Is Mike Andaman finally dead?

"Blackblade" wrote in message ...

Edward Dolan wrote:

Human power is multiplied many times by being on a machine
with wheels. I believe I have also said this many times.

You have, and you've been wrong every single time. Go and learn some physics. Were you to be right you would have invented a way to create energy ... which violates a fundamental law of the universe. But, hey, good luck with that.

This is what happens when you don’t know how to read or listen to your adversary. You come off sounding like the idiot that you are. Because a bicycle multiplies your power (mechanical advantage), you can go further and faster than you could ever walk. It is a prime reason why bikes do not belong on trails with hikers and equestrians any more than motorcycles belong on such trails. Are you really this stupid or are you only pretending?

The only one here with an inconsistent opinion is you. If you
were consistent, then motorcyclists could be on the trails with you – and you
would totally deserve one another.

When have I changed my position ? The only one who has done that is you.

Your argument for bikes on trails is no different than the argument a motorcyclist would make. All that is different is a slight difference of degree, which a motorcyclist would dismiss as not being significant, the same way you dismiss bikes on trails as not being signircantly different than walkers on trails. What a hypocrite you are!

One bad apple destroys the whole barrel. Bicycles have to be
prohibited from ALL trails everywhere that are used by hikers and equestrians -
just good old fashion American common sense. Statistics lie all the time about
everything. Never trust them to say anything meaningful!

I get it; anecdotal evidence that supports you position is acceptable, any that doesn't is not. What a fraud.

“Statistics lie all the time about everything. Never trust them to say anything meaningful!” – Ed Dolan

I only make pronouncements to fools like you who are incapable
of understanding plain English. Like all mountain bikers, you only converse with
your own ilk in your own gibberish.

Hmmm ... so what are we doing now Ed ?

You need to get on online with discussion groups from the hiking community. There you will learn about a whole different universe. A good place to start is to beg Mr. Vandeman to get on his email list. Of course, you first need to apologize to him for being such a jackass. If you do that, then maybe Saint Edward the Great will put in a good word for you with God Almighty.

[Mr.] Vandeman has been convicted of criminal battery, I've never
been in the slightest trouble with the law. You are happy to use profanity
and ad hominem whereas I eschew both. Who's the barbarian here ?

I believe Mr. Vandeman could sue you for slander,
but he is too busy getting more important things done for humanity. I guess it
is up to me to kick your sorry ass.

For him to sue me for slander (and it would be libel anyway as I'm writing it) I would have had to have said something untrue. Since he is a convicted criminal, a matter well attested in the public record, I welcome any such attempt. As to your ability to kick ass ... well, let's just say that, so far at least, I'm not impressed. You struggle to argue logically and are very inconsistent.

Being charged with a crime and being convicted of a crime are two different things. For instance, I charge you with being a jackass, but how to get you convicted of that is the problem. The Vandeman thing was a circus from beginning to end – good only for a laugh. That you seem to take it seriously is an indication that you lack the ability to see the humor in a situation. I suggest you lighten up, most particularly if you are conversing with someone like me.

Your logic is not my logic nor are your facts my facts. You have got to be some kind of ultimate boob to think that your logic and your facts are the only ones that count. But you do think exactly that because all you want is justification for your transgressions against common sense and common decency. Have you no sense of shame at all?

Trails are for walking. What’s the matter? Can’t walk?

Ed Dolan the Great
aka
Saint Edward the Great

On Sat, 2 Nov 2013 14:03:05 -0500, "EdwardDolan"
wrote:

"Blackblade" wrote in message ...

Edward Dolan wrote:

Human power is multiplied many times by being on a machine
with wheels. I believe I have also said this many times.

You have, and you've been wrong every single time. Go and learn some physics. Were you to be right you would have invented a way to create energy ... which violates a fundamental law of the universe. But, hey, good luck with that.

This is what happens when you don’t know how to read or listen to your adversary. You come off sounding like the idiot that you are. Because a bicycle multiplies your power (mechanical advantage), you can go further and faster than you could ever walk. It is a prime reason why bikes do not belong on trails with hikers and equestrians any more than motorcycles belong on such trails. Are you really this stupid or are you only pretending?

The only one here with an inconsistent opinion is you. If you
were consistent, then motorcyclists could be on the trails with you – and you
would totally deserve one another.

When have I changed my position ? The only one who has done that is you.

