OK, I'm trying a new approach. This FAQ is only being posted to
alt.mountain-bike, and it's a response to a Mike Vandeman post. I changed
the subject, at the suggestion of others. If this confuses your newsreader,
or causes you any problems, please let me know, and I'll go back to leaving
the subject unchanged.
This is for newbies, or those who have not seen it before:
Revised 01-22-1999 <-Look, I'm Y2K compliant!
This informal "FAQ" is designed to familiarize the uninitiated with the
spewings of Mike Vandeman. Once you gain an understanding of the troll, and
his values, you will quickly see that arguing with him is a waste of time
and bandwidth. Please read this
before you decide to post anything to him. (And then, resist the
temptation.)
This FAQ is not endorsed by any "committee" or group pretending to preside
over alt.mountain-bike. After all, this newsgroup, and especially all in
the alt. family, is unmoderated and unregulated. (That is, after all, why
Mike Vandeman is still free to post here.)
Q: Who is Mike Vandeman?
A: Some guy who really hates mountain biking, thinks all mountain bikers
are habitual liars, and wants them banned from everywhere except paved
roads. Another possibility is, he's just a troll, doesn't care about
mountain biking or the environment, and is only here to abuse usenet.
Q: Is Mike Vandeman a kook?
A: You betcha, just read his posts. He's even won the prestigious Kook of
the Month award from alt.usenet.kooks!
Q: Is Mike Vandeman stupid?
A: No, he isn't. (He claims to have a Ph.D. in psychology.) That's what
makes him so difficult to deal with. If you're of average intelligence, you
will probably fall into several of his traps of logic, and completely miss
the
point of his posts. If you really have trouble expressing yourself,
especially in written form, he will publicly skewer you (and you're the one
he's really after, which is why he posts here). Even some mountain-bikers
in this group admire him for his ability to make a fool out of you.
Q: What exactly is the point to Mike Vandeman's posts?
A: He hates mountain biking, and wants it banned. It conflicts with his
desire to hike on trails he wants to himself. He doesn't want you mountain
biking past him when he's hiking, and really gets pissed when it happens on
a hiker only trail. Apparently this is a big problem in his area, but even
if it's only one errant MTBer every few months or one in his whole life,
it's
a big deal to Mike. He thinks *all* mountain bikers ride on hiker only
trails, and he thinks all mountain bikers are destructive, and behave the
same. It's bigotry, plain and simple.
He won't stop until all mountain biking is banned. (It's a personal
vendetta.) The purpose of his posts is to annoy mountain bikers and
manipulate them into making themselves look stupid, violent, or destructive.
He then takes those posts and passes them on to people unfamiliar with
mountain biking so they can form their own prejudiced, mis-informed
conclusions about the sport.
Q: I am genuinely concerned about mountain biking and the environment. How
can I make sure that I bike responsibly?
A: If that's your only concern, you don't even need to read the rest of
this FAQ! Just point your web browser to the International Mountain
Bicycling Association (IMBA) Web Site, (http://www.imba.com), and browse
specifically to the IMBA Rules of the Trail
(http://www.imba.com/rules.html), which provide some excellent guidelines to
protecting our sport, and the trails we ride. Read the Rules of the Trail,
and pass them on to your mountain biking buddies. Don't let people act
irresponsibly on the trails. Obey the right-of-way rules for shared trails,
which usually state that horses have the right of way, followed by hikers,
and finally, mountain bikers. (You have to yield to everyone. Deal with
it, or ride on bike only trails.)
Q: Well, if Mike Vandeman is intelligent, as you say, I should be able to
convince him, using reason and logic, that mountain biking isn't as harmful
as he says, shouldn't I?
A: No. You've already missed the point. Mike Vandeman hates mountain
biking. Someone who hates something isn't interested in logic unless it
supports him. If he had solid, scientific data to back his claims, he would
be more calm and reasonable.
Q: Is Mike Vandeman some sort of master of logic and debate?
A: Some say he is. The obvious flaws in some of his posts are intended to
trap you into responding to him. Once you respond, he will attempt to guide
you down a path where he'll prove you wrong anyway, likely about something
that is completely irrelevant to your point. You'll give up long before you
win. Even if you're right, you will soon find that arguing with him was a
waste of time. We've all been there.
Q: Does Mike Vandeman have any allies?
