got a private message

[guest1]

i wrote something in response to a discussion forum and someone decided they did NOT like what i said ... that is OK ... i appreciate different opinions! however, this person decided to go after me via a private message, attacking me and what i said ... this is NOT OK ... i do NOT appreciate being attacked. i feel it is an open forum and if something is written in the open forum format it should be addressed in the open forum format ... there i go again, stating an opinion!

[Pax]

Lots of differing opinions on PM's, many people believe they are sacred and still others think "don't write it ANYWHERE on the internet unless you want it viewed by millions".

I'm somewhere in the middle with my view of PM's BUT on another forum when I received a particularly vicious PM I gave the author the opportunity to make it public in the thread or I would. He chose to be a coward and said hideous things to me so I copy 'n pasted back into the thread. I caught a lot of flack over it but I truly don't believe in allowing cowards to use the cover of PM's for personal attacks.

[Looeez]

I don't use PM's myself but I'm guessing it was in response in to your post of sidewalk cycling that effectively killed that thread. I had been going to post there as it's an interesting topic but I found your post off putting so didn't bother.

[Kimmyt]

I think in public internet forums that people are loathe to attack someone in public. As one of the previous posters mentioned, what is on the internet can be seen by anyone. I think it respectful that if someone disagreed with your opinion, that they did not attack you out int he middle of the forum.

I equate it with this: would you rather get in a fight with a SO in the middle of a crowded restaurant, or would you prefer it to happen in private?

If you don't feel comfortable with her response to you via PM, talk to HER and not the forum about it.

Some people call it 'not airing their dirty laundry'

:) I don't know what was contained in the PM nor do I care, I'm just saying my opinion on this as a member of various forums where things like this have happened. I, for one, think it good that someone who disagreed with you addressed it to you only, and did not clog the forum with vitriol.

K.

[Pax]

I think in public internet forums that people are loathe to attack someone in public. As one of the previous posters mentioned, what is on the internet can be seen by anyone. I think it respectful that if someone disagreed with your opinion, that they did not attack you out int he middle of the forum.

I equate it with this: would you rather get in a fight with a SO in the middle of a crowded restaurant, or would you prefer it to happen in private?

If you don't feel comfortable with her response to you via PM, talk to HER and not the forum about it.

Some people call it 'not airing their dirty laundry'

:) I don't know what was contained in the PM nor do I care, I'm just saying my opinion on this as a member of various forums where things like this have happened. I, for one, think it good that someone who disagreed with you addressed it to you only, and did not clog the forum with vitriol.

K.

Excellent points K. Interesting isn't it, how different forums have such different "cultures"?

[mimitabby]

Queen and KimmyT haha i agree with both of you.
My take if someone is being an A.H. in a PM it's creepy and yes
you have a right to let everyone know.
But if you want to be sensitive and not embarrass someone "hey, your pants
are down" a PM is entirely appropriate.

I say it depends on the message!

[Triskeliongirl]

PMs have their place. For example, I often use it when a discussion gets way too personal to be of interest to the larger group. BUT, you also have the option of instructing the site that you will not accept PMs. You also have the option of ignoring them.

[snapdragen]

If the pm is truly offensive, forward it to the administrator of the board with a complaint.

[guest1]

interesting feedback ... gave me MUCH food for thought and i appreciate your input! yes, some things may be better in a PM ... i can accept that.

as far as what i initially wrote to get such a vicious attack, it may not have set well with everyone, maybe it even killed the thread. if it did, then another thread needs to be started. opinions and new threads -- that's what makes life interesting.

[bcipam]

I've had my share of those types of emails... oh well, they don't know me and I dont know them so I don't let it get me upset or angry. I don't always respond and sometimes I do and I guess it's better private then being attacked in public which has occurred as well. Either way doesn't feel good. As I tell myself, let it go.

[BleeckerSt_Girl]

as far as what i initially wrote to get such a vicious attack, it may not have set well with everyone, maybe it even killed the thread. if it did, then another thread needs to be started. opinions and new threads -- that's what makes life interesting.

For what it's worth...I just read the sidewalk thread and I don't really see anything terrible with what you wrote. It's an opinion, big deal, wasn't attacking anyone personally or worthy of a mean PM if you ask me. (which nobody did :rolleyes: )

[snapdragen]

Yeah, what Lisa said! I saw nothing horrible there either.

[Trekhawk]

Yeah, what Lisa said! I saw nothing horrible there either.

Im with Snap and Lisa. Should I say this.....I though it was funny (put it down to a warped Aussie humour gene).

OK nobody PM me Im the sensitive type.:D

[BleeckerSt_Girl]

OK nobody PM me Im the sensitive type.:D

Ha! :D

[Geonz]

In my opinion it crosses the line between expressing one's *own* opinion about riding on sidewalks and declaring that anybody who does not share that opinion is, therefore, not a cyclist.

[Geonz]

In my opinion it crosses the line between expressing one's *own* opinion and slamming others... about riding on sidewalks and declaring that anybody who does not share that opinion is, therefore, not a cyclist.

[rocknrollgirl]

I just read the sidewalk thread, and I did not see anything wrong with your reply. As a matter of fact, I looked for a second post thinking perhaps that was the offense one.

That being said, I think that if someone had a beef with something that I posted, I would rather have them address me privately, instead of publically in the thread.

Just my two cents....

[TrekJeni]

I just read the sidewalk thread, and I did not see anything wrong with your reply. As a matter of fact, I looked for a second post thinking perhaps that was the offense one.

That being said, I think that if someone had a beef with something that I posted, I would rather have them address me privately, instead of publically in the thread.

Just my two cents....

I agree with Rocknrollgirl. I was looking for a second post.

In the state of Ohio, it is ILLEGAL for ANYONE to ride on the sidewalk OVER the age of 16. Bet you didn't know that.

Had an interesting talk with a bike cop here in Cincinnati about the whole 16 and over rule. Asked her if she would write a ticket if it was a mom on the sidewalk with her two little ones. She said she wouldn't, she uses her "judgement" versus always follwing the book.