Your argument for bikes on trails is no different than the argument a motorcyclist would make. All that is different is a slight difference of degree, which a motorcyclist would dismiss as not being significant, the same way you dismiss bikes on trails as not being signircantly different than walkers on trails. What a hypocrite you are!

One bad apple destroys the whole barrel. Bicycles have to be
prohibited from ALL trails everywhere that are used by hikers and equestrians -
just good old fashion American common sense. Statistics lie all the time about
everything. Never trust them to say anything meaningful!

I get it; anecdotal evidence that supports you position is acceptable, any that doesn't is not. What a fraud.

“Statistics lie all the time about everything. Never trust them to say anything meaningful!” – Ed Dolan

I only make pronouncements to fools like you who are incapable
of understanding plain English. Like all mountain bikers, you only converse with
your own ilk in your own gibberish.

Hmmm ... so what are we doing now Ed ?

You need to get on online with discussion groups from the hiking community. There you will learn about a whole different universe. A good place to start is to beg Mr. Vandeman to get on his email list. Of course, you first need to apologize to him for being such a jackass. If you do that, then maybe Saint Edward the Great will put in a good word for you with God Almighty.

[Mr.] Vandeman has been convicted of criminal battery, I've never
been in the slightest trouble with the law. You are happy to use profanity
and ad hominem whereas I eschew both. Who's the barbarian here ?

I believe Mr. Vandeman could sue you for slander,
but he is too busy getting more important things done for humanity. I guess it
is up to me to kick your sorry ass.

For him to sue me for slander (and it would be libel anyway as I'm writing it) I would have had to have said something untrue. Since he is a convicted criminal, a matter well attested in the public record, I welcome any such attempt. As to your ability to kick ass ... well, let's just say that, so far at least, I'm not impressed. You struggle to argue logically and are very inconsistent.

Being charged with a crime and being convicted of a crime are two different things. For instance, I charge you with being a jackass, but how to get you convicted of that is the problem. The Vandeman thing was a circus from beginning to end – good only for a laugh. That you seem to take it seriously is an indication that you lack the ability to see the humor in a situation. I suggest you lighten up, most particularly if you are conversing with someone like me.

Errr... are you saying that Vandeman was not judged guilty in the
court?

Your logic is not my logic nor are your facts my facts. You have got to be some kind of ultimate boob to think that your logic and your facts are the only ones that count. But you do think exactly that because all you want is justification for your transgressions against common sense and common decency. Have you no sense of shame at all?

But your "facts" appear to be only what you wish then to be.
Reminiscent of the Great Egg:

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone,
'it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.'

Trails are for walking. What’s the matter? Can’t walk?


Or equally as logical are Humpty's definition of "glory""

'And only one for birthday presents, you know. There's glory for you!'

'I don't know what you mean by "glory",' Alice said.

Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. 'Of course you don't, till I tell
you. I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for you!"'

I used to believe that "Through the Looking Glass" was fiction, until
I met the sainted Dolan.

I now realize that the characters in the story were taken from real
life.

Ed Dolan the Great
aka
Saint Edward the Great

And the question still stands, "who canonized Dolan?"

Or is he self anointed? Rub on a little oil and, canonize, canonize,
canonize.

--
Cheers,

John B.

"John B." wrote in message ...

On Sat, 2 Nov 2013 14:03:05 -0500, "EdwardDolan"
wrote:
[...]

Being charged with a crime and being convicted of a crime are two different things. For instance, I charge you with being a jackass, but how to get you convicted of that is the problem. The Vandeman thing was a circus from beginning to end – good only for a laugh. That you seem to take it seriously is an indication that you lack the ability to see the humor in a situation. I suggest you lighten up, most particularly if you are conversing with someone like me.

Errr... are you saying that Vandeman was not judged guilty in the
court?

The whole affair was nothing but a circus. The charges should have been thrown out and there should never have been any trial. I believe Mr. Vandeman got off as lightly as it is possible to get off and still not have the case laughed out of court. It was a prime example of mountain biker bullies acting like the thugs that they are.

Mr. Vandeman is a Saint like myself, but not a Great Saint because he is a civilized gentleman (something mountain bikers never are). We Great Saints are ruffians and can say whatever we please because we belong to a higher moral order. Saint Edward the Great once had his own Order here in Minnesota. It was called the Order of the Perpetual Sorrows, but He had to close it down as there were none in this world that were worthy of it. It turned out that it was an Order for one person only, namely Myself. It is no fun to kick your own ass, so that is what I am doing on Usenet .... kicking dumb mountain biker ass which unfortunately does no good at all. Their asses are as hardened as their heads.

