Harbour Bridge Ride - Critical Mass
scotty72
For those who are interested in this.
Meet from 5:30p for 6pm start at the Hyde Park (north) fountain this
Friday for the once a year bicycle ride over the coat-hanger.
See you there
Scotty
--
scotty72
Alan Erskine
news:scotty7...@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com...
>
> For those who are interested in this.
>
> Meet from 5:30p for 6pm start at the Hyde Park (north) fountain this
> Friday for the once a year bicycle ride over the coat-hanger.
>
> See you there
No, you won't. I wouldn't touch Critical Mess with a broom handle; they
give all cyclists a bad name.
--
Alan Erskine
Alaner...@bigpond.com
DaveB
and helmets cause more injuries than they save, and you shouldn't run
red lights, and Treks are better than Giants, and ....
Give it a rest Alan, it's been done to death.
DaveB
Alan Erskine
news:4563d309$0$5106$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Give it a rest Alan, it's been done to death.
Worse than that, their last ride in Melbourne was an absolute fizzer -
didn't even have the guts to go ahead and carry out their threat.
--
Alan Erskine
Alaner...@bigpond.com
Duncan
Maybe... but Alan's right about CM.. I'll be watching out extra
carefully come Friday afternoon for all the pissed off drivers on my
way home.
Duncan
This (http://tinyurl.com/y379xk) is precisely why CM isn't necessarily
a good thing.
Zebee Johnstone
Duncan <dunca...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>
> This (http://tinyurl.com/y379xk) is precisely why CM isn't necessarily
> a good thing.
I left work a bit before 7pm and saw the bunch pass up Miller St as I
headed the other way. Fair bit of congestion and annoyance I think,
but less than situation normal near Circular Quay!
I was able to cross the bunch at Blues Point Rd as it was the tail and
I just wriggled through them.
one bod on the bridge path heading back was weaving all over the place
and it took a couple of calls to get him to move over. He first tried
to speed up, but decided maybe that was a mug's game and moved over.
There were people ahead of him, all riding dead in the middle of the
lane, but they did move over when asked.
Dunno what it is about paths that cyclists ride in the dead middle.
Being a slow old bent I always keep left and most of the regular
commuters do, but come the weekend or evening...
Zebee
Big Bear
> This (http://tinyurl.com/y379xk) is precisely why CM isn't necessarily
> a good thing.
So you think CM should be doing blow jobs instead?
Idiots like you are why we do not have decent facilities/places for
cycling. We have tried decades of asking politely, attending meetings,
etc, etc, etc. CM just brings cyclists together to do what they are
already legally entitled to do. Of course, the sheep believe the wind up
by divisive, fat arsed journalists. Perhaps when you child has breathing
difficulties and suffers brain damage from car smog, you might see the
light.
Duncan
Big Bear wrote:
> Duncan wrote:
>
> > This (http://tinyurl.com/y379xk) is precisely why CM isn't necessarily
> > a good thing.
>
> So you think CM should be doing blow jobs instead?
>
> Idiots like you are why we do not have decent facilities/places for
> cycling. We have tried decades of asking politely, attending meetings,
> etc, etc, etc.
I don't want "facilities". I want to be able to ride safely where I
already do, legally, on the road. I don't want to be attacked by
enraged motorists because some CM dickheads pissed them off last week.
> CM just brings cyclists together to do what they are
> already legally entitled to do
Block a major arterial road during peak times that they are not legally
allowed to ride on, except during a "protest"?
> Of course, the sheep believe the wind up
> by divisive, fat arsed journalists. Perhaps when you child has breathing
> difficulties and suffers brain damage from car smog, you might see the
> light.
You're making alot of assumptions there.
Resound
"Duncan" <dunca...@my-dejanews.com> wrote in message
news:1164407127.0...@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
She's got a bug up her arse, hasn't she? I gave some "feedback":
"I'm not a fan of Critical Mass, largely because because they tend to bring
out this sort of kneejerk reaction in a significant portion of the
population. Having said that, their point remains pertinant, especially at
times like peak hour on a Friday afternoon. That is, bike don't get in the
way of traffic, bikes ARE traffic. Furthermore you'll notice that once you
get past a cyclist, you wind up being held up by the same car that was in
front of you before. In other words, you're exactly where you would have
been if the cyclist had never been there. If the guy in front of you was
riding a bike, he wouldn't be in your way. If you were on a bike, you'd be
one of the cyclists moving substantially faster than the stalled traffic and
getting home sooner. Journeys home on a Friday night are not needless.
Making them by car very often is. As someone who works in the city centre
(Melbourne incidentally) I am amazed that anyone would be daft enough to
drive there. Over the course of the 8km trip home, there are few places
where I can consistantly overtaken and I generally move so much faster than
the traffic it's not funny (actually, it is). Not I don't run red lights nor
do I ride on the footpath, to the consternation of some motorists. Whether I
wear lycra is neither here nor there. Look at the price of registration,
parking, petrol, gym memberships (I don't need one any more) and how much
time you have to make to get any exercise and ask yourself what benefit if
any you get from driving. Garn...on yer bike!"
Not that she's likely to ever read it.
cfsmtb
Duncan Wrote:
>
> > Of course, the sheep believe the wind up
> > by divisive, fat arsed journalists. Perhaps when you child has
> breathing
> > difficulties and suffers brain damage from car smog, you might see
> the
>
> You're making alot of assumptions there.
Then read this News Limited article, Big Bear is right on the money. A
incompetent, lazy article that doesn't further *either side* of the
discussion.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,20818783-5007146,00.html
--
cfsmtb
Duncan
ermmm... I think you'll find that's the article I first linked to..
cfsmtb
Duncan Wrote:
>
>
> ermmm... I think you'll find that's the article I first linked to..
Not exactly Pulitzer Prize standard stuff, is it?
--
cfsmtb
asterope
cfsmtb Wrote:
> Not exactly Pulitzer Prize standard stuff, is it?
streets for cyclists is a good thing and should be done to encourage
tolerance between fellow road users, doing so at peak hour on a very
busy throughfare (regardless of police escort) isnt exactly inspiring.
Were i hampered from getting home on my bike by a sea of CM cyclists
during peak hour, i would at first be indifferent, then i would
probably get sh*tty... the people in cars obviously feel the same way.
I agree there should be far less single occupant car trips happening
any day and at any time, but holding up a bridge full of cranky fsckers
in cars isnt going to make them want to clean up their pushie and ride
it to work or take the bus and leave the car at home... its going to
make them want to do cruel and dangerous things to cyclists in general
because of the "slow and annoying" stigma that they have now had
attached to them.
what i really dont like about the opinion piece (apart from the lot of
it and the cowardly name calling) is the part about how CM riders have
no consideration for those "people who have been working hard all week
and want to get home".
im flipping this lady a big virtual bird for that comment, I bet a
considerable chunk of the CM riders had also been working very hard
that week and were also looking forward to getting home. It seems this
womans idea of cyclists is that they are poor, unemployed or unable to
drive and thats why they ride bikes... i think someone removed the part
of her brain that contained the common-sense region and replaced it with
a bitchy stereotyping bit when she was born...
--
asterope
Duncan
no, its popularist wind-up.. but that's not the point.
My issue with CM is that they get out there and piss people off...
deliberately. All that does is prompt articles like that linked, and
create a more hostile road environment for cyclists who just want to
get out there and get somewhere in traffic.
