got a private message

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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......

[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." )