Your logic is not my logic nor are your facts my facts. You have got to be some kind of ultimate boob to think that your logic and your facts are the only ones that count. But you do think exactly that because all you want is justification for your transgressions against common sense and common decency. Have you no sense of shame at all?

But your "facts" appear to be only what you wish then to be.
Reminiscent of the Great Egg:

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone,
'it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.'

Mr. HD is wiser than you and I put together. Even so, no facts (words) are sacred. Facts have to be put in context and interpreted. Facts standing alone are worse than useless. They are what charlatans use to mislead fools.
[...]

I used to believe that "Through the Looking Glass" was fiction, until
I met the sainted Dolan.

I now realize that the characters in the story were taken from real
life.

I feel like I am living in Wonderland when I hear the kind of arguments that mountain bikers make in order to justify their cycling on trails designed as foot paths for walkers.

Trails are for walking. What’s the matter? Can’t walk?

Ed Dolan the Great
aka
Saint Edward the Great

And the question still stands, "who canonized Dolan?"

Or is he self anointed? Rub on a little oil and, canonize, canonize,
canonize.

Envy is the worst of all the vices because it gives no pleasure, I suggest you take up gluttony or lust.

The story of how I became a Saint on Usenet is an interesting one. All things are relative and it shortly became apparent that compared to the rest of the poor souls on these cycling forums Ed Dolan stood out as having some morality, maybe not much, but one hell of lot more than anybody else. The few women posters we had at one time were especially wicked, regular spawns of the Devil if I do say so myself. I got rid of all those female vixens by being holier than thou. I shamed them in to leaving. It was at that point that I realized that I was not only a Saint, but a Great Saint. You may address me in all subsequent correspondence as “Your Holiness�, although “Your Excellency� will also do. But what I really am to you is “Your Majesty�. Now get with the program and stop ****ing around!

Ed Dolan the Great
aka
Saint Edward the Great

This is what happens when you don’t know how to read or listen
to your adversary. You come off sounding like the idiot that you are. Because a
bicycle multiplies your power (mechanical advantage), you can go further and
faster than you could ever walk.

Oh dear, I didn't want to make you look silly but you leave me no choice. A bicycle does not and cannot 'multiply power'. The power output, being that of one human being, is the SAME ! You are confusing speed with power .... and they are very different. A bicycle, by providing gearing, converts torque into motion which does, in some circumstances, result in higher speed.. However, power is the same. A bicycle converts more energy (energy per sec = power) into kinetic (motion) energy.

Before arguing further on the point I really do suggest you go and read some basic physics ....

Your argument for bikes on trails is no different than the
argument a motorcyclist would make. All that is different is a slight difference
of degree

This is getting very tedious. I have addressed this point numerous times. On every point that you say you care about motorbikes and mountainbikes are orders of magnitude apart.

“Statistics lie all the time about everything. Never trust them to say
anything meaningful!” – Ed Dolan

I think it's you who can't come up with anything meaningful. You don't like statistics but you don't like anecdote that doesn't support your position either. You can't win this Ed; either way you lose because, quite simply, the conflicts and collisions you're positing are largely perceptual.

You need to get on online with discussion groups from the
hiking community. There you will learn about a whole different universe.

I AM a hiker Ed ... are you hard of reading ?

A good
place to start is to beg Mr. Vandeman to get on his email list.

If I'm looking for fiction then I prefer to read something a bit more entertaining :-)

Being charged with a crime and being convicted of a crime are
two different things.

Indeed they are. However, as you might recall, Vandeman was charged with crimes AND convicted on three counts. Your point ?

The Vandeman thing was a circus
from beginning to end – good only for a laugh. That you seem to take it
seriously is an indication that you lack the ability to see the humor in a
situation.

It gets pretty damn serious when people simply out to enjoy themselves on their bikes are getting assaulted. If I was getting accosted when out riding I wouldn't be taking that as a joke. As has been remarked many times, your characterisation of mountainbikers as thugs is clearly incorrect; if they were, Vandeman would be in hospital nursing a few broken bones for his behaviour.

I suggest you lighten up, most particularly if you are conversing
with someone like me.

This whole thing, as you point out, is a joke. You're not going to change your mind and, as you might have noticed, I very rarely post on a Saturday because I spend half of it on my bike ... so I'm not planning on doing so either.