Big Bear
> I don't want "facilities". I want to be able to ride safely where I
> already do, legally, on the road. I don't want to be attacked by
> enraged motorists because some CM dickheads pissed them off last week.
Think about it; idiots who get enraged about CM would also get enraged
about you riding on "their" roads.
>
>
>>CM just brings cyclists together to do what they are
>>already legally entitled to do
>
>
> Block a major arterial road during peak times that they are not legally
> allowed to ride on, except during a "protest"?
Talk to the police. They are the ones who insist on that move.
>
> You're making alot of assumptions there.
Pot, kettle, black. Get on your bike and take part in a CM, then post
your suggestions for improvements to their list.
>
Big Bear
> My issue with CM is that they get out there and piss people off...
> deliberately. All that does is prompt articles like that linked, and
> create a more hostile road environment for cyclists who just want to
> get out there and get somewhere in traffic.
lol, children, the hostile road environment was there before CM.
Zebee Johnstone
Big Bear <newsthree...@woa.com.au> wrote:
> Idiots like you are why we do not have decent facilities/places for
> cycling. We have tried decades of asking politely, attending meetings,
So, prove that CM has actually achieved anything. Beyond making life
difficult for people doing the work of course.
Say a statement from someone in the RTA, or an MP, or the police, or
anyone at all who isn't CM? Anyone at all who provides the things you
say haven't been provided and wouldn't be except for CM?
I'm not asking for much I'd have thought. YOu can prove your
statement can't you? You do have the evidence to even try to convince
me?
As it happens, the current non-CM advocates in NSW are doing a good
job, I've heard "damn they are hard bargainers" from more than one
source.
But then as you obviously don't know how these things work....
Zebee
Zebee Johnstone
Duncan <dunca...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>
> Big Bear wrote:
> I don't want "facilities". I want to be able to ride safely where I
> already do, legally, on the road. I don't want to be attacked by
> enraged motorists because some CM dickheads pissed them off last week.
I dunno that's a fair accusation to level against motorists.
In that I doubt they'd deliberately attack.
I am not even sure there'd be an unconscious bias. Be interesting to
see if there was a way to determine if there was, no idea how that
could be done.
I don't think it does anything the other way though, as big lumps with
a police escort aren't really "the traffic".
Every commuter who rides on the roads is the traffic and the more of
those there are just riding politely and well the more drivers get
used to dealing with bikes.
Big lumps that happen now and then are 'special event' and annoying.
A driver who sees 20 well behaved cyclists every day will end up being
more attuned to cyclists and their needs (and see bikes as viable)
than one who sees a hundred or two once a month in a big lump making
life difficult, and imitating a special event rather than daily
traffic.
Certainly when I talk to non-riders, the first thing they say is "red
light runners". Few mention CM, but the few who have are consistently
contemptuous.
Zebee
Duncan
Big Bear wrote:
> Get on your bike and take part in a CM, then post
> your suggestions for improvements to their list.
no fucking way am I going anywhere near them..
Zebee Johnstone
asterope <asterop...@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
>
> that week and were also looking forward to getting home. It seems this
> womans idea of cyclists is that they are poor, unemployed or unable to
> drive and thats why they ride bikes... i think someone removed the part
> of her brain that contained the common-sense region and replaced it with
> a bitchy stereotyping bit when she was born...
And how does the author know that they aren't students and unemployed?
Sure, it is a stereotype. What does CM do to dispel that?
It looks like a special event, and there were people wrapped in tinsel
and wearing costumes. That's not a bunch of legit commuters. That's
a bunch of hippie weirdos.
If you want people to change their minds, then you have to work from
where they are, not from somewhere else. If they think normal commuters
look like X, then look like X, but on bicycles.
If the people who do CM really want cyclists to be seen as normal
traffic they have to behave as it.
Clothing from lycra to suits, gear from backpacks to briefcases, and
riding solo or in small groups, coping if split by lights or traffic,
expecting no special treatment, obeying rules and being normal traffic.
They do that at least once a week, every week.
The only way to show bikes are viable transport used by all kinds of
people is for them to visibly *be* viable transport used by all kinds
of people. Day in, day out.
Zebee
Zebee Johnstone
Resound <sacre...@everyzig.bigpond.com> wrote:
>
> times like peak hour on a Friday afternoon. That is, bike don't get in the
> way of traffic, bikes ARE traffic. Furthermore you'll notice that once you
Not ones in large bunches with a police escort.
*I* am traffic. CM is a nuisance.
> get past a cyclist, you wind up being held up by the same car that was in
> front of you before. In other words, you're exactly where you would have
Not on the harbour bridge you don't. Nor on the freeway. I have been
there at that time of day, and it still moves faster than CM was
moving.
I'll believe this "we are the traffic" shit when they are doing it on
their own, without escorts, obeying all laws, and doing what I am
doing day in day out.
because I am the traffic. They aren't.
Zebee
- who does her best not to hold up traffic on her bicycle. If it can
move faster than I can than why not do my damndest to let it?
cfsmtb
Zebee Johnstone Wrote:
>
> As it happens, the current non-CM advocates in NSW are doing a good
> job, I've heard "damn they are hard bargainers" from more than one
> source.
>
> But then as you obviously don't know how these things work....
Intriguing, as I know how low in the priorities cycling actually are
with the current NSW government. Carl Scully and Michael Costa combined
have done a lovely job of ignoring cycling right out the governments
priorities. Don't think Critical Mass had literally anything to do with
that longterm situation.
BTW - Who are these "non CM advocates"? Do some reading about what 'CM
may actually be' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_Mass), the
rides are literally a disparate group of cyclists with no real agenda
that getting together for a few hours a month. You're made a big
assumption, lumping together CM, which apparently has no organisation,
with BNSW, Bike North, Bike Sydney, MassBUG, Bike East etc. For
advocacy, observe the next national ALGA meeting and the 2007 NSW
election, you might actually learn something "how these things work".
Now a few questions, why is it apparently acceptable for journalists,
ie: Andrew Carswell initial article and then Anita Quigley's opinion
piece, to twist subject content out of all context, publish a
individuals phone number, incite or suggest violence and harm to a road
user group, all because put simply, they don't neccessarily agree with a
supposed groups aims or methods? The issue of actually liking CM isn't
the issue, it's how the media think it is *acceptable* to comment upon
a news event.
My usual answer to people who don't care much for CM is this: if the
relevant cycling organisations such as BNSW, BV etc, actually did their
roles properly, then then wouldn't be any reason for Critical Mass to
exist.
--
cfsmtb
persia
<snip>So, prove that CM has actually achieved anything. Beyond making
life
difficult for people doing the work of course.</snip>
Right on, Zebee. CM has achieved absolutely nothing positive. It has
many negative achievements, on the other hand. You are right on the
money about the need to normalise cycling and the fact that the "hippy"
appearance and behavior of CM works against this.
cfsmtb wrote:
<snip>if the relevant cycling organisations such as BNSW, BV etc,
actually did their roles properly, then then wouldn't be any reason for
Critical Mass to exist.</snip>
There *is* no reason for CM to exist.
BV has achieved an enormous amount - this is patently obvious.
CM has achieved *nothing* positive for cycling.
CM is the Taliban of cycling: conservative, intolerant of criticism,
absolutely convinced of the rightness of their approach, despite all
evidence to the contrary. Conservative? Yes: despite appearances, doing
the same thing for 11 years, while evidence of the negative outcomes of
the activity mounts, is conservative behavior. CM is activism lite -
easy, warm inner glow, monthly taste of being naughty.