She was pretty cool though because I asked her another question pertaining to objects being thrown at cyclists. Even if it didn't hit you, they "attempted" and I was supposed to call her to file a report!

Jeni

[Looeez]

I just read the sidewalk thread, and I did not see anything wrong with your reply. As a matter of fact, I looked for a second post thinking perhaps that was the offense one.

Personally I didn't find the post offensive. Although perhaps humourous, I felt it could be interpreted as rude. I can't be bothered with elitism and snobbery in sports or anything else and so didn't feel it was worth responding. As a shameless "bike rider" who'd want my opinion on a cyclists board?

[wannaduacentury]

I agree with Rocknrollgirl. I was looking for a second post.

In the state of Ohio, it is ILLEGAL for ANYONE to ride on the sidewalk OVER the age of 16. Bet you didn't know that.

Had an interesting talk with a bike cop here in Cincinnati about the whole 16 and over rule. Asked her if she would write a ticket if it was a mom on the sidewalk with her two little ones. She said she wouldn't, she uses her "judgement" versus always follwing the book.

She was pretty cool though because I asked her another question pertaining to objects being thrown at cyclists. Even if it didn't hit you, they "attempted" and I was supposed to call her to file a report!

Jeni

We need more policeman(women) like her. I like Cincinnati-I was there in December, nice city. Jennifer

[CycleChic06]

I think this brings up another question. Who is a cyclist? What is a cyclist? How do you define it?

Webster's simply defines a cyclist as:

"One who rides a cycle."

My question is, when did the term 'cyclist' become an elitist term used to include some and exclude others?


But what do I know, I actually got pulled over by a cop on my bike and recieved a $50 ticket for riding my bike over a pedestrian bridge. The alternative was to ride over a narrow two lane bridge with constant stream of cars and semis traveling at 50mph. It was worth the $50.

[Aint Doody]

Whoa, Cycle Chic...I think I'd have fussed about that one.

[Veronica]

I think this brings up another question. Who is a cyclist? What is a cyclist? How do you define it?

Webster's simply defines a cyclist as:

"One who rides a cycle."



I'm a cyclist. All the people I ride with are cyclists.

The lady I saw today working her way up a hill in jeans on her hybrid is a cyclist.

I haven't read the sidewalk thread.

V.

[guest1]

I think this brings up another question. Who is a cyclist? What is a cyclist? How do you define it?

Webster's simply defines a cyclist as:

"One who rides a cycle."

My question is, when did the term 'cyclist' become an elitist term used to include some and exclude others?

I like this idea ... should we start a new thread? The question: WHO is a cyclist?! What a great discussion because we obviously have a lot of different opinions! However, if I started it, I think I would get a lot of people mad, so maybe someone else could start it and I could just read it ... I may be enlightened because it is SAFE to say -- I am a BIKE SNOB ... confession is good for the sole, isn't it?! :) :p ;)

[Pax]

...

My question is, when did the term 'cyclist' become an elitist term used to include some and exclude others?

We live in a world of ever smaller circles of exclusion.

Think about how this works with Marines, they are MARINES/Brothers in arms/Leathernecks...then the question arises about where they went to boot camp (Parris Island for "real" Marines or Sandy Eggo for "Hollywood" Marines), this is further broken down into what their military specialty is/was...if you're not a rifleman then you are a pogue (someone who isn't primarily a rifleman and who is therefore "less").

We use "circles" to exclude and include those we want to either lessen or enhance...my guess is this is usually done as a way to elevate ourselves (and those we include) above others.

It's too bad that people feel the need to do this and create disharmony or ill-will in the process.

[7rider]

I"m reading all of this and all I can think of is that saying...
"Opinions are like belly buttons. Everybody's got one."

Yeah...it's a little Forrest Gump-ish, but hey. Get's the point across.

And PLEASE....don't start a "what is a cyclist" debate!!!
It's like asking - again - "How come that person on the bike (dare I say "cyclist"?) didn't wave at me when I waved first? Is he/she an elistist snob or something??" :rolleyes:

[mimitabby]

I"m reading all of this and all I can think of is that saying...
"Opinions are like belly buttons. Everybody's got one."

Yeah...it's a little Forrest Gump-ish, but hey. Get's the point across.

And PLEASE....don't start a "what is a cyclist" debate!!!
It's like asking - again - "How come that person on the bike (dare I say "cyclist"?) didn't wave at me when I waved first? Is he/she an elistist snob or something??" :rolleyes:

I agree, Regina... pulleeezze

[snapdragen]

We are all cyclists. Some are more cyclist than others.....:D



with apologies to George Orwell

[guest1]

We live in a world of ever smaller circles of exclusion.

Think about how this works with Marines, they are MARINES/Brothers in arms/Leathernecks...then the question arises about where they went to boot camp (Parris Island for "real" Marines or Sandy Eggo for "Hollywood" Marines), this is further broken down into what their military specialty is/was...if you're not a rifleman then you are a pogue (someone who isn't primarily a rifleman and who is therefore "less").

We use "circles" to exclude and include those we want to either lessen or enhance...my guess is this is usually done as a way to elevate ourselves (and those we include) above others.

It's too bad that people feel the need to do this and create disharmony or ill-will in the process.

I agree with you, life is full of "circles" to exclude and include -- to elevate and devalue ourselves and others. So, who and what is a cyclist? Is ANYone who rides a bike a cyclist? To me, that is like saying ANYone who throws a football in the backyard with their kids on Sunday afternoons is a football player; ANYone who jumps into a pool and doggie paddles across the pool length is a swimmer; ANYone who shoots hoops in their driveway is a basketball player. OK, I may be wrong, but to me, they are people having fun playing a sport, not necessarily defined by that sport. As for riding a bike, there are times when I am riding a bike and I am a bike rider -- I am goofing around with my kids in the neighborhood, riding my bike to the grocery store, or riding a smooth bike trail with my friends. Other times, I am a cyclist -- I am riding for fitness, endurance, and training. I am working hard and pushing my body to its limits (yep, give me a circle to place myself in), and I am presenting myself and my sport in the highest regard because I am maximizing my efforts and displaying respect for myself and my equipment, other people, automobiles, and the laws of my state. I am no longer "just riding my bike" but I am athlete and a professional (if only in my own mind). Yes, I am a bike rider, having fun and following the rules of the road, but I am also a cyclist because I train and work hard at riding my bike. IN MY OPINION, most everyone can ride a bike, but not everyone can be a cyclist. Ok, call me a snob, or any other form of snobbery ... I will be the first to claim it as truth ... but please don't PM me just because my "circle" is different from yours. Life is full of "circles" and that will never change.