Your logic is not my logic nor are your facts my facts. You
have got to be some kind of ultimate boob to think that your logic and your
facts are the only ones that count.

Actually, logic and facts are ... axiomatically ... objective. If you can't prove them objectively then they are refuted.

This is, I think, where you continually fail; you can claim that what you feel and want are 'your logic and facts' but they're not. They are simply perceptions.

But you do think exactly that because all
you want is justification for your transgressions against common sense and
common decency. Have you no sense of shame at all?

What transgressions against common sense Ed ? I go riding on a bicycle and upset no-one in so doing ... other than, it appears, you whom I've never encountered in the real world.

On Sat, 2 Nov 2013 22:49:26 -0500, "EdwardDolan"
wrote:

"John B." wrote in message ...

On Sat, 2 Nov 2013 14:03:05 -0500, "EdwardDolan"
wrote:
[...]

Being charged with a crime and being convicted of a crime are two different things. For instance, I charge you with being a jackass, but how to get you convicted of that is the problem. The Vandeman thing was a circus from beginning to end – good only for a laugh. That you seem to take it seriously is an indication that you lack the ability to see the humor in a situation. I suggest you lighten up, most particularly if you are conversing with someone like me.

Errr... are you saying that Vandeman was not judged guilty in the
court?

The whole affair was nothing but a circus. The charges should have been thrown out and there should never have been any trial. I believe Mr. Vandeman got off as lightly as it is possible to get off and still not have the case laughed out of court. It was a prime example of mountain biker bullies acting like the thugs that they are.

Mr. Vandeman is a Saint like myself, but not a Great Saint because he is a civilized gentleman (something mountain bikers never are). We Great Saints are ruffians and can say whatever we please because we belong to a higher moral order. Saint Edward the Great once had his own Order here in Minnesota. It was called the Order of the Perpetual Sorrows, but He had to close it down as there were none in this world that were worthy of it. It turned out that it was an Order for one person only, namely Myself. It is no fun to kick your own ass, so that is what I am doing on Usenet .... kicking dumb mountain biker ass which unfortunately does no good at all. Their asses are as hardened as their heads.

Your logic is not my logic nor are your facts my facts. You have got to be some kind of ultimate boob to think that your logic and your facts are the only ones that count. But you do think exactly that because all you want is justification for your transgressions against common sense and common decency. Have you no sense of shame at all?

But your "facts" appear to be only what you wish then to be.
Reminiscent of the Great Egg:

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone,
'it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.'

Mr. HD is wiser than you and I put together. Even so, no facts (words) are sacred. Facts have to be put in context and interpreted. Facts standing alone are worse than useless. They are what charlatans use to mislead fools.
[...]

I used to believe that "Through the Looking Glass" was fiction, until
I met the sainted Dolan.

I now realize that the characters in the story were taken from real
life.

I feel like I am living in Wonderland when I hear the kind of arguments that mountain bikers make in order to justify their cycling on trails designed as foot paths for walkers.

Trails are for walking. What’s the matter? Can’t walk?

Ed Dolan the Great
aka
Saint Edward the Great

And the question still stands, "who canonized Dolan?"

Or is he self anointed? Rub on a little oil and, canonize, canonize,
canonize.

Envy is the worst of all the vices because it gives no pleasure, I suggest you take up gluttony or lust.

The story of how I became a Saint on Usenet is an interesting one. All things are relative and it shortly became apparent that compared to the rest of the poor souls on these cycling forums Ed Dolan stood out as having some morality, maybe not much, but one hell of lot more than anybody else. The few women posters we had at one time were especially wicked, regular spawns of the Devil if I do say so myself. I got rid of all those female vixens by being holier than thou. I shamed them in to leaving. It was at that point that I realized that I was not only a Saint, but a Great Saint. You may address me in all subsequent correspondence as “Your Holiness”, although “Your Excellency” will also do. But what I really am to you is “Your Majesty”. Now get with the program and stop ****ing around!

Ed Dolan the Great
aka
Saint Edward the Great

Gee, I hate to be the one to enlighten you but the first requirement
for sainthood is to be dead, so either you aren't a saint or you are a
ghost, in the latter case of course, your wants and notions are of no
interest to the living, except on Dia de Muertos (Or hungry ghost day
if you have the squinty eyes).

I'm given to understand that your figure is somewhat rotund so perhaps
you are the second coming of Humpty-dumpty, the Great Egg returns,
etc.

