking the bullfighter if he feels intimidated by the
> > beast, only that you are not looking for trouble and that the beast we
> > are facing can absolutely be tamed --if only the government cared.
> >
> > So is the cyclist out there a bit of a bullfighter? Do you feel that
> > black SUV charging at you like a raging bull? Ole!
> >
> > http://webspawner.com/users/bikeforpeace
>
> A bullfighter... yeah, that works. Few drivers have spikes driven into
> their groins to piss them off. Well, none do, but there are always
> thousands of cars on the route, and the odds are a few of them feel a
> bit "bullish." Other odds limit the chance that one of these will be in
> your lane or crossing your path when it matters.
>
Drivers are bullish when they don't have any sword hanging over them
for intimidating others. In that sense, the system allows that happen
by not taming the beast. If it was given the same priority as DUIs, we
would probably be much safer. At least we wouldn't have the bull
roaming free.
|
| |
Date: 10 Aug 2006 07:59:43
From: StephanieM
Subject: Re: Do you feel intimidated by Traffic? Ole!
|
Roger Zoul wrote:
> Raptor wrote:
> :: It takes a little bit of psychosis for someone to play chicken with a
> :: completely defenseless cyclist. Thankfully, very few people are
> :: psychotic, AND psychotic behind the wheel. The vast majority of motor
> :: vehicle versus cyclist (as opposed to "person on a bike") are due to
> :: errors in judgment or inattention, almost always on the part of the
> :: driver.
Yes, I generally try to ride traffic free roads. It's preferrable, but
it isn't always possible. For me that means a 45 mile one way trip to
do this. My honest thoughts are it will be a quick death.
|
| |
Date: 09 Aug 2006 16:27:09
From: Raptor
Subject: Re: Do you feel intimidated by Traffic? Ole!
|
donquijote1954 wrote:
> (I hope you see the need for a separate thread where the focus is
> strictly bikes. Well, you may occasionally launch your tirades against
> bad drivers like these...)
>
> This is my original post...
>
> I know, you only dare ride a stationary bike, or perhaps you are breve
> enough to bike to work, but do you still feel intimidated by traffic?
> Well, it's like asking the bullfighter if he feels intimidated by the
> beast, only that you are not looking for trouble and that the beast we
> are facing can absolutely be tamed --if only the government cared.
>
> So is the cyclist out there a bit of a bullfighter? Do you feel that
> black SUV charging at you like a raging bull? Ole!
>
> http://webspawner.com/users/bikeforpeace
A bullfighter... yeah, that works. Few drivers have spikes driven into
their groins to piss them off. Well, none do, but there are always
thousands of cars on the route, and the odds are a few of them feel a
bit "bullish." Other odds limit the chance that one of these will be in
your lane or crossing your path when it matters.
It takes a little bit of psychosis for someone to play chicken with a
completely defenseless cyclist. Thankfully, very few people are
psychotic, AND psychotic behind the wheel. The vast majority of motor
vehicle versus cyclist (as opposed to "person on a bike") are due to
errors in judgment or inattention, almost always on the part of the driver.
I pick routes with an eye for ample shoulder space. A wide usable
shoulder is armor for a bike rider. When the shoulder narrows or
disappears, I take the lane and hammer. It's a little like sidestepping
the charging bull.
I actually prefer a high-traffic, medium to high speed route through
town with many intersections and driveways. It's the main "cruising"
route, in fact. It means to me that drivers are always alert. I'm
counting on that alertness. The judgment errors are just par for the
course, and that's where the bullfighting comes in.
--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall
I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the
trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view,
the most insidious of traitors."
George H.W. Bush, April 16, 1999,
|
| | |
Date: 10 Aug 2006 07:40:59
From: Roger Zoul
Subject: Re: Do you feel intimidated by Traffic? Ole!
|
Raptor wrote:
:: It takes a little bit of psychosis for someone to play chicken with a
:: completely defenseless cyclist. Thankfully, very few people are
:: psychotic, AND psychotic behind the wheel. The vast majority of motor
:: vehicle versus cyclist (as opposed to "person on a bike") are due to
:: errors in judgment or inattention, almost always on the part of the
:: driver.
I wonder about the veracity of that last statement. What precentage of the
time is the error due to errors in judgment or inattention on the part of
the cyclist?
|
| | | |
Date: 10 Aug 2006 15:41:41
From: Raptor
Subject: Re: Do you feel intimidated by Traffic? Ole!
|
Roger Zoul wrote:
> Raptor wrote:
The vast majority of motor
> :: vehicle versus cyclist (as opposed to "person on a bike") are due to
> :: errors in judgment or inattention, almost always on the part of the
> :: driver.