[Pax]

... but please don't PM me just because my "circle" is different from yours. Life is full of "circles" and that will never change.

Point of clarification - Since you quoted my text it appears that you're addressing the above quote to me...I'd like to be clear that I am not the person who PM'd you.

[salsabike]

We are all cyclists. Some are more cyclist than others.....:D



with apologies to George Orwell

Nice one, Snap.

[Deborajen]

I agree, too. We're all cyclists - that's why we're here. We all ride bikes whether it's for commuting, exercise, competition, or whatever.

I think sportsmanship is always important in sports. Winning without gloating and losing without being a "sore loser" make all sports more fun. It keeps everyone in the "circle." Same with not having to define/qualify a person to be a "cyclist." Why go there?

Deb

[Kalidurga]

I like this idea ... should we start a new thread? The question: WHO is a cyclist?! What a great discussion because we obviously have a lot of different opinions! However, if I started it, I think I would get a lot of people mad, so maybe someone else could start it and I could just read it ... I may be enlightened because it is SAFE to say -- I am a BIKE SNOB ... confession is good for the sole, isn't it?! :) :p ;)

This is a great article that I read in Bicycling magazine (and I think someone also posted the link here a few months ago): Invisible Riders (http://www.bicycling.com/article/0,6610,s1-3-12-13639-1,00.html). If you want enlightenment about "who is a cyclist?", it's possible you'll find some in that article.

[BleeckerSt_Girl]

I think it's OKAY for us to have different definitions of what a "cyclist" is.
It's a definition that likely cannot be agreed upon here. All we can really do is state our various opinions of what it means to us as individuals. No one is Right or Wrong. Unfortunately, it often happens that one person will state their opinion and another will take exception to it and feel compelled to prove them "wrong", or just get angry about it. Language is such that most terms and words have varying definitions to different people- useless to argue about whose definition is more or less correct.

[guest1]

Point of clarification - Since you quoted my text it appears that you're addressing the above quote to me...I'd like to be clear that I am not the person who PM'd you.

yep, you're not and that was NOT the intent of what I wrote! it was a general statement, meaning, I know what I am and if ANYone disagrees, I support you for disagreeing but please don't send me private messages about how you (meaning ANYone) disagree ... tell Everybody!

[guest1]

This is a great article that I read in Bicycling magazine (and I think someone also posted the link here a few months ago): Invisible Riders (http://www.bicycling.com/article/0,6610,s1-3-12-13639-1,00.html). If you want enlightenment about "who is a cyclist?", it's possible you'll find some in that article.

I read that article ... good point! THANKS! :)

[Geonz]

I agree with you, life is full of "circles" to exclude and include -- to elevate and devalue ourselves and others. So, who and what is a cyclist? Is ANYone who rides a bike a cyclist? To me, that is like saying ANYone who throws a football in the backyard with their kids on Sunday afternoons is a football player; ANYone who jumps into a pool and doggie paddles across the pool length is a swimmer; ANYone who shoots hoops in their driveway is a basketball player. OK, I may be wrong, but to me, they are people having fun playing a sport, not necessarily defined by that sport. As for riding a bike, there are times when I am riding a bike and I am a bike rider -- I am goofing around with my kids in the neighborhood, riding my bike to the grocery store, or riding a smooth bike trail with my friends. Other times, I am a cyclist -- I am riding for fitness, endurance, and training. I am working hard and pushing my body to its limits (yep, give me a circle to place myself in), and I am presenting myself and my sport in the highest regard because I am maximizing my efforts and displaying respect for myself and my equipment, other people, automobiles, and the laws of my state. I am no longer "just riding my bike" but I am athlete and a professional (if only in my own mind). Yes, I am a bike rider, having fun and following the rules of the road, but I am also a cyclist because I train and work hard at riding my bike. IN MY OPINION, most everyone can ride a bike, but not everyone can be a cyclist. Ok, call me a snob, or any other form of snobbery ... I will be the first to claim it as truth ... but please don't PM me just because my "circle" is different from yours. Life is full of "circles" and that will never change.

So, you have a logical issue with saying ANYBODY who throws a football... I have that problem with your global ANYONE who ever uses a sidewalk not being "an athlete" "maximizing my efforts" etc. etc. The rather obvious implication is that I don't train, don't work hard, and don't follow the rules of the road because I get on a sidewalk when it makes sense - since you say that you are a cyclist because you train and work hard at riding your bike. If I am not a ;cyclist, that woudl imply that I don't.

However, i am simply positive that you work harder and train harder than I ever will. *That's* what makes you 'More" of a cyclist... at least a certain kind... *not* that you never cross off the road to go slower for a little while.

[BleeckerSt_Girl]

Instead of people being "more" or "less" of a cyclist, how about just saying there are different kinds of cyclists?: Professional cyclists, competition cyclists, fitness cyclists, and purely recreational cyclists. One could be more than one type too, like a competition mtn bike racer who rides in the park with their kids on the weekend! (maybe even going on the sidewalk! :eek: )

[CycleChic06]

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: Ok, I really really really didn't mean to set off that discussion of "what is a cyclist" It was meant rhetorically. I though it was clear when I listed the definition from websters that anyone who cycles is a cyclist. My point was we that we shouldn't bother categorizing and giving a name to what we are and what we do. We are all on this board becuase we share an interest in riding bicycles. We are all different levels of experience and invovlement, but all with one purpose. Please try to remember this and lets get back to discussing the relevant things like how far we've ridden today or how many scars we have from falling with clipless pedals or if we prefer sports beans over bananas...

