logistics associated with starting a new riding group?

On Jan 23, 9:44 pm, "Mike Kruger" wrote:



I've been away and so I'm responding late to this post.

Me too. Idiots on other NGs have got me preoccupied!

1. If you actually show up, you might find that there is more of a variety
of ages in the group than it appears. It's possible that the younger group
doesn't have any people who care to take pictures.

In my case -- and I'm in NYC -- it's definitely mostly middle-aged
folks. Stands to reason. Those are the people who do not seem to
have as many "social outlets" as younger folks.

2. Ask them what other groups are in the area. Most people seem happy to
share this information, although naturally they think the group they ride
with is best. (and it probably is, for THEM)

Even though this is NYC, there aren't any that want to do any inter-
state and inter-city riding. You'd think there was a market for this
kind of thing here, but no -- everybody's either a skinny limp-wristed
racer or a fatty who likes riding "around the block" (close to home).

3. Around here, you can ride with a group a few times before they get
serious about collecting dues, assuming they ever do. There's no real
investment involved.

There's a reason why most cyclists cycle alone or in pairs at most.
God, I really miss those days when you just call up your classmates
and off you go into a whole other borough!

The only group I was involved in starting was a spin-off. Some of us were
refereeing youth soccer, and thought it would be good conditioning / a bit
of fun to go for a ride on Saturday morning. Sometimes there were a few
older (5th-8th grade) kids along. We did this for two or three years. You
might do a spin-off from a fitness center, a church men's group, or
something else.

Yup. Too bad you can't depend on people. One guy who "recruited" me
even wanted to ride to Florida from here! Fellow's now another MIA/
AWOL case -- and that's before winter had set in.

Prisoner at War wrote:
Legal issues are probably the biggest consideration. Like, what if
someone gets hurt and so forth. You may not be an official club, but
I'd worry about any laws, local or otherwise, which may beg to differ
with you on that! I know it sounds ridiculous, but...maybe it's
'cause I'm in New York, with half the world's lawyers here....

Don't draft any paperwork that calls you a "club". Then you are just a
group of cyclists that happen to be riding together.
That should make you lawyer-proof.
Having each other's phone numbers and informally riding together doesn't
make a club. You could have a separate '5s' for cycling activities. The
'5s' is for cell phones as seen on television (over and over).
Bill Baka

On Feb 6, 5:57 pm, Bill Baka wrote:
Prisoner at War wrote:
Legal issues are probably the biggest consideration. Like, what if
someone gets hurt and so forth. You may not be an official club, but
I'd worry about any laws, local or otherwise, which may beg to differ
with you on that! I know it sounds ridiculous, but...maybe it's
'cause I'm in New York, with half the world's lawyers here....

Don't draft any paperwork that calls you a "club". Then you are just a
group of cyclists that happen to be riding together.
That should make you lawyer-proof.

I'm not sure about that. For example, look at so-called "common law
marriages"...there's no paperwork saying "husband and wife" but if
they split the guy's still liable to pay child-support for her kids
that she already had previous to their relationship!

Having each other's phone numbers and informally riding together doesn't
make a club. You could have a separate '5s' for cycling activities. The
'5s' is for cell phones as seen on television (over and over).

Dude, this is liberal NYC, and the City wants bicyclists numbering
more than twenty (or whatever the exact number is) to apply for a
parade permit first. Wedding and funeral processions in cars are all
right, but bicyclists they want to crack down on....

I'm just saying, you never know...sometimes the law thinks in the "if
it looks like duck and walks like a duck" frame-of-mind...if folks
meeting regularly to ride can look to a casual observer to be a bike
club, the law may decide that for all practical intents and purposes
they are! I hope not, of course, but you hear about crazy lawyer-****
in the news all the time....