>
> I wonder about the veracity of that last statement. What precentage of the
> time is the error due to errors in judgment or inattention on the part of
> the cyclist?
Having no statistics - there probably being no statistics about such
things - my statement means exactly what I say it means. :) One doesn't
make the transformation from "person on a bike" to "cyclist" without
accruing some good judgment. But mistakes happen: I've struck two
vehicles on my bike, which is as many as have struck me.
I'm holding 'em to a draw, so far!
--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall
I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the
trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view,
the most insidious of traitors."
George H.W. Bush, April 16, 1999,
|
| | | | |
Date: 10 Aug 2006 18:57:31
From: Roger Zoul
Subject: Re: Do you feel intimidated by Traffic? Ole!
|
Raptor wrote:
:: Roger Zoul wrote:
::: Raptor wrote:
:: The vast majority of motor
::::: vehicle versus cyclist (as opposed to "person on a bike") are due
::::: to errors in judgment or inattention, almost always on the part
::::: of the driver.
:::
::: I wonder about the veracity of that last statement. What
::: precentage of the time is the error due to errors in judgment or
::: inattention on the part of the cyclist?
::
:: Having no statistics - there probably being no statistics about such
:: things - my statement means exactly what I say it means. :) One
:: doesn't make the transformation from "person on a bike" to "cyclist"
:: without accruing some good judgment.
Right...those that don't make the transformation (person-on-a-bike) don't
because they get flattened by a vehicle first (poor judgment). Those that
make it, are the ones called "cyclists" (good judgment).
:)
|
| | | |
Date: 10 Aug 2006 10:37:33
From: Jack May
Subject: Re: Do you feel intimidated by Traffic? Ole!
|
"Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:12dm6qcoj3aal00@news.supernews.com...
> I wonder about the veracity of that last statement. What precentage of
> the time is the error due to errors in judgment or inattention on the part
> of the cyclist?
You didn't know that cyclist are perfect human beings with no faults and
make no mistakes as they always loudly proclaim :-)
That is why cyclist are inherently allowed to violate all traffic laws and
blame any problems on those evil other vehicles that are required to follow
the laws, just because they are evil.
|
| | |
Date: 10 Aug 2006 04:07:21
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Do you feel intimidated by Traffic? Ole!
|
"Raptor" <lawall@xmission.com > wrote in message
news:ebdn8d$kg9$1@news.xmission.com...
[newsgroups trimmed]
[...]
> A bullfighter... yeah, that works. Few drivers have spikes driven into
> their groins to piss them off. Well, none do, but there are always
> thousands of cars on the route, and the odds are a few of them feel a bit
> "bullish." Other odds limit the chance that one of these will be in your
> lane or crossing your path when it matters.
Another Russian roulette player!
> It takes a little bit of psychosis for someone to play chicken with a
> completely defenseless cyclist. Thankfully, very few people are psychotic,
> AND psychotic behind the wheel. The vast majority of motor vehicle versus
> cyclist (as opposed to "person on a bike") are due to errors in judgment
> or inattention, almost always on the part of the driver.
There are millions of very stupid drivers on the roads of the U.S. Any idiot
at all can get a driver's license. I have seen so many cyclists in really
horrible accidents with motor vehicles that I am fearful of riding my bike
on any number of heavily trafficked roads. You NEVER want to be on a two
lane major highway with no shoulder. Damn it, I said NEVER and I meant
NEVER!
> I pick routes with an eye for ample shoulder space. A wide usable shoulder
> is armor for a bike rider. When the shoulder narrows or disappears, I take
> the lane and hammer. It's a little like sidestepping the charging bull.
Very wise of you to pick roads with shoulders upon which to ride.
> I actually prefer a high-traffic, medium to high speed route through town
> with many intersections and driveways. It's the main "cruising" route, in
> fact. It means to me that drivers are always alert. I'm counting on that
> alertness. The judgment errors are just par for the course, and that's
> where the bullfighting comes in.
It is really quite amazing how we count on drivers to watch out for us.
However, I know the world's dumbest driver. Every time he gets behind the
wheel, there is an going to be an accident down the road. Believe me, you do
not want to be anywhere near this dolt when he is driving his car.
A cyclist should always prefer traffic free streets. Even if it means you
have to go slower, you will likely live longer. A cyclist who likes to mix
with traffic is not long for this world.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | |
Date: 10 Aug 2006 15:38:41
From: Raptor
Subject: Re: Do you feel intimidated by Traffic? Ole!
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Raptor" <lawall@xmission.com> wrote in message
> news:ebdn8d$kg9$1@news.xmission.com...
>
> [newsgroups trimmed]
>
> [...]