[LBTC]

hmmmm.....all those circles, and I'm not exempt.

I am a beer snob. Yes, it's true. I just won't drink it if I just don't love it. No Bud, Labatt's, Canadian, Miller, etc in my house! If it isn't Sleeman's, Granville Island, Bowen Island or some micro brew that the average person has never heard of, I just won't drink it. Thanks for the offer, but, uh, no thanks.

heh.

I'm also not a photographer. I'm a photo enhusiast.

What the heck, everything else is labeled!!

Hugs and butterflies,
~T~

[pooks]

This reminds me of something I read on another site. A bunch of cyclists stopped at a small grocery out in the country to buy water, and had to walk by a bunch of guys with Harleys to go inside.

They all started talking and laughing, and the guys on Harleys were a lot more accepting of the guys in spandex than they feared, until one of the cyclists referred to himself as a "biker."

One of the big Harley guys growled, "Son, WE'RE the bikers. YOU'RE the bikEEs."

Badabing.

[ribbit_zap]

I just have to say that the last part of CycleChic's post from above made me grin :D I agree with Lisa's post from above. I think there are just different types of cyclist. Good point Lisa!

[five one]

Not tech savvy enough to insert the image, but this is one of my favorite comics that addressed biker/cyclist issue.

http://rhymeswithorange.com/home.php?date=20020507

[guest1]

So, you have a logical issue with saying ANYBODY who throws a football... I have that problem with your global ANYONE who ever uses a sidewalk not being "an athlete" "maximizing my efforts" etc. etc. The rather obvious implication is that I don't train, don't work hard, and don't follow the rules of the road because I get on a sidewalk when it makes sense - since you say that you are a cyclist because you train and work hard at riding your bike. If I am not a ;cyclist, that woudl imply that I don't.

However, i am simply positive that you work harder and train harder than I ever will. *That's* what makes you 'More" of a cyclist... at least a certain kind... *not* that you never cross off the road to go slower for a little while.

the sidewalk thing: if it is ILLEGAL to ride on the sidewalk, then I say don't do it because it is a TERRIBLE way to represent the sport of cycling! if it is LEGAL and the BEST METHOD to get from point A to point B, then use it because that makes you a VERY WISE cyclist! ;)

[stacie]

I listen to the evening news while cooking dinner. Reports of a cyclist hit by a car stop me in my tracks. I find myself hanging on every word trying to identify, is this a cyclist or someone on a bike? Without thought I try to identify if this was someone who was aware of the laws and following them. Yes, I try to identify if it is someone in "my group" or not. I am struck harder if someone I consider a cyclist has been injured. It's not that I care less for the other person it's just that it feels more like it could have been me. I can relate to this person and their level of risk more.
At my work, we are in the process of creating small groups of people with related interests. We have groups who like to work out before daylight in the morning. We have a tri-athlete group. We have a group of seniors, people who like to cook, a book club, a group of attorneys who drink wine and ride bikes......The goal is not to exclude people but to create a sense of family, community. We are pack animals. We like to belong. We enjoy being around people who have something in common with us. We enjoy meeting people with shared interest. Why must we feel that creating communities is excluding someone who doesnt share our interests? I belong to so many different communities. I rarely blend these groups together. I enjoy hanging with my cyclists friends on some occasions and my foodie friends on others. If you are not part of this group it just means we don't share this interest.
Don't let your emotions get in the way of healthy debate. Isn't the idea here to get together a bunch of people from different places with different ideas. Isn't it more interesting if we disagree, argue and debate? One group you can exclude me from is the one where everyone agrees with everything I say.
Just my 2 cents.

[Crankin]

OK, I laughed about the snobbiness of Marines. My son, who is a Marine, is home before he heads out to the "Hollywood" base at Camp Pendleton. He did go to Parris Island, he's a machine gunner, and he just got done with 2.5 years in the "Fast Force," a unit you get chosen for on the basis of an intelligence test. He definitely feels a bit "superior," but when I annoy him about not finishing college and become an officer, he gets really mad! It's the same thing. He is a major cyclist, by the "snobby" definition, but I know he would not make fun of anyone who rides. He was probably the most encouraging person to me when I started. My former exchange student, who is a professional racer in Europe, rode twice with me last summer. He also was just so encouraging about my progress, since i was toodling along on my mtb on the street when he met me. So, I guess what I'm trying to sy, is that we all have our definitions of who fits in a group and who doesn't. I try not to be a bike snob, and I actually like helping beginners, but I know that sometimes I am.

[Duck on Wheels]

A thought that just occurred to me ... Maybe we should take this thread back to where it started. Seems to me the question was whether it's ok to flame someone on this forum as long as the flame gets sent as a PM. Was that the question? If so, then my vote is "No, it's not OK." I'd say it's ok to disagree, preferably out in the open and politely. It's also ok to ask whether something we found hurtful was meant that way, and that might be an appropriate message for a PM, at least as a first step. But it's not ok to flame.

[Tuckervill]

One of the big Harley guys growled, "Son, WE'RE the bikers. YOU'RE the bikEEs."

Along those lines, there was a recent headline in my local paper:

"Cyclist, 16, killed on road"

Oh no! It really was more of a tragedy than at first glance, because the boy was killed when his own father crossed over the centerline on the country road near their home, and hit the boy with his truck.

But the boy was riding a MOTORcycle, not a BIcycle.

I think they were wrong to use the word "cyclist" to describe a motorcycle rider, but that just may be because of my perspective as a cyclist.