Bill Baka

Prisoner at War wrote:
On Feb 6, 5:57 pm, Bill Baka wrote:
Prisoner at War wrote:
Legal issues are probably the biggest consideration. Like, what if
someone gets hurt and so forth. You may not be an official club, but
I'd worry about any laws, local or otherwise, which may beg to differ
with you on that! I know it sounds ridiculous, but...maybe it's
'cause I'm in New York, with half the world's lawyers here....
Don't draft any paperwork that calls you a "club". Then you are just a
group of cyclists that happen to be riding together.
That should make you lawyer-proof.

I'm not sure about that. For example, look at so-called "common law
marriages"...there's no paperwork saying "husband and wife" but if
they split the guy's still liable to pay child-support for her kids
that she already had previous to their relationship!

Having each other's phone numbers and informally riding together doesn't
make a club. You could have a separate '5s' for cycling activities. The
'5s' is for cell phones as seen on television (over and over).

Dude, this is liberal NYC, and the City wants bicyclists numbering
more than twenty (or whatever the exact number is) to apply for a
parade permit first. Wedding and funeral processions in cars are all
right, but bicyclists they want to crack down on....

I'm not sure that isn't an apples and oranges comparison.

I'm just saying, you never know...sometimes the law thinks in the "if
it looks like duck and walks like a duck" frame-of-mind...if folks
meeting regularly to ride can look to a casual observer to be a bike
club, the law may decide that for all practical intents and purposes
they are! I hope not, of course, but you hear about crazy lawyer-****
in the news all the time....

AAARRGGGHH. If that is any reflection of how the mayor runs things I
sure don't want him dropping his hat in the "Run for president" ring.

Bill Baka, again.

On Feb 9, 2:59 pm, Bill Baka wrote:
Prisoner at War wrote:
On Feb 6, 5:57 pm, Bill Baka wrote:
Prisoner at War wrote:
Legal issues are probably the biggest consideration. Like, what if
someone gets hurt and so forth. You may not be an official club, but
I'd worry about any laws, local or otherwise, which may beg to differ
with you on that! I know it sounds ridiculous, but...maybe it's
'cause I'm in New York, with half the world's lawyers here....
Don't draft any paperwork that calls you a "club". Then you are just a
group of cyclists that happen to be riding together.
That should make you lawyer-proof.

I'm not sure about that. For example, look at so-called "common law
marriages"...there's no paperwork saying "husband and wife" but if
they split the guy's still liable to pay child-support for her kids
that she already had previous to their relationship!

Having each other's phone numbers and informally riding together doesn't
make a club. You could have a separate '5s' for cycling activities. The
'5s' is for cell phones as seen on television (over and over).

Dude, this is liberal NYC, and the City wants bicyclists numbering
more than twenty (or whatever the exact number is) to apply for a
parade permit first. Wedding and funeral processions in cars are all
right, but bicyclists they want to crack down on....

I'm not sure that isn't an apples and oranges comparison.

Yeah, but they're both fruits! So maybe if you're after Vitamin C,
then it does matter whether you have an orange or an apple, but if you
just feel like a healthy snack, then no, it doesn't matter too
much...I'm just saying that the City has some weird ideas about
cycling (I'd really like to meet the asses who started the whole "a
bike is a vehicle" mentality, such that now biking peaceably on
sidewalks is considered a crime), and I'd not be too surprised if
things turn out as I fear...I'm telling you, I have a lot of
experience with lawyers, and they really can con the devil himself out
his dues (ever read "Merchant of Venice"??)....

AAARRGGGHH. If that is any reflection of how the mayor runs things I
sure don't want him dropping his hat in the "Run for president" ring.

It's very curious, but I'm not sure Mayor Bloomberg even notices
bicycling matters, unlike his personal interest in gun control and
public health and grand building projects...no, the anti-bicycling
impetus seems to be from the NYPD for some reason....

Bill Baka, again.