A: Well, that's debatable. There are posts with other names on them, like
Erutan000 (Nature spelled backwards), that sound an awful lot like Mike, and
say the same things. This is either a very close friend of Mike's, also in
the Bay Area of California, or it may be Mike himself. Also, there have
recently been posts from usenet re-mailers, that match the same patterns,
and spam the same newsgroups Mike does. He also likes to re-post e-mails
from so-called "anonymous" people who support him. One thing is certain:
His supporters are few.
Q: How can I tell if a post was made by Mike Vandeman?
A: Mike's posts follow certain patterns, so you can recognize them even
when he uses an alternate name, or re-mailer. His posts are usually some
inane reply to an e-mail he's received, a repost of some old message (e-mail
or usenet post, with no new content), or a re-post of some supposedly
anonymous supporter. He usually uses inflammatory titles like "Why do
mountain bikers lie?", and spams it to other newsgroups, like
rec.backcountry, rec.bicycles.soc, sci.environment, and
rec.animals.wildlife. If you see these newsgroups and the pattern above,
it's got to be Mikey!
Q: Does Mike Vandeman play golf?
A: Hell if I know, but I've enjoyed accusing him of this extremely
destructive sport. I even got a rise out of him with some of my posts, so I
suspect he might be a golfer. (This, of course, is irrelevant anyway.)
Q: Is Mike Vandeman mentally ill?
A: Well, I don't have a Ph.D. in psychology like Mike does, but some would
say that he suffers from obsessive compulsive disorder, which causes him to
obsess on mountain bikers, and the alt.mountain-bike newsgroup. He sure
does seem to get overly emotional in his crusades, and frequently re-posts
old items without adding any new content. He doesn't respond to logic and
rational debate. For a Ph.D., this seems abnormal to me.
Q: Isn't Mike Vandeman just a nutcase who doesn't know what the hell he's
talking about?
A: This kind of prejudice is exactly what Mikey preys upon. Most people
believe that if Mike is way off base on some things, he must be wrong about
everything. Arguing with such a person should be easy, right? Wrong! Mike
is right about a lot of things, and he will prove it. Like Bill Clinton,
he's not always saying what you think he's saying. He also knows when he's
wrong, better than you do. (That's how he knows which way to steer you in a
debate.) By the way, yes, he is a nutcase.
Q: So, what are Mike Vandeman's main arguments, and how do I fight them?
A: You don't fight them, but here's a sampling:
Argument: Mountain Biking causes damage to the environment
Traps: He's right, it does cause damage, although minor. The problem is,
people interpret "damage" to be the same as "significant damage". However,
it
isn't. Most people will try to deny it, which is what he wants, so he can
make you into a liar (which, of course, you are). Others will adopt an
antagonistic attitude and say "Yeah, I cause damage, I love to kill things
and destroy stuff. F*k You", etc. Mike loves this stuff. It supports his
claims that Mountain Bikers are A*holes. This is what he saves and passes
on.
The truth: MTBing does cause damage, though minor. You do kill plants and
animals when you ride. (They're usually insects or small weeds.) You also
frighten
animals when you go by (which is why they hide, but that's their natural
behavior). But Mike also causes damage when he hikes. In fact, we all kill
insects and minute creatures no matter where we walk. Hell, you even
swallow some spiders when you sleep! Mike's point is to exaggerate this to
paint a distorted picture of mountain bikers running over rabbits and other
ludicrous allegations. Before you decide to argue this point, he's heard it
all and ignored it all before.
Argument: Mountain Bikers are liars. (He loves this one, and will prove you
to be one if you fall into his traps.)
Traps: He's probably right. Most of us have been known to lie from time to
time. (I don't know anyone who hasn't.) Some people admit this truth, and
point out that Mike Vandeman is also a liar. (You're right, he is! You're
catching on!) By the way, Mike also has an alternate definition of "liar":
Someone who disagrees with him. By this definition, you are most certainly
a liar.
The truth: All humans are liars, so if you deny lying, he'll have a field
day
with you. Don't even bother pointing out this obvious truth for him, it
means nothing. Also, by being accused of lying, Mike is not necessarily
saying that you're dishonest. He's using his own definition. When he say's
"All mountain bikers are liars", well, he's right. Everyone lies sometimes.
When he says "Mountain bikers lie constantly", he means we all disagree with
him constantly, and in his own world, we're liars. So, by Mike's special
definition of "liar", he's also usually right. But Mike lies deliberately,
and stretches the truth, and exaggerates, to make his point against mountain
biking.
Argument: Mountain biking is easier than hiking. Used to prove that biking
is more destructive than hiking because you go farther into the woods. He
also loves this one because MTBers interpret this as him saying we are
wimps.