>
>> A bullfighter... yeah, that works. Few drivers have spikes driven into
>> their groins to piss them off. Well, none do, but there are always
>> thousands of cars on the route, and the odds are a few of them feel a bit
>> "bullish." Other odds limit the chance that one of these will be in your
>> lane or crossing your path when it matters.
>
> Another Russian roulette player!
http://www.lalatimes.com/weird/index.php?name=mansink0417&PHPSESSID=0030682ebe6b640967ec26b32b631c78
http://makeashorterlink.com/?X53023B8D
(Sinkhole swallows man relaxing in his living room, killing him.)
>> It takes a little bit of psychosis for someone to play chicken with a
>> completely defenseless cyclist. Thankfully, very few people are psychotic,
>> AND psychotic behind the wheel. The vast majority of motor vehicle versus
>> cyclist (as opposed to "person on a bike") are due to errors in judgment
>> or inattention, almost always on the part of the driver.
>
> There are millions of very stupid drivers on the roads of the U.S. Any idiot
> at all can get a driver's license. I have seen so many cyclists in really
> horrible accidents with motor vehicles that I am fearful of riding my bike
> on any number of heavily trafficked roads. You NEVER want to be on a two
> lane major highway with no shoulder. Damn it, I said NEVER and I meant
> NEVER!
In a race with traffic control, such roads are lovely. :)
>> I pick routes with an eye for ample shoulder space. A wide usable shoulder
>> is armor for a bike rider. When the shoulder narrows or disappears, I take
>> the lane and hammer. It's a little like sidestepping the charging bull.
>
> Very wise of you to pick roads with shoulders upon which to ride.
>
>> I actually prefer a high-traffic, medium to high speed route through town
>> with many intersections and driveways. It's the main "cruising" route, in
>> fact. It means to me that drivers are always alert. I'm counting on that
>> alertness. The judgment errors are just par for the course, and that's
>> where the bullfighting comes in.
>
> It is really quite amazing how we count on drivers to watch out for us.
> However, I know the world's dumbest driver. Every time he gets behind the
> wheel, there is an going to be an accident down the road. Believe me, you do
> not want to be anywhere near this dolt when he is driving his car.
>
> A cyclist should always prefer traffic free streets. Even if it means you
> have to go slower, you will likely live longer. A cyclist who likes to mix
> with traffic is not long for this world.
That's the theory, at least. I've been mixing it up with traffic in a
few locales for two decades without a major incident.
--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall
I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the
trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view,
the most insidious of traitors."
George H.W. Bush, April 16, 1999,
|
| | | | |
Date: 12 Aug 2006 23:18:23
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Do you feel intimidated by Traffic? Ole!
|
"Raptor" <lawall@xmission.com > wrote in message
news:ebg8pd$b5c$1@news.xmission.com...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
>> A cyclist should always prefer traffic free streets. Even if it means you
>> have to go slower, you will likely live longer. A cyclist who likes to
>> mix with traffic is not long for this world.
>
> That's the theory, at least. I've been mixing it up with traffic in a few
> locales for two decades without a major incident.
You will always be much safer on a street with little or no traffic than you
will be on a street with lots of traffic. Elementary, my dear Watson!
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| | | |
Date: 10 Aug 2006 13:19:12
From: Chuck Anderson
Subject: Re: Do you feel intimidated by Traffic? Ole!
|
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Raptor" <lawall@xmission.com> wrote in message
> news:ebdn8d$kg9$1@news.xmission.com...
>
> [newsgroups trimmed]
>
Not sufficiently! Who are all you monkeys with keyboards?
> [...]
>
Read the rec.bicycles FAQ, do what it says, and pick the ONE newsgroup
your "discussion" belongs in.
--
*****************************
Chuck Anderson • Boulder, CO
http://www.CycleTourist.com
*****************************
|
| | | | |
Date: 12 Aug 2006 23:14:36
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Do you feel intimidated by Traffic? Ole!
|
"Chuck Anderson" <websiteaddress@seemy.sig > wrote in message
news:5LadnTT9f_MwG0bZnZ2dnUVZ_vadnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "Raptor" <lawall@xmission.com> wrote in message
>> news:ebdn8d$kg9$1@news.xmission.com...
>>
>> [newsgroups trimmed]
>>
> Not sufficiently! Who are all you monkeys with keyboards?
>> [...]
>>
> Read the rec.bicycles FAQ, do what it says, and pick the ONE newsgroup
> your "discussion" belongs in.
Chuck, the message I posted had to do with safety issues in connection with
cycling. Therefore, it can be on all the cycling newsgroups where riding
your bike on the streets and roads applies. However, I do agree with you
that we should not engage in too much cross posting as every newsgroup has
its own culture which differs from the others.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
|