Karen

[Pax]

I listen to the evening news while cooking dinner. Reports of a cyclist hit by a car stop me in my tracks. I find myself hanging on every word trying to identify, is this a cyclist or someone on a bike? Without thought I try to identify if this was someone who was aware of the laws and following them. Yes, I try to identify if it is someone in "my group" or not. I am struck harder if someone I consider a cyclist has been injured. It's not that I care less for the other person it's just that it feels more like it could have been me. I can relate to this person and their level of risk more.
At my work, we are in the process of creating small groups of people with related interests. We have groups who like to work out before daylight in the morning. We have a tri-athlete group. We have a group of seniors, people who like to cook, a book club, a group of attorneys who drink wine and ride bikes......The goal is not to exclude people but to create a sense of family, community. We are pack animals. We like to belong. We enjoy being around people who have something in common with us. We enjoy meeting people with shared interest. Why must we feel that creating communities is excluding someone who doesnt share our interests? I belong to so many different communities. I rarely blend these groups together. I enjoy hanging with my cyclists friends on some occasions and my foodie friends on others. If you are not part of this group it just means we don't share this interest.
Don't let your emotions get in the way of healthy debate. Isn't the idea here to get together a bunch of people from different places with different ideas. Isn't it more interesting if we disagree, argue and debate? One group you can exclude me from is the one where everyone agrees with everything I say.
Just my 2 cents.

I agree that circles are inevitable, we meet up with people who share our common interests...it becomes problematic when we use our circle to denigrate others because they're not in the right circle.

TE is a circle, and a special one at that, I would consider it a negative thing though if people from TE made denigrating comments to other women who ride because they aren't member of TE or because they don't participate in TD/triathlons/racing/etc. It's the "snob factor" that sets my teeth on edge.

[Geonz]

the sidewalk thing: if it is ILLEGAL to ride on the sidewalk, then I say don't do it because it is a TERRIBLE way to represent the sport of cycling! if it is LEGAL and the BEST METHOD to get from point A to point B, then use it because that makes you a VERY WISE cyclist! ;)

Welp, it's legal. I'm still rolling my eyes at your condescension - actually, I have no reason to assume you train harder than I do and are "more of a cyclist" even by *your* definition. My 8o00+ miles last year didn't all come on the sidewalks.

But... here's the bigger issue:

I really love cycling - and not just so I can win things. I think it can improve the whole planet and so many of the people in it.

Are you assuming that I like (or even accept) the fact that to keep my skin, I have to negotiate sidewalks instead of being reasonably safe on the roads? If that's why you hold sidewalkers in contempt... what are you doing about it?

I mean, besides being condescending to people riding on the sidewalks?

Does that make the roads safer? Do you honestly think that brings those people out onto the roads?

No, in fact, it makes those sidewalker think "oh, okay, I'm just not *brave* enough for this. They are. Must be something wrong with me, not with the way the roads are designed. I can't expect better. Roads were made for cars."

Yes, one of the reasons I don't like riding on the sidewalk is because I don't like the message it sends to drivers or other cyclists or possible future cyclists.

I'm on our town's Bicycling and Pedestrian Advisory commission, I'm on the board of the League of Illinois Bicyclists; I write letters, I've been on the telly. ...but more than all that, IMO, I *ride* visibly and often, and do my utmost to get others to do so by leading beginner rides and just being a "normal" person who rides a bicycle to show it's a feasible option.

I want our roads to be places where cyclists can ride safely and efficiently. Right now that ain't the case. Some places, it is for people who have the courage and conviction and speed to negotiate the traffic - but so many, many people think that there's no need to make the roads safe for cyclists. They think that there's no reason to divert funds or inconvenience motorists for a bunch of Lance wannabees - let's face it, we wouldn't do that for hockey players, would we? Why should the public support your recreational pursuit?

I love cycling . I think it can do far more good than the benefits that athletics provide. There are so many current Stupid Problems that bicycling helps with, either a little or a lot, either individually (health) or societally (let's slow down and talk to each other!) or environmentally, or.. or..

HOwever, cyclists are a barely significant minority - even here. On the third hand, I talk to so many people who would *love* to ride more, either for fitness or instead of driving - but there are barriers.

Do you want to be one of those barriers?




... my most recent motorbiker interaction: pulled up to the Blarney Stone (only place for food in Ivesdale) as three motorbikes pulled up.
"Lance!"
We just grinned, went in... and then met the same group at teh Sadorus Pub which was our next stop... yea, our ration of riding to drinking was a little higher than theirs ;)

[BleeckerSt_Girl]

Seems to me the question was whether it's ok to flame someone on this forum as long as the flame gets sent as a PM. Was that the question? If so, then my vote is "No, it's not OK." I'd say it's ok to disagree, preferably out in the open and politely. It's also ok to ask whether something we found hurtful was meant that way, and that might be an appropriate message for a PM, at least as a first step. But it's not ok to flame.

I agree with all that. And I think "politely" is a key word here.

[stacie]

A statement was made. Some agree some don't. I believe we are so afraid of being labeled a ***** that we don't disagree, be assertive or be bold. We can't have healthy debates if we are so worried about stepping on someone's toes. This entire argument has been because someone could get their feelings hurt if someone happened to exclude them and then ridicule them for not being part of the group? If you disagree with someone, argue your point. I actually think this forum would be more interesting if we had some healthy passionate, debates. Please read Reviving Ophelia by Mary Pipher.

[Pax]

A statement was made. Some agree some don't. I believe we are so afraid of being labeled a ***** that we don't disagree, be assertive or be bold. We can't have healthy debates if we are so worried about stepping on someone's toes. This entire argument has been because someone could get their feelings hurt if someone happened to exclude them and then ridicule them for not being part of the group? If you disagree with someone, argue your point. I actually think this forum would be more interesting if we had some healthy passionate, debates. Please read Reviving Ophelia by Mary Pipher.

Some may have felt denigrated by the implication that they aren't "real cyclists" as stated below.


some people ride bikes

some people are cyclists

some people are roadies - they ride on the road

some people are mountain bikers - they ride on trails

there are those who do both while racing -- they are cyclocross racers

there are no sidewalk cyclists

some people ride bikes -- please do NOT confuse them with cyclists!

I truly enjoy a rousing argument and am not usually concerned about "stepping on toes". However as I've read various posts on TE, this board seems much "softer" in that area and I try to respect the culture of the board I'm visiting.

[Geonz]

It is denigrating - as well as pretty hysterically absurd - to be told not to confuse a person with a cyclist because they have a different opinion.


In fact, it pretty much prevents actual debate about the cycling issue.