--
Cheers,

John B.

"John B." wrote in message ...

On Sat, 2 Nov 2013 22:49:26 -0500, "EdwardDolan"
wrote:
[...]

Envy is the worst of all the vices because it gives no pleasure, I suggest you take up gluttony or lust.

The story of how I became a Saint on Usenet is an interesting one. All things are relative and it shortly became apparent that compared to the rest of the poor souls on these cycling forums Ed Dolan stood out as having some morality, maybe not much, but one hell of lot more than anybody else. The few women posters we had at one time were especially wicked, regular spawns of the Devil if I do say so myself. I got rid of all those female vixens by being holier than thou. I shamed them in to leaving. It was at that point that I realized that I was not only a Saint, but a Great Saint. You may address me in all subsequent correspondence as “Your Holiness�, although “Your Excellency� will also do. But what I really am to you is “Your Majesty�. Now get with the program and stop ****ing around!

Gee, I hate to be the one to enlighten you but the first requirement
for sainthood is to be dead, so either you aren't a saint or you are a
ghost, in the latter case of course, your wants and notions are of no
interest to the living, except on Dia de Muertos (Or hungry ghost day
if you have the squinty eyes).

You have got Me confused with ordinary Saints. I am a Great Saint ... which is as near to God as you can get. I have His Ear so you had better watch out!

I'm given to understand that your figure is somewhat rotund so perhaps
you are the second coming of Humpty-dumpty, the Great Egg returns,
etc.

You know nothing of my figure just as you know nothing of Great Saints.

Trails are for walking. What's the matter? Can’t walk?

Ed Dolan the Great
aka
Saint Edward the Great

"Phil W Lee" wrote in message ...
[...]

He's [Ed Dolan] saying that he only has contempt for the courts.
And by writing as he has, he has opened himself to action by the court
for contempt.

Cyclists (mountain bikers) who ride their bikes on hiking trials occasion nothing but contempt and scorn from the civilized community. Mr. Vandeman is as pure as the driven snow. The bikers were dirty rotten swine, but I think we can say that about all bikers who ride their bikes on hiking trails. If there were any justice in this world, they would all be struck dead as they engage in their nefarious activities. I rejoice whenever I hear of any of them getting themselves killed. It is always good riddance to bad rubbish!

By the way, my contempt for you overfloweth. That is because you are an asshole. You prove it with your every post.

Trails are for walking. What’s the matter? Can’t walk?

Ed Dolan the Great
aka
Saint Edward the Great

"Blackblade" wrote in message ...

This is what happens when you don’t know how to read or listen
to your adversary. You come off sounding like the idiot that you are. Because a
bicycle multiplies your power (mechanical advantage), you can go further and
faster than you could ever walk.

Oh dear, I didn't want to make you look silly but you leave me no choice. A bicycle does not and cannot 'multiply power'. The power output, being that of one human being, is the SAME ! You are confusing speed with power ... and they are very different. A bicycle, by providing gearing, converts torque into motion which does, in some circumstances, result in higher speed. However, power is the same. A bicycle converts more energy (energy per sec = power) into kinetic (motion) energy.

Tom Sherman used to give me explanations like that too and, like you, always was able to miss the main point of any discussion. The fact that anyone on a bicycle can go faster and further with less effort is the point which anyone with an ounce of common sense knows.

Before arguing further on the point I really do suggest you go and read some basic physics ....

I ruled out any study of physics at the high school level. I was more interested in metaphysics.

Your argument for bikes on trails is no different than the
argument a motorcyclist would make. All that is different is a slight difference
of degree

This is getting very tedious. I have addressed this point numerous times. On every point that you say you care about motorbikes and mountainbikes are orders of magnitude apart.

Motorcyclists would not agree with you any more than hikers agree with you about the differences between some slob on bicycle wheels and someone walking.

“Statistics lie all the time about everything. Never trust them to say
anything meaningful!” – Ed Dolan

I think it's you who can't come up with anything meaningful. You don't like statistics but you don't like anecdote that doesn't support your position either. You can't win this Ed; either way you lose because, quite simply, the conflicts and collisions you're positing are largely perceptual.

You have your selection of both (statistics and anecdotes) and so do I. The difference is that none of yours apply to what is being discussed whereas all of mine do. Glad I was able to clear that up for you!

You need to get on online with discussion groups from the
hiking community. There you will learn about a whole different universe.

I AM a hiker Ed ... are you hard of reading ?