What really sh*ts me about CM is the waste of resources. While some
involved, including cfsmtb, do lots of good advocacy work (and perhaps
moderate the group to some extent), it seems to me that other
participants get much more excited and put far more effort into the
whole adolescent performance than they do into serious cycling work.
I would suggest that CM should be ignored. Excepting the times that
they cause major confrontation when riding on bridges and in tunnels,
they are only a minor irritant. I'd prefer the whole thing got wound
up, but since this is unlikely, let's just get on with real cycling
work.
Persia
Big Bear
> If you want people to change their minds, then you have to work from
> where they are, not from somewhere else. If they think normal commuters
> look like X, then look like X, but on bicycles.
Fat, smoking, talking on a mobile phone, ear phones, eating, drinking,
etc, etc, etc
Naah, not prepared to compromise my principles that much.
Complete waste of time.
>
> If the people who do CM really want cyclists to be seen as normal
> traffic they have to behave as it.
lol, so it is really about people not having to be corporate clones,
that is what you are really objecting too.
Big Bear
> In that I doubt they'd deliberately attack.
Obviously you don't get out much. Keep ridding, it will happen.
> Certainly when I talk to non-riders, the first thing they say is "red
> light runners". Few mention CM, but the few who have are consistently
> contemptuous.
lol, do they actually ride a bicycle, or just have one hanging on the
wall in the garage?
Big Bear
> In aus.bicycle on Sat, 25 Nov 2006 10:17:49 +1100
> Big Bear <newsthree...@woa.com.au> wrote:
>
>>Idiots like you are why we do not have decent facilities/places for
>>cycling. We have tried decades of asking politely, attending meetings,
>
>
> So, prove that CM has actually achieved anything.
Easy, look at what BNSW achieved before CM (nothing) and the bits they
have achieved since.
Zebee Johnstone
cfsmtb <cfsmtb...@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
>
> Zebee Johnstone Wrote:
>>
>> As it happens, the current non-CM advocates in NSW are doing a good
>> job, I've heard "damn they are hard bargainers" from more than one
>> source.
>>
>> But then as you obviously don't know how these things work....
>
> Intriguing, as I know how low in the priorities cycling actually are
> with the current NSW government. Carl Scully and Michael Costa combined
> have done a lovely job of ignoring cycling right out the governments
> priorities. Don't think Critical Mass had literally anything to do with
> that longterm situation.
Hard to know, I think it's unlikely they've had much effect on
government either way.
Scully and Costa are ignoring everything, don't think cycling's been
singled out.
On the other hand, there's been more done for them in the last few
years than previously mostly via councils which is where a lot of
motorcycls safety gains have been too.
Again, that's the hard work of the advocates rather than CM.
>
> BTW - Who are these "non CM advocates"? Do some reading about what 'CM
> may actually be' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_Mass), the
> rides are literally a disparate group of cyclists with no real agenda
> that getting together for a few hours a month. You're made a big
There's rather a lot of howling about how wonderful it is whenever it
is mentioned.
> assumption, lumping together CM, which apparently has no organisation,
> with BNSW, Bike North, Bike Sydney, MassBUG, Bike East etc. For
Who did that? Wasn't me. IN fact I was quite clearly separating them
I thought, but obviously not clearly enough.
> advocacy, observe the next national ALGA meeting and the 2007 NSW
> election, you might actually learn something "how these things work".
What, do that as well as my motorcycle advocacy? "these things" was
about advocacy in general rather than NSW cycle politics in specific.
As in a bunch of people bignoting once a month isn't what is doing the
work.
> Now a few questions, why is it apparently acceptable for journalists,
> ie: Andrew Carswell initial article and then Anita Quigley's opinion
> piece, to twist subject content out of all context, publish a
> individuals phone number, incite or suggest violence and harm to a road
> user group, all because put simply, they don't neccessarily agree with a
> supposed groups aims or methods? The issue of actually liking CM isn't
> the issue, it's how the media think it is *acceptable* to comment upon
> a news event.
I didn't say it was acceptable. It is, however, very good tabloid
journalism. Which is about selling advertising space to those who
sell to a known demographic.
They aren't in the business of "news" or "fairness" or even journalism
really.
Why are there so many over the top columnists about? Because they
generate controversy, they generate sales of advertising.
>
> My usual answer to people who don't care much for CM is this: if the
> relevant cycling organisations such as BNSW, BV etc, actually did their
> roles properly, then then wouldn't be any reason for Critical Mass to
> exist.
Really? That implies that CM is doing the job they are not. Please
explain cleary how that is so, what actual achievements they have
gained, with checkable details.
Explain also what they are currently achieving, again with details.
Zebee
Big Bear
> My usual answer to people who don't care much for CM is this: if the
> relevant cycling organisations such as BNSW, BV etc, actually did their
> roles properly, then then wouldn't be any reason for Critical Mass to
> exist.
Ditto.
BNSW has been doing exactly what the sheep advocate for over 20 years
and what we have is some paint on foot paths and one passible bicycle
path of some size. Meanwhile, the police heirachy have become corrupt
and inept.
Big Bear
> I'll believe this "we are the traffic" shit when they are doing it on
> their own, without escorts, obeying all laws, and doing what I am
> doing day in day out.
Take it up with the police.
cfsmtb
persia Wrote:
>
> CM is the Taliban of cycling: conservative, intolerant of criticism,
> absolutely convinced of the rightness of their approach, despite all
> evidence to the contrary.
What a bizarre remark, care to expand upon that on next Wednesday
evening? If CM is such a waste of time, why do you even bother to
socialise with numerous Melbourne bicycle folk, who have, shock,
horror, been to a CM or two, or even post your remarks to the CM-Melb
yahoogroup for the last 3-4 years? Pot. Kettle. Black.
One good aspect about CM in Melbourne context that it has brough
together a whole diverse group of cyclists who paths would of *never*
socialised with each other. Roadies, BUG's, commuters, recreational
riders, tourers etc etc etc. BV aren't remotely interested in bringing
stakeholders together, unless there's money in it.
If CM has no reason to exist, then please explain to us the reason of
this puzzling paradox for the last 11 years? Why did a estimated 600
cyclists ride through Melbourne last evening?
--
cfsmtb
cfsmtb
Zebee Johnstone Wrote:
>
> Really? That implies that CM is doing the job they are not. Please
> explain cleary how that is so, what actual achievements they have
> gained, with checkable details.
>
> Explain also what they are currently achieving, again with details.
You're in Sydney, you are subscribed to the MASS-BUG list, why not ask
the locals about their POV? Call Alex Unwin at BNSW, ask him what he
thinks, as Kate has only just taken up the position of BNSW Head of
Advocacy. There's plenty of people to ask in your hometown with
detailed local knowledge.
--
cfsmtb
Aeek
>If the people who do CM really want cyclists to be seen as normal
>traffic they have to behave as it.
>
>Clothing from lycra to suits, gear from backpacks to briefcases, and
>riding solo or in small groups, coping if split by lights or traffic,
>expecting no special treatment, obeying rules and being normal traffic.
>They do that at least once a week, every week.
The above quoting gives a completely different empasis than Bear's,
which gave me a "normal clothing" spin (not down to Bear).
Glad I went back to the source!
Small groups? Tricky. Any number of commuters can be riding in
proximity without being together. That's how traffic works.
Recognition of critical differences in the road rules, just like
motorbikes and heavy vehicles, is not special treatment.
Onroad bike lanes and even bike boxes are traffic management options
that benefit ALL traffic, complaints to the contrary.