Traps: This is a truly pointless argument. What does he mean by easy? He
means distance covered for a given number of leg strokes. However, you,
still sore from that last killer climb, will tell him no way is mountain
biking easier. The last thing you want to admit is that a ride that damn
near killed you was easy! You just found out that walking up that hill was
easier than riding it! Mike has discovered one of your buttons and will
keep pushing it.
The truth: Depends on a precise definition of a vague, relative term like
"easy". In reality, the bicycle acts as a transmission between your legs
and the ground. You trade speed for torque. For speed, high gearing is
easier. For torque (climbing), low gearing is easier. Walking is the
ultimate "first gear" for humans. Mike doesn't understand the point any
better than you do, so these arguments can go on for weeks. Relax. It
means nothing.
Mike takes basic truths, words them to be inflammatory (liar!), and waits
for you to deny them. He uses these basic truths as twisted proofs of some
really outrageous and extreme arguments, and seems to deliberately employ
poor logic calculated to get you to take the bait. When you do, you'll
likely make a flawed argument yourself, and he'll make a fool out of you.
You lose. If you make no mistakes, he'll ignore you. You still lose. If
you think you're going to change his mind, you are sadly mistaken, and you
will lose. Arguing with Mike has been compared to teaching a pig to sing.
(Sing, pig, SING, dammit!)
Argument: Mountain bikers frequently harass hikers and wildlife and should
be banned from the wilderness.
Traps: This is one of his most inflammatory and overgeneralized statements,
and will get your blood boiling. This is where he goes over, and you'll
really want to set him straight. Forget it. He won't budge. You'll see
posts from little old ladies (presumably Vandeman himself) who claim a biker
whizzed by and knocked her down, stopped, turned back, flipped her off,
uttered profanities, and sped off in a cloud of wildlife killing dust,
leaving a trail of trash behind. (There's also the whipsnake story.) You
can't deny or disprove it, since you weren't there. Pointing out that
you've never committed such an act is irrelevant. He'll accuse you of
allowing it to happen.
The Truth: Who knows. If it happened once, a dozen times, or never at all,
it's irrelevant to the way most of us ride. No need to point this out to
Mike, though, he's ignored it all before. If you contradict one of his
fabrications or flaws, he'll call you a liar (which, you'll recall, you
are), or state one of the other truths above. Your discussion will degrade
to some irrelevant point where he's right. You lose. By the way, he'll
never get back to the point about which he's wrong, so you'll never get a
chance to prove it. Even if you prove him wrong for the rest of us (which
is easy), you'll never prove it to him, which was the point of your post in
the first place, wasn't it?
Argument: All Mountain Bikers <blah blah, something destructive>.
Traps: You: "Well, I've never <blah blah>" Mike: "Most mountain bikers
have <blah blah>, so by allowing your fellow bikers to <blah blah>, you are
part of the problem!" You: "I don't know of any bikers who <blah blah>,
and I would never allow anyone in my group to do that." Mike: "You are a
liar. I see mountain bikers <blah blah>-ing all the time. Why do mountain
bikers always lie?"
Truth: Mike's claims that all mountain bikers behave the same as the few
extremes he's supposedly observed, are prejudice, plain and simple. We all
know this, but arguing it is useless. He'll ignore you, call you a liar, or
lead you down some other path where he's right, like "Mountain bikes go
farther than hikers do."
Q: So, how can we get Mike Vandeman to stop posting to this newsgroup?
A: I don't know. Several things have been tried, and haven't worked,
including:
Ignore him: Even if you're not new, it's really hard to ignore him. Some
of his posts are so obviously out of whack you'll just *have* to reply, if
for no other reason, than to get it out of your system. Even if you decide
to ignore him, there is a constant influx of newbies (even newer than you)
who will go down the same road over and over with him, thinking they can
change him.
Invite him for a one-on-one meeting: Forget it. He won't bite. He's
afraid of getting the sh*t kicked out of him or worse. (The man does have
enemies, after all.)
E-mail him: There is currently an E-mail campaign against Mike. He hates
this. If your e-mail is well crafted, well reasoned, and clever, it will
probably get ignored. If, however, your e-mail is abusive or poorly
written, he will complain to your ISP about harassment or spamming (and
depending on your ISP, you might actually have problems from that), and he
will post your message to this newsgroup and a whole bunch of others, to
show how stupid you are. (That's what he's trolling for, you know.)