[guest1]

Welp, it's legal. I'm still rolling my eyes at your condescension - actually, I have no reason to assume you train harder than I do and are "more of a cyclist" even by *your* definition. My 8o00+ miles last year didn't all come on the sidewalks.

But... here's the bigger issue:

I really love cycling - and not just so I can win things. I think it can improve the whole planet and so many of the people in it.

Are you assuming that I like (or even accept) the fact that to keep my skin, I have to negotiate sidewalks instead of being reasonably safe on the roads? If that's why you hold sidewalkers in contempt... what are you doing about it?

I mean, besides being condescending to people riding on the sidewalks?

Does that make the roads safer? Do you honestly think that brings those people out onto the roads?

No, in fact, it makes those sidewalker think "oh, okay, I'm just not *brave* enough for this. They are. Must be something wrong with me, not with the way the roads are designed. I can't expect better. Roads were made for cars."

Yes, one of the reasons I don't like riding on the sidewalk is because I don't like the message it sends to drivers or other cyclists or possible future cyclists.

I'm on our town's Bicycling and Pedestrian Advisory commission, I'm on the board of the League of Illinois Bicyclists; I write letters, I've been on the telly. ...but more than all that, IMO, I *ride* visibly and often, and do my utmost to get others to do so by leading beginner rides and just being a "normal" person who rides a bicycle to show it's a feasible option.

I want our roads to be places where cyclists can ride safely and efficiently. Right now that ain't the case. Some places, it is for people who have the courage and conviction and speed to negotiate the traffic - but so many, many people think that there's no need to make the roads safe for cyclists. They think that there's no reason to divert funds or inconvenience motorists for a bunch of Lance wannabees - let's face it, we wouldn't do that for hockey players, would we? Why should the public support your recreational pursuit?

I love cycling . I think it can do far more good than the benefits that athletics provide. There are so many current Stupid Problems that bicycling helps with, either a little or a lot, either individually (health) or societally (let's slow down and talk to each other!) or environmentally, or.. or..

HOwever, cyclists are a barely significant minority - even here. On the third hand, I talk to so many people who would *love* to ride more, either for fitness or instead of driving - but there are barriers.

Do you want to be one of those barriers?




... my most recent motorbiker interaction: pulled up to the Blarney Stone (only place for food in Ivesdale) as three motorbikes pulled up.
"Lance!"
We just grinned, went in... and then met the same group at teh Sadorus Pub which was our next stop... yea, our ration of riding to drinking was a little higher than theirs ;)

Good for you! I am sure you are proud of what you have accomplished and what you do as a cycling advocate. However, I sure hope your crown doesn't hurt your head TOO badly when you wear your cycling helmet! :eek:

[Geonz]

Good for you! I am sure you are proud of what you have accomplished and what you do as a cycling advocate. However, I sure hope your crown doesn't hurt your head TOO badly when you wear your cycling helmet! :eek:

Okay, okay, climbing down from my *own* little "I'm higher than you" elevation :o

Pax ;)

[BleeckerSt_Girl]

It is denigrating - as well as pretty hysterically absurd - to be told not to confuse a person with a cyclist because they have a different opinion.


In fact, it pretty much prevents actual debate about the cycling issue.

I don't know, I simply found it mildly snobbish (I can be mildly snobbish about lots of things too, including biking). Several people have already expressed that they did not find anything offensive at all in the post. Clearly the post is viewed differently by different people. That's not unusual. It's ok to enter into discussion that disagrees with the poster's opinion. That's what the forum is about- exchanging various ideas and opinions. There's probably nothing we would all agree on.
What makes this case different is that apparently someone sent a nasty private message in response to the post. Just how nasty it was we will never know, but if it was indeed nasty and rude well then that was inappropriate and uncalled for. It's healthy to disagree and argue one's point, but I think it's NOT ok to be toxically nasty and/or attack people personally. In my opinion, using the cover of a PM in order to get away with saying nasty things to another member without it being openly seen is abusing the forum.

[rocknrollgirl]

I don't have any answers, but this sure has been interesting......

;)

[roguedog]

What is a cyclist?

This has actually been on my mind lately and something I'm trying to figure out.

I'm new to "cycling" though I've been riding bikes since I was like 5. For me it was just about the only alternative left since I hate running and I've gotten really sick of going to the gym. So I just started... and I found out I enjoy it.

However, I haven't ridden since Tday with holidays, family and other social stuff going on. In that time I've been contemplating this question since I feel all this guilt or feeling like a "slacker" since I'm not out there doing my 100 miles a week like some folks. In some sense this has been good cuz it gives me perspective.

When did biking become cycling to me? When did I need to don my fancy clothes (of which I don't have many really) to just ride to work?? I mean I went to UC Davis for god's sake and spent (cough) all my college years biking around in jeans and sweats in the friggin wind, rain and cold on a used bike from the bike auction. I didn't even have a car for 2-3 years. Walking or riding were my only alternatives.

Then I was reading thru Rivendell's site and their pragmatic approach to cycling/biking was really fresh air to me.

"Special clothing just to ride a bike? Are you sure?

(This is kind of a long rant.)

If you have any doubts that you can ride in normal clothing, consider that 200 million people worldwide do it every day. So it comes down to clothing for "serious, performance cycling," and that's when the clothing starts to look and feel funny. Based on the snug-fitting clothing of the famous comic book superheros, cycling clothing has continued to devolve to its current state, which is: "

So yesterday morning, I just jumped on my little mtn bike with my jeans and geeky reflective cuff velcro thingy and went to work.

What am saying.. rambling? I guess ...that we are privileged to live in a country that gives us the choice to be cyclists. And that as long as I am aware of that, I've defined it for myself. I've defined my "circles." Will I keep buying stuff. Ya betcha cuz I love shopping :) And will I train for the Terra Bella and the Cindy.. yup as much as my life will allow me at the moment.

But.. I have to remember that cycling is one of my hobbies and I'm a damn, friggin lucky a$$ bastard to have that choice.