Resound
"Big Bear" <newsthree...@woa.com.au> wrote in message
news:4567ec1d$0$53463$c30e...@ken-reader.news.telstra.net...
Uh huh, then why is traffic noticeably more hostile after CM, expecially
when it inspires bitchy op ed pieces like the one linked to? Most of the
time I don't get grief in traffic.
Resound
Monday-Friday, to and from work. Like I said before, I don't get grief,
probably because I don't go looking for it.
Resound
"Zebee Johnstone" <zeb...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:slrnemfvl0...@gmail.com...
> In aus.bicycle on Sat, 25 Nov 2006 10:41:21 +1100
> Resound <sacre...@everyzig.bigpond.com> wrote:
>>
>> times like peak hour on a Friday afternoon. That is, bike don't get in
>> the
>> way of traffic, bikes ARE traffic. Furthermore you'll notice that once
>> you
>
> Not ones in large bunches with a police escort.
>
> *I* am traffic. CM is a nuisance.
>
Granted, which is why I said *bikes* are traffic. Their point is pertinant,
their actions are less so.
>
>> get past a cyclist, you wind up being held up by the same car that was in
>> front of you before. In other words, you're exactly where you would have
>
> Not on the harbour bridge you don't. Nor on the freeway. I have been
> there at that time of day, and it still moves faster than CM was
> moving.
A grandmother on the waiting list for a hip replacment pushing a shopping
jeep with two shagged out wheels is faster than CM. I can't comment on the
bridge being a Melbournite and I don't ride on the freeway because it
doesn't go where I want to go and it's a shite place to ride, not to metion
being illegal.
> I'll believe this "we are the traffic" shit when they are doing it on
> their own, without escorts, obeying all laws, and doing what I am
> doing day in day out.
>
> because I am the traffic. They aren't.
>
> Zebee
> - who does her best not to hold up traffic on her bicycle. If it can
> move faster than I can than why not do my damndest to let it?
>
Exactly. We don't have to hold them up much and they don't have to hold us
up much. A co-operative rather combative approach works well for me and the
more people that do *that* the more quickly bikes will get accepted. The
only people who'll be unhappy are the desperate radicals who really just
want to piss people off.
Zebee Johnstone
You made the claim, back it up.
You made the claim that CM is doing what the others aren't, back it
up.
Zebee
Zebee Johnstone
Big Bear <newsthree...@woa.com.au> wrote:
> Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>
>> In that I doubt they'd deliberately attack.
>
> Obviously you don't get out much. Keep ridding, it will happen.
Really? I admit I haven't ridden a bicycle as much as I have a
motorcycle, probably only for 4 years in Adelaide, 2 years in Sydney a
while back and now only a few months. Daily commuting. How long do I
have to wait?
Or could it possibly be that cyclists who are sensible don't have the
problem?
>
>> Certainly when I talk to non-riders, the first thing they say is "red
>> light runners". Few mention CM, but the few who have are consistently
>> contemptuous.
>
> lol, do they actually ride a bicycle, or just have one hanging on the
> wall in the garage?
Have trouble reading do you? What is it about the word "non-riders"
that makes you think they have a bicycle? In the spirit of
communication I'll define it for you: people who don't ride bicycles.
Zebee
Zebee Johnstone
Resound <sacre...@everyzig.bigpond.com> wrote:
> Monday-Friday, to and from work. Like I said before, I don't get grief,
> probably because I don't go looking for it.
Same attitude I have whether it's powered or unpowered two wheels.
I find it interesting that I can ride the same roads as other two
wheelers at the same times of day, and their stories are full of near
misses and agression, and mine are "lovely ride".
Zebee
Zebee Johnstone
Aeek <aeee...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
>
> The above quoting gives a completely different empasis than Bear's,
> which gave me a "normal clothing" spin (not down to Bear).
> Glad I went back to the source!
>
Cyclists wear all sorts of clothes. That's something that is
important!
On my commute I see everything from suits to full team kit. Mostly
people in lycra or normal shorts and t-shirts though. A few bods in
jeans.
I think the CM on Friday was a special event so some treated it as
such. I suspect it wasn't a good idea if you want to be seen as
normal traffic, but I don't have any way to know what the non-riders
thought specifically of that.
The anti-lycra thing is weird, I can't work out if it's jsut a
convenient way to demonise the other, some variety of homophobia, or a
dislike of the flouters of convention which says that something
looking like that is really underwear. All three probably. Find the
thing that is a known marker and also unconventional and as it has
bonus points about body image it makes a really good handle for
denigrating a group.
I wear a pair of old cargo shorts, or some heavyweight ribbed
leggings. Being female means I can wear the leggings of course, men
wearing such things get the homophobia bit above.
> Small groups? Tricky. Any number of commuters can be riding in
> proximity without being together. That's how traffic works.
Well yes. That's the *point* isn't it? Get enough bikes into an area
that they become a "critical mass" and are the traffic. Not to say
"we are special" but to say "we are normal".
As far as I'm aware, that's not what they do, and it's definitely not
what they did on Friday.
>
> Recognition of critical differences in the road rules, just like
> motorbikes and heavy vehicles, is not special treatment.
True. But having a police escort is. Else where's mine?
I think recognising that not everything's a car is important, and it
is slowly happening. The NSW state government is dragging the chain,
but councils are doing more and more.
It isn't clear to me what an group gathered together for the purpose
of blocking traffic does for that though.
It is clear to me that CM doesn't win friends except amongst other
cyclists. Which wouldn't be a problem if it wasn't gaining enemies
amongst non-cyclists.
>
> Onroad bike lanes and even bike boxes are traffic management options
> that benefit ALL traffic, complaints to the contrary.
I'm finding a lot of people have a zero sum game
approach to the road, if that lot benefit I must be losing somehow.
This definitely applies to anything seen as needing funding.
And of course lots of people are selfish, surprise surprise! They
don't give a damn about other people's safety or convenience,
only their own. Which is true of as many cyclists as it is of car
drivers I suspect.
And of motorcyclists, I copped a lot of flack including the good old
"They all run red lights so screw them" for saying that bike boxes are
a bicycle safety feature so why should motorcycles get to use them as a
convenience. I did point out that being against road safety for a class
of user because some of that class broke a road law without it seeming
to lead to a higher crash rate was a bad precedent for motorcyclists
but it didn't seem to sink in....
It's a very human thing, to see the other as either unimportant or
actively bad. So someone who rides a bicycle and a motorcycle and
drives a car sees fewer as other than someone who does 2 of the 3 or 1
of the 3. But then I dont skateboard or rollerblade.
Zebee
Zebee Johnstone
Resound <sacre...@everyzig.bigpond.com> wrote:
>>
>
> Exactly. We don't have to hold them up much and they don't have to hold us
> up much. A co-operative rather combative approach works well for me and the
> more people that do *that* the more quickly bikes will get accepted. The
> only people who'll be unhappy are the desperate radicals who really just
> want to piss people off.
I find the co-operative approach works. I am sure that the more
sensible commuters who act like traffic but are riding bicycles there
are, the more used to them drivers get. That is, after all, the Dutch
experience.
I'd like more road design that is cycle friendly, and acknowledgement
that bicycles want direct routes too rather than be shunted off to
detours. There's a chunk of my commute that has pinch points that are
only there because of useless wide footpaths (useless as in a) no peds
and b) it's just a big curved open expanse of paving). If a couple of
feet was carved off that it would be a lot better. But it won't
change because bicycles are supposed to take the long way round.