If you threaten him, he will really have a field day. He will post your
e-mail with some kind of heading like "Mountain biker threatens violence to
protect his destructive activities", and cross post it to a half-dozen
newsgroups who don't want to hear it. If you mail-bomb him (send multiple
messages filled with gibberish), he'll post that, essentially mail-bombing
usenet. E-mail him or don't. That's up to you. The funny thing is, he'll
reply to some e-mails to tell the sender they're not getting past his
filters! That is truly amazing!
Complain to his ISP for spamming: Been there. Done that. He successfully
argues his first amendment right to post to alt.mountain-bike. As long as
his posts are related to mountain biking, he does have a right to post here,
and it's not spam. (Spam us usually considered to be off-topic usenet
posts, usually ads, or unsolicited bulk e-mail.) Like it or not, messages
condemning mountain biking are on-topic. (Another one where Mike is right,
and his ISP agrees with him.)
The purpose of this FAQ is not to keep Mike Vandeman from posting here.
It's not to keep you from responding to him. It is, however, to keep you
from wasting time doing things that have been done before, which we're all
tired of reading over and over. We also would like to see Mike get tired of
us and move on with his life.
So, you're left with making a choice:
You can set your own newsreader to ignore all of his posts. This will keep
you from seeing him and from being upset by his rants. You can also go to
rec.bicycles.off-road. Mike's posts have been banned there because that NG
is moderated. (Note, that Mike isn't banned, just his posts. ;-)
Or, you can read his posts and responses, for a chuckle, and may even decide
to have fun with him, as many of us are tempted to do from time to time.
Think up something clever and amusing. Just understand that you will soon
tire of this exercise.
Q: So, what's the best way to respond to Mike's posts, if I choose to?
A: Amuse us. Amuse yourself. Don't take it seriously at all. If you
reply to Mike's post and he makes a fool out of you, you lose. If another
MTBer posts a reply to you, with "ROTFL" or other words of approval,
(especially if Mike ignores you), you win! (Come to think of it, even if
the only one chuckling at your post is you, you still win!)
However, you will likely grow tired of arguing with Mike, because it's like
playing tic-tac-toe with a 5 year old. You know all the moves, they are
few, and you get tired of winning all the time.
Just remember, we've already seen these before, so don't bother arguing
them:
* There are worse things than mountain biking. (Not to Mike.)
* Mike hikes, yet condemns hiking. (Yep, it's true.)
* Mike uses public transportation, which pollutes the air. (He doesn't
care.)
* Mike uses twisted logic to make his points.
* "Mike, why do you keep ignoring my question about <blah blah>?" (Perhaps
you have a valid point, which doesn't serve him.)
* Mike says MTBing is easier only because he's never done it. (And he knows
it pisses you off.)
* Maybe Mike should try mountain biking. (Many invites, yet he's never
taken anyone up on it. I wonder why!)
* Mike crossposts too much. (To get everyone sick of mountain biking.)
* Mike annoys all of us, and we wish he'd go away. (He already knows this.)
* Mike must be a golfer. (Rumor has it!)
* Mike is wasting his time here, since no one will change their mind.
(Except his sock puppets.)
* Mike should be working on larger issues like clear-cutting. (His mission
is banning mountain biking, though, remember?)
* Mike is giving true environmentalists a bad name. (He doesn't care.)
* Mike should be nicer to people, then they might agree with him more. (He
thinks the way to change people is to piss them off. How's it working?)
Q: If Mike Vandeman is such a nutcase, and people want him to go away, why
are so many people talking about him? What's the fascination?
A: I suspect he really has a Ph.D. in psychology. Initially, he causes us
to question a sport we find harmless. Then, he irritates and infuriates us
with his outlandish claims. He knows exactly which buttons to push to get a
rise out of old timers as well as a continuous influx of newbies. Perhaps
his only true mission is to generate long off-topic threads and dominate the
newsgroup.
Q: So what makes you such an expert on Mike Vandeman, and his use of logic?
A: Not a damn thing. It's just my opinion!
Q: Where can I learn more about Mike Vandeman?
A: Why? OK, from the fool himself:
http://www.imaja.com/change/environment/mvarticles
or, an excellent, balanced examination of Mike's claims:
http://members.xoom.com/bbauer/environ.html
(Don't worry, ountain biking doesn't cause significant damage to natural
areas.
It's about the same as walking.)
Relax... It's only the Internet!
Dan
---
"Every absurdity has a champion to defend it" -- Oliver Goldsmith
Lurker2 "at" usa "dot" net
Include "!NS!" in subject to avoid the junk heap.
|
