jbeattie writes:

On Thursday, December 26, 2019 at 4:22:10 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/26/2019 6:15 PM, wrote:
On Thursday, December 26, 2019 at 6:36:34 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:

I'd say science and logic are better than tradition. Which makes your
argument entirely backwards.

Because for over 100 years of American (at least) bicycle use, the
common teaching and common tradition was that bicyclists have no right
to the road, and are safest when they ride facing traffic, and/or on
sidewalks, and/or in the gutter.

But, as with astronomy, people eventually applied observation, logic and
science (and also took the time to understand applicable laws) and found
that was wrong. It was determined that bicyclist do better when they
operate as legal vehicle operators.

You seem to be either stuck in an old myth, or arguing against science
and learning.

Now the question is, are you doing this based on thorough knowledge of
what is actually being taught in these books and courses? IOW, have you
taken such a course or thoroughly read such a book? Or are you arguing
based on your own assumptions?

I think everyone here is doing the right thing considering the
specific situation and their judgement.

I think everyone here _thinks_ they are doing the right thing; but that
doesn't mean they are.

But you can't prescribe for them without knowing their circumstances, including applicable laws.


Up to half a year ago I had the urge sometimes to point out to
people what they were doing wrong despite I never got a sensible
reply or discussion as a result. I think the natural reaction of
people when doing something wrong they blame the other guy. The
last time a guy who stopped his car at a dangerous spot and opened
his door in front of me. A curse escaped me when I just could go
around his door. He came after me and right hooked me into the
roadside and almost knocked me off my bike. I came home all ****ed
up and it ruined my up to then pleasant ride. I promised myself I
won't let that happen again. You can't discuss with idiots and I
don't do that anymore.

I'd never say that confronting an idiot motorist is without risks. One
very muscular, short-tempered friend of mine once followed an abusive
motorist into a parking lot and got in a fight with him. My friend was
jailed as a result.

If a cyclist does choose to verbally confront an abusive idiot, I think
it needs to be done with care and judgment - and perhaps with a good
supply of luck. I can certainly understand people choosing to never,
ever do that.

Right, when someone threatens me, a drop down menu appears in my
vision field populated with potential
responses. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AuUqpZgHiEE
Hmmm. Let me think calmly and rationally about my response.


But in my view, it's one thing to choose not to chase down such a jerk,
or yell angrily at them. It's another thing to skulk in the gutter or
refuse to ride on roads because of such jerks. The jerks comprise a tiny
percentage of motorists. I encounter them only rarely.

Who skulks in gutters? I have never once seen a cyclist skulking in a
gutter. In fact, it is really hard to even ride in a gutter let alone
skulk and ride.

Frank has gutters? We had to skulk in the poison ivy patches by the
side of the road.