Then there's the Kent St/Pyrmont Bridge path mess. I see a lot of
footpath riding and chaos when people try and get onto that path.
Zebee
Duncan
Big Bear wrote:
> Meanwhile, the police heirachy have become corrupt
> and inept.
be careful... the tinfoil hat is starting to poke out.
Big Bear
> Uh huh, then why is traffic noticeably more hostile after CM, expecially
> when it inspires bitchy op ed pieces like the one linked to? Most of the
> time I don't get grief in traffic.
It is the same agro sht heads before and after CM here.
Lets face it, CM just allows idiot motorists a focus that doesn't make
it clear to them that they are the real problem.
normal day; "I am really stuck in this massive traffic jam because lots
of other fat arses like myself are too lazy to use public transport, or
ride a bicyle"
CM days allows them tro blames cyclists.
Personally the letter to write in response to moron articles is "Well,
if CM is only once a month, how do you explain the traffic jams on all
the other days?"
Big Bear
In the spirit of
> communication I'll define it for you: people who don't ride bicycles.
ride =/= own.
Big Bear
looking in the mirror are we?
when was the last time you had a policeperson talk to someone who
harrassed you? Do you think the big constable plod will send someone
around to talk to that journo about "inciting violence". If so, please
hold your breath until they do.
>
Euan
> persia Wrote:
>> CM is the Taliban of cycling: conservative, intolerant of criticism,
>> absolutely convinced of the rightness of their approach, despite all
>> evidence to the contrary.
>
> What a bizarre remark, care to expand upon that on next Wednesday
> evening? If CM is such a waste of time, why do you even bother to
> socialise with numerous Melbourne bicycle folk, who have, shock,
> horror, been to a CM or two, or even post your remarks to the CM-Melb
> yahoogroup for the last 3-4 years? Pot. Kettle. Black.
I see, so if you barrack for Fitzroy and I barrack for the Bombers we
can't talk to each other about footy? That's essentially what you're
saying.
I'm on the CM-Melb group, I even went on a ride. It wasn't for me, I
don't think it achieves anything but there are a lot of good people in
the CM with a lot of good knowledge. I'm not about to cut myself off
from those people just because they attend an event I don't. That's
just stupid.
> One good aspect about CM in Melbourne context that it has brough
> together a whole diverse group of cyclists who paths would of *never*
> socialised with each other. Roadies, BUG's, commuters, recreational
> riders, tourers etc etc etc. BV aren't remotely interested in bringing
> stakeholders together, unless there's money in it.
We need to promote PubBUG more, mind you that would leave out the
teetotallers.
> If CM has no reason to exist, then please explain to us the reason of
> this puzzling paradox for the last 11 years? Why did a estimated 600
> cyclists ride through Melbourne last evening?
Derryn exaggerating again? He had the number pegged at 700.
--
Cheers
Euan
DaveB
Yep that one statement summed up Big Bear's position oh so clearly.
The n+1 rule also applies to the killfile.
DaveB
cfsmtb
Zebee Johnstone Wrote:
>
> You made the claim, back it up.
>
> You made the claim that CM is doing what the others aren't, back it
> up.
Doesn't the issue just stare back at you? If everything in the bicycle
world was lovely & peachy - then why do these rides continue to exist?
There's a obvious disconnect between what Government and bicycle orgs
are doing on behalf of cyclists - and the reality people have to face
when they ride in Sydney. Some of them may even decide to to take
direct action. Some of them take another step and get involved with
their local communities to improve the lot of cycling.
For the record, I asked you the same question several months ago, which
you haven't bothered to answer.
1 Jul 2006
http://tinyurl.com/y2pzn3
Also for the record, I've been informed by several folk in Sydney that
have indeed spoken to you *in person* about CM, invited you to come
along and make up your own mind, and also have explained to you about
what CM means to them.
You have responded to them you won't attend rides, won't write to
politicians. It's not whether you agree with CM or not, you are simply
cherrypicking what you prefer to listen to, or even bother to read.
That indeed speaks volumes - especially when people have contacted you
*in person*, not the internet, and you still keep parrotting this guff
about "I don't know what CM is".
--
cfsmtb
cfsmtb
Euan Wrote:
>
> I see, so if you barrack for Fitzroy and I barrack for the Bombers we
> can't talk to each other about footy? That's essentially what you're
> saying.
In context, I thought "persias" remark was bizarre and some what
disappointing, since recently he was extending a peace, love and mung
beans attitude towards several Melb bike folk, but now he's gone all
sectarian again.
BTW - being an old Roys fans you've touched a raw nerve here. For those
who came in late, Fitzroy died a death of a thousand cuts back in 1996 &
was merged with Brisbane. I really haven't gotten over it & haven't
followed footy since. {sob}.
{Wipes away the tears, gets vaguely back on topic}
You're right about the PubBUG thing, but I just don't have the time to
promote the bloody thing more effectively. Although teetotallers could
satisfy their thirst with lemon, lime & bitters .... or fizzy red
cordial. If you read the yahoogroup homepage, there is a "JavaBUG"
offshoot but I have absolutely no idea how active that faction is at
the moment.
Euan Wrote:
>
> Derryn exaggerating again? He had the number pegged at 700.
God knows what Derryn is bollocking on about. I'm awaiting his take on
exposing links btw Critical Mass, Family First and Vladimir Putin.
--
cfsmtb
monsterman
conspiracy theorists, that come across from aus.ufo
--
monsterman
Dave Hughes
> lol, do they actually ride a bicycle, or just have one hanging on the
> wall in the garage?
Do you know, I've been looking at Big Bear's posts and thinking they
really sounded like Terry C. Then I noticed the domain. <sigh>. I'm an
idiot, but at least I put my name to it.
--
Dave Hughes | da...@hired-goons.net
Flagrant system error! The system is down. I dunno what you did,
moron, but you sure screwed everything up - Strongbad
persia
cfsmtb wrote:
> What a bizarre remark, care to expand upon that on next Wednesday
> evening?
No, I'll be entirely task-focussed next Thursday. Probably wouldn't
help your credibility to identify as CM with the DOI people, anyway.
>If CM is such a waste of time, why do you even bother to
> socialise with numerous Melbourne bicycle folk, who have, shock,
> horror, been to a CM or two
I socialise with lots of bike folk & I don't necessarily agree with all
of their beliefs or activities. That goes for Barry H and it goes for
you, too.
, or even post your remarks to the CM-Melb
> yahoogroup for the last 3-4 years?
I generally answer stuff there about Melbourne, or (very occasionally)
argue against the more provcative CM stuff. Seems pretty consistent to
me.
>
> One good aspect about CM in Melbourne context that it has brough
> together a whole diverse group of cyclists who paths would of *never*
> socialised with each other.
I'm prepared to accept that. I don't believe, however, that it goes
anywhere near counterbalancing the negative outcomes, which have been
many.
BV aren't remotely interested in bringing
> stakeholders together, unless there's money in it.
That might well be a failing of BV. Again, I would suggest that that it
doesn't go anywhere near counterbalancing the positive outcomes, which
have been many.
>
> If CM has no reason to exist, then please explain to us the reason of
> this puzzling paradox for the last 11 years?
I already have: read my post again.
Why did a estimated 600
> cyclists ride through Melbourne last evening?
Activism lite.
BTW: you haven't really answered the questions posed by Zebee & echoed
by myself. I would suggest that this is because there are no answers.
Persia
Big Bear
> Then I noticed the domain. <sigh>.
pipe's blocked, so this is temp {:-).