I'll leave this morning's contemplation with this photo. The lady in the picture below has my respect and awe. I took this when my tour bus had an engine problem outside of Shanghai. While we were just wandering around stretching our legs, this lady just came riding up on the opposite side of road, toting her load and then quietly just disappeared into the horizon. She "trains" everyday because she has no choice. And she's definitely not a a weight weeny! And god knows how far she has to go everyday..

This picture just makes me laugh at myself but also makes me feel very lucky.

Enjoy...keep on pedaling (I'm off to work .. in my jeans)

[snapdragen]

Good for you! I am sure you are proud of what you have accomplished and what you do as a cycling advocate. However, I sure hope your crown doesn't hurt your head TOO badly when you wear your cycling helmet! :eek:


Okay, okay, climbing down from my *own* little "I'm higher than you" elevation :o

Pax ;)

Well thank goodness, I thought I was going to have to put on my moderator crown....er hat.

:rolleyes: :D

[Eden]

Little anecdote:

Around here there was a rather tragic situation that emphasized who is a cyclist? A woman downtown was pushed under a bus and killed. The first reports that came out were that it was a cyclist riding on the side walk that caused the woman to fall. So what did everyone immediately think? It must have been one of those crazy messengers - see we told you cyclists were dangerous etc. Well when the whole story was reported it came out that the man and woman were having an arguement when he shoved her and she fell under the bus. The man then grabbed a bike from someone else and rode off to flee the scene. The media continued to report it as a cyclist killing a pedestrian. Was he a cyclist or a man with a bike? Could he have been both at different times?

Sometimes the different groups of cyclists around here tiff a bit over who is more justified to be on the road - whether or not we should have a helmet law (which was recently enacted) and who bike laws have the most effect on. In the end we just need to realize that cyclists are a varied community. We all have varied and valid reasons for riding a bike and no we aren't all going to automatically be friends or agree, but at least we can respect those who choose our mode of transportation. Who knows maybe next year that person who was afraid to venture off of the sidewalk will buy a new road bike and get the confidence to go out on the road. Maybe when I'm 98 1/2 and riding a tricycle I'll want to stay on the sidewalk and not ride faster than a walk..

[mimitabby]

Little anecdote:

Around here there was a rather tragic situation that emphasized who is a cyclist? A woman downtown was pushed under a bus and killed. The first reports that came out were that it was a cyclist riding on the side walk that caused the woman to fall. So what did everyone immediately think? It must have been one of those crazy messengers - see we told you cyclists were dangerous etc. Well when the whole story was reported it came out that the man and woman were having an arguement when he shoved her and she fell under the bus. The man then grabbed a bike from someone else and rode off to flee the scene. The media continued to report it as a cyclist killing a pedestrian. Was he a cyclist or a man with a bike? Could he have been both at different times?
.

Good grief, Eden, i followed that story and never heard these details!!

[missymaya]

Roguedog,
Those are my thoughts exactly! We are pretty darn lucky to be able to discuss the definition of a "cyclist" and anything it entails and be able to do what we love to do, ride, as a hobbie and/or form of transportation, health, etc. I think someone already mentioned it, bicycle mag had an article, Invisible Riders, which is pretty good.
As for the PM, I take communicating through the net simarly to communicating to someone in person, it's just not cool to be insulting and offensive, in order to defend your argument. If someone has a problem with what's been said, politely confront and discuss the issue. No need to create more hate and anger; this world doesn't need anymore!
Remember, we're on this forum b/c we all relate in one particular subject: cycling, riding, bicycling, or whatever you wanna call it! :D

[Geonz]

I don't know, I simply found it mildly snobbish (I can be mildly snobbish about lots of things too, including biking). Several people have already expressed that they did not find anything offensive at all in the post. Clearly the post is viewed differently by different people. That's not unusual. It's ok to enter into discussion that disagrees with the poster's opinion. That's what the forum is about- exchanging various ideas and opinions. There's probably nothing we would all agree on.
What makes this case different is that apparently someone sent a nasty private message in response to the post. Just how nasty it was we will never know, but if it was indeed nasty and rude well then that was inappropriate and uncalled for. It's healthy to disagree and argue one's point, but I think it's NOT ok to be toxically nasty and/or attack people personally. In my opinion, using the cover of a PM in order to get away with saying nasty things to another member without it being openly seen is abusing the forum.

I would agree - basically, being toxically nasty (on the forum or in PM) is uncalled for. (And I wouldn't call saying 'don't confuse Sue with a cyclist' *toxically* nasty - it was more the idea that anybody who ever hops on a sidewalk for their own safety can't also hammer that I found beyond "expressing an opinion" and crossing to "putting down the other person." )

[Kimmyt]

I'd like to point something out about the media referring to people as 'cyclists' that perhaps they shouldn't:

One of my other hobbies is rock climbing. (I hesitate to say I'm a climber. I don't think of myself as one). There are always news stories about people at (usually) local crags that fall to their deaths.

The news stories refer to them as climbers.

Many times, these 'climbers' are actually people who are scrambling up on the rock and have no business being there. They are kids fooling around without realizing the danger, hikers who think that surely their feet won't slip. They are not climbers.

Or are they? The media calls them that, and so climbing may get more bad press... local areas may begin to have access issues.

I'm just saying that calling something or someone by a name does not mean that they necessarily are one. Whats that famous saying about the rose?? It happens in lots of sports.

K.

[Tuckervill]

I reserve the right to define myself by any label that furthers my aims.

Conversely, I reserve the right to refuse a label that prevents me from being fully equal or makes me less than.

In other words, I reserve the right to self-determination.

Karen

[LBTC]

I reserve the right to define myself by any label that furthers my aims.

Conversely, I reserve the right to refuse a label that prevents me from being fully equal or less than.

In other words, I reserve the right to self-determination.

Karen

Amen

[lph]

<butting in a week late as usual, what can I say, I think slow>

This exact argument has gone on more times than I can count on my (rock) climber forum. Someone offhandedly throws a comment about "newbies who climb grade x", and everybody who has never been above grade x in the course of 15 years of climbing get all huffy about being called newbies.

What it basically boils down to is that if you do something you're proud of, and mentally have given yourself some kind of "title", you don't take kindly to someone else saying you're not worthy of that title. Especially not if they at the same time imply that they are more worthy of said title.