On 14 Feb 2007 22:36:39 -0800, "Prisoner at War"
wrote:

I'd really like to meet the asses who started the whole "a
bike is a vehicle" mentality,

I didn't start it but strongly agree with it. W/o it we'd have even
more limited rights on the road.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

On Jan 18, 11:33 am, "Ken C. M." wrote:
I have now been riding again for a couple of years now, been a regular
here almost as long and now find myself wanting to ride with some other,
the problem with this is, there is a local riding group but from the
looks of some of the club photos, it looks like most of the riders are a
bit older, I would prefer to ride more with riders a little closer to my
own age group. Now I may investigate the local group a bit more and
maybe even do a ride or two when they have open rides, I don't want to
spend to join a group that I am not interested in riding with. So I
guess what this boils down to is this: Has anyone ever started a riding
group? Whats the hardest part?

Keeping the idiots out. If you have a 'ride type' in mind, whether it
be slow, conversational or fast, paceline practice, or hammer to stop
signs, getting everybody on the same page, safely, is a chore.
Somebody's ego always gets in the way.

I would think it's probably getting new
riders. How would you go about such an endeavor if you were inclined to
make such an attempt? Thanks in advance for all the input.

Ken
--
The bicycle is just as good company as most husbands and, when it gets
old and shabby, a woman can dispose of it and get a new one without
shocking the entire community. ~Ann Strong

On Feb 15, 7:02 am, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:
On 14 Feb 2007 22:36:39 -0800, "Prisoner at War"

wrote:
I'd really like to meet the asses who started the whole "a
bike is a vehicle" mentality,

I didn't start it but strongly agree with it. W/o it we'd have even
more limited rights on the road.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visithttp://www.jt10000.com
****************************


I must disagree. AFAIK, bicyclists have always had road rights, as do
even pedestrians. Driving is a *priviledge* -- it's licensed, after
all -- and I'm afraid we lose sight of that because human nature finds
it easy to bully the Little Guy....

No, bicyclists have always had road rights. Bikes predate
automobiles! And I don't see any benefit at all to this "a bike is a
vehicle too!" mentality -- if you really believed that, you'd be
calling for us to be licensed (with plates!) and insured as well, like
any other vehicle!

What, should skateboarders and foot-scooters have to wear helmets and
stay off sidewalks, too?? How about folks jogging at 10 mph???

Damned fascists!!

Prisoner at War wrote:
On Feb 9, 2:59 pm, Bill Baka wrote:
AAARRGGGHH. If that is any reflection of how the mayor runs things I
sure don't want him dropping his hat in the "Run for president" ring.

It's very curious, but I'm not sure Mayor Bloomberg even notices
bicycling matters, unlike his personal interest in gun control and
public health and grand building projects...no, the anti-bicycling
impetus seems to be from the NYPD for some reason....

I was thinking Guilliani(sp?). Bloomberg is a total unknown to me? Does
he drive a gas guzzling SUV or get limo'd everywhere he goes? Has he
EVER ridden a bike? Many city kids never get a chance to ride a bike,
due to money, theft, and parents concerns over the freedom to go into
bad areas. The closest I have ever come to a big city was growing up in
the Chicago suburbs where I could ride into the city, but chose to ride
away from it. Riding in Chicago seemed so improbable that even at 14 I
took the Metra train and hooked up with the 'El' subway/skyway system
then took buses to things like the museums. I don't know if Chicago is
bike unfriendly by law, but my common sense tells me I want to be in a
car in that city. New York doesn't seem to be that different in terms of
population density, so is it ridable or what?
Sidewalks being illegal does not make much sense unless some hot shots
tried 20 MPH and actually caused accidents that got the law passed.
8 MPH on a sidewalk beats 20 MPH in traffic, for me, at least.
Bill Baka

On 15 Feb 2007 11:05:57 -0800, "Prisoner at War"
wrote:

On Feb 15, 7:02 am, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:
On 14 Feb 2007 22:36:39 -0800, "Prisoner at War"

wrote:
I'd really like to meet the asses who started the whole "a
bike is a vehicle" mentality,

I didn't start it but strongly agree with it. W/o it we'd have even
more limited rights on the road.
--

I must disagree. AFAIK, bicyclists have always had road rights, as do
even pedestrians.

Even pedestrians?
Really? So you can just walk down a typical road or street as much as
you want - no need to be on the sidewalk? I did not know that.


--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************