Big Bear
> won't write to politicians.
Says a lot.
persia
cfsmtb wrote:
> In context, I thought "persias" remark was bizarre and some what
> disappointing, since recently he was extending a peace, love and mung
> beans attitude towards several Melb bike folk, but now he's gone all
> sectarian again.
The Taliban comparison was colourful language, to be sure. Substitute
Exclusive Brethren, or the fundo religious group of your choice if you
like.
I've always tried to be on relatively good terms with all parties,
criticising where it was due and praising the same. I have criticised
Baz and defended him at times, I have done the same for a variety of CM
people.
If you think that my criticising CM is being sectarian, then I regret
to inform you that you have just made my point - that CM seems to be
above criticism - an article of faith. That's what Zebee & I have have
done: criticised CM, and asked some reasonable questions, which have
not been answered and cannot be answered.
Persia
cfsmtb
persia Wrote:
>
> BTW: you haven't really answered the questions posed by Zebee & echoed
> by myself. I would suggest that this is because there are no answers.
They have been answered - and also forwarded on for people in Sydney.
Incidently, I *first* asked Zebee to answer these exact same questions
back in July. She had plenty of time and has been deadly quiet on the
subject since.
http://www.cyclingforums.com/showpost.php?p=3092327&postcount=35
Also, your question, whatever it is, has been picked up on via CM-Melb
- so why don't you take the discussion there or the CM-Sydney list if
the reply you receive isn't to your personal taste? BTW - Moz has got a
2nd hand sim card going cheap ...
http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/cm-melb/message/7614
If you don't like that explanation either, please feel free to explain
upon your opinions either at the next CM-Melb ride or take it up on the
list. As for your self-appointed role as a contrarian, you seriously
don't really do much, other than not talking *openly* about your
opinions, except to mutter darkly in the background and bewildering
people by having a personal attitude that runs hot and cold.
In answer to the childish Taliban reference, maybe you should of been
more sensible with the analogy, refer below.
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/~mvcarmac/women1.html
--
cfsmtb
bikesaint
> drivers who see / are held up by Critical Mass get angry
This view (or similar) expressed on this list and by the media can only
indicate that the proponent has not been on a Critical Mass ride. Yes,
the odd person gets upset, but the majority cheer and wave and do a
thumbs up - even during the Harbour Bridge ride last Friday. The
police, afterward, said how happy they were with it - it went smoothly
and was trouble-free. Please, if you are going to state something as
fact - check it out first. Not from one incident you read about or
saw, but actually see what it's really like on a ride. The majority of
drivers smile and wave as they are politely thanked for waiting and that
their patience is appreciated. On the Harbour Bridge ride we even hand
out flowers to drivers as a symbol of goodwill, and it works. Please
show you can do better than believing what you read in the gutter
press, otherwise how can you expect anyone to have respect for you.
> Critical Mass has never achieved anything
Again - just shows how ignorant one can be. Does this person mean that
they've never seen "and thanks to Critical Mass for making this
possible" on a government document? What a surprise! Actually, CM is
responsible for the NSW government's "Action for Bikes" which, for the
first time, pledged $250 million in 1999. Yes, really, it was in
response to the CM "four link bikeplan" campaign.
And then there was the day that CM rode on the M4 to protest cyclists
being charged a toll. The toll was dropped the next day.
And then there are all the other things you don't hear about and that
aren't credited to CM...
***
Please - the level of antagonism and ignorance I've seen on this list
makes it unlikely I'll visit very often. It really would help for
everyone to try and build understanding and communication rather than
hostility, and to ensure that comments are informed.
Fiona
Sydney
--
bikesaint
Zebee Johnstone
persia <robi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Activism lite.
Whenever there's a need to "do something" in the motorcycle world, the
first suggestion and the most popular is "protest ride!".
People love them. They love to be in this big mass, love the feel of
power and community, love the idea that they are now in the majority
and others must notice and give way. Love the feeling of importance.
That they do bugger all isn't important.
Pollies don't give a shit about mass demonstrations unless they get to
the size and frequency of the Vietnam moratoriums. Anything less than
that is nothing, except maybe a safety valve, a way for people to feel
they've done their bit so they can now go on their way. No need to do
anything actually difficult or time consuming. A protest ride is a
couple of hours out of your day, it gives much pleasure, and it allows
you to tick the box of caring.
Seems to me that CM is vry rewarding. It gives a feeling of power,
it gives a feeling of community, it's anonymous so you can do things
you couldn't otherwise do.
Which is why it generates such passion both for and against.
Just as useless as any protest ride though.
Zebee
Zebee Johnstone
bikesaint <bikesain...@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
>
>> drivers who see / are held up by Critical Mass get angry
>
> This view (or similar) expressed on this list and by the media can only
> indicate that the proponent has not been on a Critical Mass ride. Yes,
> the odd person gets upset, but the majority cheer and wave and do a
> thumbs up - even during the Harbour Bridge ride last Friday. The
Really?
Then the people I saw didn't exist, and the ones who talked to me
about it on the weekend didn't either?
We see what we want to see.
> police, afterward, said how happy they were with it - it went smoothly
> and was trouble-free. Please, if you are going to state something as
Meaning that no one fell off, and no one attacked anyone. Good
enough, but not the point. THe police definition of trouble free is
"we didn't have to put the sirens on" not "it didn't upset anyone.
> fact - check it out first. Not from one incident you read about or
> saw, but actually see what it's really like on a ride. The majority of
> drivers smile and wave as they are politely thanked for waiting and that
> their patience is appreciated. On the Harbour Bridge ride we even hand
> out flowers to drivers as a symbol of goodwill, and it works. Please
> show you can do better than believing what you read in the gutter
> press, otherwise how can you expect anyone to have respect for you.
I was there for the miller st section. I was looking at drivers and
cars and peds. And I talk to people who aren't cyclists.
>
> Again - just shows how ignorant one can be. Does this person mean that
> they've never seen "and thanks to Critical Mass for making this
> possible" on a government document? What a surprise! Actually, CM is
> responsible for the NSW government's "Action for Bikes" which, for the
> first time, pledged $250 million in 1999. Yes, really, it was in
> response to the CM "four link bikeplan" campaign.
What, not in response to holding up traffic?
But in response to an actual standard advocacy method?
Zebee
Donga
cfsmtb wrote:
> BTW - being an old Roys fans you've touched a raw nerve here. For those
> who came in late, Fitzroy died a death of a thousand cuts back in 1996 &
> was merged with Brisbane. I really haven't gotten over it & haven't
> followed footy since. {sob}.
I'm happy to have you declared an honorary Brisbanite if you'll go with
the Lions.
Donga
Big Bear
>>drivers who see / are held up by Critical Mass get angry
>
>
> This view (or similar) expressed on this list and by the media can only
> indicate that the proponent has not been on a Critical Mass ride. Yes,
> the odd person gets upset,
Stacks according to the posting on the CM list, including one person who
said they were reduced to getting out of their taxi at 5:45pm and
walking. Funny bit is that the mass had not started by that time {:-).
>>Critical Mass has never achieved anything
>
>
> Again - just shows how ignorant one can be. Does this person mean that
> they've never seen "and thanks to Critical Mass for making this
> possible" on a government document? What a surprise! Actually, CM is
> responsible for the NSW government's "Action for Bikes" which, for the
> first time, pledged $250 million in 1999. Yes, really, it was in
> response to the CM "four link bikeplan" campaign.