Sure it's a valid personal opinion, but it's not surprising if people don't like it.

And for the record - I could care less about what other people think of my cycling, but I HATE it when people call 5.10 climbers newbies... ;) Obviously my pride lies in climbing, not cycling.

[Pax]

<butting in a week late as usual, what can I say, I think slow>

This exact argument has gone on more times than I can count on my (rock) climber forum. Someone offhandedly throws a comment about "newbies who climb grade x", and everybody who has never been above grade x in the course of 15 years of climbing get all huffy about being called newbies.

What it basically boils down to is that if you do something you're proud of, and mentally have given yourself some kind of "title", you don't take kindly to someone else saying you're not worthy of that title. Especially not if they at the same time imply that they are more worthy of said title.

Sure it's a valid personal opinion, but it's not surprising if people don't like it.

And for the record - I could care less about what other people think of my cycling, but I HATE it when people call 5.10 climbers newbies... ;) Obviously my pride lies in climbing, not cycling.

Excellent post! I imagine there are folks here who identify deeply as "cyclists"...by the same token I imagine there are folks riding in the TDF who would scoff at those who identify that way.

I like Tucks post so I think I'll stick with that:


I reserve the right to define myself by any label that furthers my aims.

Conversely, I reserve the right to refuse a label that prevents me from being fully equal or makes me less than.

In other words, I reserve the right to self-determination.

Karen

[li10up]

In one of Lance's books he stated something to the effect that "real" cyclists wouldn't even take the bike out of the garage for a ride of less than 3 hrs. Was I offended? No. Do I consider myself a cyclist? Yes - A recreational cyclist. I rode a bike from the time I was 4 until I went off to college. Did I consider myself a cyclist then? No. I was a bike rider. Do I consider the person riding on the wrong side of the street, with no helmet and wobbling all over a cyclist? No. But likely, neither does he. But I still make eye contact with him, raise a finger or say hello because I feel a kinship with anyone on a bike. There are all kinds of levels in life...what's wrong with just being a bike rider? It doesn't make you any less of a person. I'm not any less of a person because I can't ride 3 hrs with Lance...and I guess I agree with him on some level...I'm not a real cyclist...I'm a recreational cyclist. I have no delusions of being in the same league as Lance and the boys (and girls). I don't think it's denigrating at all to try to describe things on various levels. We're all cyclists in the literal sense...but that doesn't mean I can't define "cyclist" for myself in my own way.

Nobody can make you feel inferior without your consent. ~Eleanor Roosevelt

[li10up]

Queen, you beat me to the quote!! :) Or I didn't see it I guess.

[mimitabby]

ah, heck, I've been a cyclist since I was 3 on a red tricycle. Lance isn't more of a cyclist than me or any other kid. he might be faster, stronger, tougher, and a lot more famous than any other cyclist, but we're ALL cyclists if we like to ride bikes!

[salsabike]

ah, heck, I've been a cyclist since I was 3 on a red tricycle. Lance isn't more of a cyclist than me or any other kid. he might be faster, stronger, tougher, and a lot more famous than any other cyclist, but we're ALL cyclists if we like to ride bikes!

Absolutely, positively +1.

[SouthernBelle]

I note the OP is now 'guest' rather than her registered name. ??

[IFjane]

Belle - I noted that as well. Hmmmmm.....:rolleyes:

[BleeckerSt_Girl]

I note the OP is now 'guest' rather than her registered name. ??

I just hope she didn't have to change her user ID because of getting more upsetting PM's. :(

[Thistle]

How do you do that? change your login without setting up a whole new one?

I was thinking of changing mine cos i was "discussion board naive"when i started and used my real name :o

[snapdragen]

I just hope she didn't have to change her user ID because of getting more upsetting PM's. :(

I hope she didn't get chased off. :(

[Mr. Bloom]

OK, I wonder if the residents of this place near my office would be considered cyclists:

http://www.cfcapartments.com/apt_apartment_full.php?community_cd=5&company_cd=1

[wannaduacentury]

OK, I wonder if the residents of this place near my office would be considered cyclists:

http://www.cfcapartments.com/apt_apartment_full.php?community_cd=5&company_cd=1

Now I like that idea, we need some of those type urban planners in Ga, maybe solve the traffic problem. What would it be like if everyone "had" to ride bicycles for everything?

[BleeckerSt_Girl]

What would it be like if everyone "had" to ride bicycles for everything?

China?

[mimitabby]

China?

yeah, except in China, everyone is racing to get a car.

[wannaduacentury]

yeah, except in China, everyone is racing to get a car.

I heard that story too. Or when the subway and taxi's went on strike in NYC, everyone was scrambling to get around(pictures of men riding pink girls bicycles b/c it was all they had).
:rolleyes:

[mimitabby]

I heard that story too. Or when the subway and taxi's went on strike in NYC, everyone was scrambling to get around(pictures of men riding pink girls bicycles b/c it was all they had).
:rolleyes:

yes, that was grand!

[BleeckerSt_Girl]

In Puerto Rico when you see men on bikes half the time it's some little kid's bike, often pink. :rolleyes:

[Geonz]

OK, I wonder if the residents of this place near my office would be considered cyclists:

http://www.cfcapartments.com/apt_apartment_full.php?community_cd=5&company_cd=1

I sent that address out to my bike advocacy group and one of our folks has some influence on our local planners, etc. and our town is in many ways similar to Bloomington IN (and close enough to it, too)... she said thanks for posting this - it may have far reaching effects :) :)

[Offthegrid]

I was thinking of changing mine cos i was "discussion board naive"when i started and used my real name :o

No one would have known if you hadn't told us. ;)

Surprisingly, "grid" isn't my real name.

[SouthernBelle]

No one would have known if you hadn't told us. ;)

Surprisingly, "grid" isn't my real name.

I was going to just start calling you 'offthe' I just figured it was some european thing.

[snapdragen]

No one would have known if you hadn't told us. ;)

Surprisingly, "grid" isn't my real name.

But Offthe is?;)