>
> And then there was the day that CM rode on the M4 to protest cyclists
> being charged a toll. The toll was dropped the next day.
>
> And then there are all the other things you don't hear about and that
> aren't credited to CM...
like BNSW finally getting off their backsides to given some support to
their local advocacy groups and finally, finally appointing an advocacy
officer.
>
> ***
> Please - the level of antagonism and ignorance I've seen on this list
> makes it unlikely I'll visit very often. It really would help for
> everyone to try and build understanding and communication rather than
> hostility, and to ensure that comments are informed.
It is the caffee-lattee' crowd of wanna-bees. If you read carefully,
many spend more time with their arse on/in motorised transport.
Big Bear
> We see what we want to see.
Exactly, but you've declared yourself as a more frequent user of
motorised transport, so we know what sort of glasses you wear.
Zebee Johnstone
Really?
you sure?[1]
As it happens, I am riding the pushbike more than the motorbike at the
moment. And as I am a motorcyclist I don't get held up by bicycles
singly or en mass as a rule.
Being against Cm doesn't mean being against cycling. Or even being
not that much in favour of same. Just means being against certain
forms of activism that I believe make my life as a cyclist harder not
easier.
I expect a fair few divorced fathers with custody issues think the
twats running around in superhero costumes are doing them no favours,
but are not against better outcomes for themselves.
However, I am glad to see you agree that the CM people are biased and
so they aren't seeing things that are against their point of view.
WHich goes to show what we should all know - the plural of anecdote
(mine or yours) is not data.
To say "no one is upset because I didn't see them" is foolish. I have
no doubt not everyone was upset, but I know people were, because I saw
them.
Zebee
[1] silly question I know. Of course you are sure.
EuanB
bikesaint Wrote:
> > drivers who see / are held up by Critical Mass get angry
>
> This view (or similar) expressed on this list and by the media can only
> indicate that the proponent has not been on a Critical Mass ride.
less than impressed. Maybe the one ride I've been on was a bad one but
the impression I had from that ride was that it was bad PR. That's why
I haven't been on another one.
Now how about having a bit of respect for others and stop jumping to
conclusions?
--
EuanB
EuanB
Big Bear Wrote:
>
> > ***
> > Please - the level of antagonism and ignorance I've seen on this list
> > makes it unlikely I'll visit very often. It really would help for
> > everyone to try and build understanding and communication rather than
> > hostility, and to ensure that comments are informed.
>
> It is the caffee-lattee' crowd of wanna-bees. If you read carefully,
> many spend more time with their arse on/in motorised transport.
Just for clarity, the only reason I'm driving at the moment is 'cause
I've got a broken leg. Normally I ride 300km a week, all of it
commuting and most of it solo. And it's a double shot espresso please,
milk just ruins the coffee :-)
--
EuanB
Duncan
Big Bear wrote:
> It is the caffee-lattee' crowd of wanna-bees. If you read carefully,
> many spend more time with their arse on/in motorised transport.
hardly..
I ride approx 25k x 2 4/5 days of the week to work.. often 5/5. That'd
be 200-250k/week on a bike. I'd be luck to drive 50k on the weekends,
and that's with the wife and two kids in the car.
I don't race bikes, or drink latte (much preferring a flat white)
Zebee Johnstone
EuanB <EuanB....@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
>
> Big Bear Wrote:
>>
>> It is the caffee-lattee' crowd of wanna-bees. If you read carefully,
>> many spend more time with their arse on/in motorised transport.
>
> Just for clarity, the only reason I'm driving at the moment is 'cause
> I've got a broken leg. Normally I ride 300km a week, all of it
> commuting and most of it solo. And it's a double shot espresso please,
> milk just ruins the coffee :-)
Ah, but the definition of "wannabe" isn't what you ride, or where or
how long. It's if you are ideologically sound.
Zebee
Zebee Johnstone
I do a bit under 2.5 hours a day commuting 3-5 days a week. If I'm not
on the pushie I am on the motorbike but that takes about 1.5 hours.
Plus these days I'm only doing 1-2 hours on the motorbike when not
commuting, and about 30 mins on the bent, shopping and usually an hour
or so just riding. So the arse is on the unpowered two wheeler for more
of the time.
And I don't drink coffee.
Zebee
- wondering why Cm advocates tend to the sillier end of the spectrum
cfsmtb
Hey Donga, may take up you offer of honoury "Brisbanite". North or
South? Can I attend a LA ride in absentia?
--
cfsmtb
cfsmtb
EuanB Wrote:
> Just for clarity, the only reason I'm driving at the moment is 'cause
> I've got a broken leg. Normally I ride 300km a week, all of it
> commuting and most of it solo. And it's a double shot espresso please,
> milk just ruins the coffee :-)
You sound like a likely recruit for JavaBUG! What's your preference,
Robusta or Arabica blends? Ever heard of Civet Cat coffee? :p
--
cfsmtb
monsterman
cfsmtb Wrote:
> Hey Donga, may take up you offer of honoury "Brisbanite". North or
can:
- provide evidence of appropriately separated ancestral lineage
- demonstrate sound anti-banjo tendancies (Duracell Bunny admits to
owning a banjo - whilst we all make mistakes, that one will lead to
her waking up in a detention centre one day soon without ever knowing
why)
- satisfy us that you do not live in your car, with your extended
family
- satisfy us that your first words were not "Attention K-Mart
shoppers ... ..."
- prove you don't take reading material to the toilet
- prove you do not wake up each day dressed and ready for work
- prove you don't think a padded bedhead = safe sex
- prove you've never worn a tie with a flannelette shirt
- prove you've never accepted an invitation written on a public
toilet wall.
We'll fly a missing man format just for you at the next LA ride, in
exchange for your undertaking to ride with us when next in paradise ..
.. ..
go the blues!
--
monsterman
TimC
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> In aus.bicycle on Mon, 27 Nov 2006 06:36:43 +1100
> bikesaint <bikesain...@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
>>
>>> drivers who see / are held up by Critical Mass get angry
>>
>> This view (or similar) expressed on this list and by the media can only
>> indicate that the proponent has not been on a Critical Mass ride. Yes,
>> the odd person gets upset, but the majority cheer and wave and do a
>> thumbs up - even during the Harbour Bridge ride last Friday. The
>
> Really?
>
> Then the people I saw didn't exist, and the ones who talked to me
> about it on the weekend didn't either?
Were they there? Did they see it? Or were they blaming the generally
slow traffic on something they saw on the news that night?
--
TimC
Your fault (core dumped)
TimC
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>
If you took the advice of a thread last year, you'd know how to ride
with a broken leg. :)
Oh and Terry, some of us CM supporters are café latté sipping lycra
clad wannabes, although one or more of us may be stuck on a bus more
often than not lately, given the weather of late. Oh how depressing
it is. But I have found a good source of lattés here now, at least.
Oh, and they are getting a liquor licence. Does this mean we are
going to have a proper bar by the end of the year, instead of having
to go visit the local bogan establishments?
--
TimC
"This thesis brought to you by the letter tau" -- TimC
PiledHigher
Resound wrote:
> "I'm not a fan of Critical Mass, largely because because they tend to bring
> out this sort of kneejerk reaction in a significant portion of the
> population.
One of the best ways to defuse an argument is to get the opposition to
be ridiculous, there is a famous quote regarding this. Hopefully the
hyperbolic argument makes people go, I'm not that much of a lunatic.
We've been through the hyperbole earlier in the week with WA talking
about daylight savings.
PiledHigher
said!
>Disturbing cycle a critical mess
>By Anita Quigley
>
>November 25, 2006 12:00
>It has never occurred to me it might matter to people what a muslim wears because, hijab >or birka, all muslims in the city are irritating and I find bring on an overwhelming desire to >swerve towards.
Cycling needs to be a religion...
Zebee Johnstone
TimC <tcon...@no.spam.accepted.here-astro.swin.edu.au> wrote:
> On 2006-11-26, Zebee Johnstone (aka Bruce)
> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>>
>> about it on the weekend didn't either?
>
> Were they there? Did they see it? Or were they blaming the generally
> slow traffic on something they saw on the news that night?
One of them said she saw the cop car across the road and the bikes,
the other I'm not sure saw it, but was on the road at the time and
does it every day so has some idea of what the traffic is usually
like.
Zebee
Aeek
<tcon...@no.spam.accepted.here-astro.swin.edu.au> wrote:
>Oh and Terry, some of us CM supporters are café latté sipping lycra
>clad wannabes, although one or more of us may be stuck on a bus more
>often than not lately, given the weather of late. Oh how depressing
>it is. But I have found a good source of lattés here now, at least.
Are lattés a good recovery drink like chocolate milk?
Personally, I prefer a banana smoothie and a long black.
Aeek
wrote:
>Cycling needs to be a religion...
WHAT!!! It's not ???
PiledHigher
It is:
Our Father, who art in Belgium,
Mercks be thy Name.
Thy bicycles come.
Thy racing be done,
On Earth as it is in Belgium.
Give us this day our daily ride.
And forgive us our softnesses,
As we forgive 4wds who trespass against us.
And lead us not into mechanicals,
But deliver us from head winds.
For thine is the cadence,
and the power,
and the wins,
for ever and ever.
Axle.
cfsmtb
Aeek Wrote:
>
> Are lattés a good recovery drink like chocolate milk?
> Personally, I prefer a banana smoothie and a long black.
Chocie milk good ...
http://tinyurl.com/y5g4we
Chocolate milk helps athletes recover more quickly. Study shows it
beats other power drinks for speeding recovery
DENVER — It comes in only one flavor — no Fierce Grape or Riptide Rush
available — and you certainly won't see your favorite basketball star
gulping it down on the sideline during a timeout.
But a group of scientists recently discovered that one of the most
effective drinks to help athletes recover after exercise is the same
thing moms across America have been giving their kids for years.
A simple glass of chocolate milk.
To be forthright, the study by the scientists from Indiana University,
published in the International Journal of Sports Nutrition and Exercise
Metabolism, was supported in part by the Dairy and Nutrition Council.
Still, their findings are compelling.
The small group of nine fit athletes who took part in the study were
asked to work out strenuously on a stationary bicycle, then drink
low-fat chocolate milk, a fluid-replacement drink like Gatorade and a
carbohydrate replacement drink like Endurox R4. A few hours later, they
were asked to cycle again until they reached exhaustion.
The test was repeated three times — once with each kind of drink — and
the data showed that the cyclists were able to go between 49 and 54
percent longer on the second stint after drinking chocolate milk than
when they drank the carbohydrate drink. The difference between the milk
and the fluid-replacement drink was not significant.
"My way of explaining it is, there's really nothing magic about the
powder in a can that you mix with water," cycling coach Scott Saifer
said of the carbohydrate drink. "It's water, carbs, proteins, maybe
minerals and electrolytes. What's in chocolate milk? The same thing.
There's no reason it shouldn't be as good for recovery as a carb
drink."
(more in article)
--
cfsmtb
Dave Hughes
> Our Father, who art in Belgium,
> Mercks be thy Name.
<snip>
Axle.
I think you misspelled your name, Axel.
--
Dave Hughes | da...@hired-goons.net
'Behold ye angels, I have created the arse. Throughout
the ages to come, men and women shall grab hold of these,
and shout my name.' -- God, according to Geoff, Coupling.
monsterman
PiledHigher Wrote:
>
> It is:
>
> Our Father, who art in Belgium,
> Mercks be thy Name.
> Thy bicycles come.
> Thy racing be done,
> On Earth as it is in Belgium.
> Give us this day our daily ride.
> And forgive us our softnesses,
> As we forgive 4wds who trespass against us.
> And lead us not into mechanicals,
> But deliver us from head winds.
> For thine is the cadence,
> and the power,
> and the wins,
> for ever and ever.
> Axle.
--
monsterman
cfsmtb
PiledHigher Wrote:
>
> Our Father, who art in Belgium,
> Mercks be thy Name.
> Thy bicycles come.
> Thy racing be done,
> On Earth as it is in Belgium.
> Give us this day our daily ride.
> And forgive us our softnesses,
> As we forgive 4wds who trespass against us.
> And lead us not into mechanicals,
> But deliver us from head winds.
> For thine is the cadence,
> and the power,
> and the wins,
> for ever and ever.
> Axle.
Cycling's Mountain Madonna
http://tinyurl.com/y5vtoe
Michael Brunton pedals up to Lombardy's Madonna del Ghisallo chapel,
where Italy's bikers seek divine protection
A thousand years ago, in the wooded hills above Bellagio, where
cypresses sweep down to meet Lake Como as it branches into Lake Lecco,
the Count of Ghisallo was out hunting when he was set upon by brigands.
Fleeing for his life, the Count sought divine mercy at a roadside shrine
to the Virgin Mary and, according to legend, was miraculously spared.
The details of his escape are lost, but we can be sure it didn't
involve a bike. Yet centuries later, the Madonna del Ghisallo was named
the patron saint of cyclists, and ever since, pilgrims have been
pedaling up the mountain to this spot to ask her to "protect us along
the roads, relieve us from dangers and lead us to safety." And, the pro
cyclists can't help but add, to victory.
For a commuting cyclist in London, life can get scary. What with the
potholes and the scant regard for safety that leaves us to mix it with
buses and trucks, I've come to rely on my senses instead. Wearing a
helmet feels more like an act of desperation than faith, so I rarely
bother. I'd prefer the patronage of road planners to saints any day,
but a little divine intervention wouldn't go amiss.
dewatf
>> Maybe... but Alan's right about CM.. I'll be watching out extra
>> carefully come Friday afternoon for all the pissed off drivers on my
>> way home.
>
> This (http://tinyurl.com/y379xk) is precisely why CM isn't necessarily
> a good thing.
Exactly why?
Though the research is one pro-cyclists. It hasn't been replicated or
controlled for variable e.g. that he might ride further out when riding
with a helmet and looking for data that supports his prejudices.
It is not improbably that drivers may feel UK cyclist with helmets ride
safer and don't veer out (helmets are voluntary in the UK), or that drivers
subconsciously think of cyclists with helmets as less like vulnerable
fellow humans, but this research is hardly convincing and the logic he uses
to justify his conclusions nonsense.
Though I have encountered Critical Mass in Sydney twice. Once as a driver
when they were not "riding as cyclists normally do and are legaly entitled
to ride" but deliberately riding slowing and obstructing motorists to piss
them off. Secondly in a bar after a rally on an unrelated matter when they
were trying to recruit people for the next Critial Mass rally to "fuck the
system" == funny enough they were also Resitance members.
My local BUG, working with local councils and trying to work the RTA, has
achieved much more. The main result of anti-car groups like Critial Mass
has been to piss off drivers and cause politicians to make token gestures
like unsafe cycle lanes and paths that are not in cyclists' interests.
dewatf.