All you are presenting here are mountain biker arguments.

A good
place to start is to beg Mr. Vandeman to get on his email list.

If I'm looking for fiction then I prefer to read something a bit more entertaining :-)

I will give you something more to read at the end of this post. It can’t hurt and it might help. You know next to nothing about what hikers require and indeed demand when on a trail.

Being charged with a crime and being convicted of a crime are
two different things.

Indeed they are. However, as you might recall, Vandeman was charged with crimes AND convicted on three counts. Your point ?

I think you are wrong about the convictions, but my memory is not what it used to be.

The Vandeman thing was a circus
from beginning to end – good only for a laugh. That you seem to take it
seriously is an indication that you lack the ability to see the humor in a
situation.

It gets pretty damn serious when people simply out to enjoy themselves on their bikes are getting assaulted. If I was getting accosted when out riding I wouldn't be taking that as a joke. As has been remarked many times, your characterisation of mountainbikers as thugs is clearly incorrect; if they were, Vandeman would be in hospital nursing a few broken bones for his behaviour.

You do not know what happened precisely any more than anybody else on these forums. I have little doubt as to whom was being assaulted. Mountain bikers when in a group are aggressive and behave like the thugs that they are. Hikers should go armed with a concealed hand gun on their person when out on the trails. Such a precaution may save your life.

I suggest you lighten up, most particularly if you are conversing
with someone like me.

This whole thing, as you point out, is a joke. You're not going to change your mind and, as you might have noticed, I very rarely post on a Saturday because I spend half of it on my bike ... so I'm not planning on doing so either.

The only jokers here are mountain bikers who ride their bikes on hiking trails. What's the matter? Not enough road for you to ride?

Your logic is not my logic nor are your facts my facts. You
have got to be some kind of ultimate boob to think that your logic and your
facts are the only ones that count.

Actually, logic and facts are ... axiomatically ... objective. If you can't prove them objectively then they are refuted.

Logic and facts are subject to spin, just like everything else under the sun. Is there global warming? If so, is it being caused by human activity? Who knows? Logic and facts do not answer that question because there is disagreement within the scientific community. Enter politics and you have got the usual mess of confusion at which point ideology takes over. That is what you are essentially ... an ideologue.

This is, I think, where you continually fail; you can claim that what you feel and want are 'your logic and facts' but they're not. They are simply perceptions.

That is all you have too. The difference is my perceptions are relevant and yours are not.

But you do think exactly that because all
you want is justification for your transgressions against common sense and
common decency. Have you no sense of shame at all?

What transgressions against common sense Ed ? I go riding on a bicycle and upset no-one in so doing ... other than, it appears, you whom I've never encountered in the real world.

Your naiveté springs from ignorance. It is likely that your ignorance is unconquerable, but I persist like the good soldier I am since there may be others following this thread who are capable of enlightenment.

Trails are for walking. What’s the matter? Can’t walk?

Ed Dolan the Great
aka
Saint Edward the Great

PS: Something for you to read:

From: Peter Coyote
To: "
Subject: RPMT TPEIR

Dear Sirs,
It has come to my attention that I have been listed as a supporter of
the plan to increase the number of trails available to Mountain
Bikers. In fact I am against such a proposal. While biking is
certainly a "green" pursuit, the Mt. Bikers are extremely organized
and sophisticated, and I've had extensive experience with them in LA
(where a close friend sits on the Park Commission) which leads me to
believe that unless we specifically restrict certain trails to foot
and equestrian use, the Mt. Bikers will drive all the others away.
There are many lawyers among them and they are a well-educated and
sophisticated lot, whereas many of those dedicated to simpler uses
are not. Consequently they tend to have an inordinate influence on
planning commissions.
Experience has proven that they do not repair trail damage; that they
frighten horses and pedestrians, that they have high impacts on
trails. They should continue to be limited to use on fire protection
roads where there is space to share them safely with other users.
Increasing their range and access is incompatible with natural
resource protection and the kind of pastoral pursuits enjoyed by
walkers and equestrians.
If there is literature from the Mt. Bike community promulgating
responsible behavior, and teaching members how to decrease the
impacts of their technology, I certainly have never seen it, and
therefore take with a grain of salt, assurances that the community
can police itself, and will cause no egregious damage to our open
spaces. Absent such education, what is the rationale for offering
them new and enhanced facilities?
The Marin County Department of Parks and Open Space renaming to Marin
Parks, tends to suggest that we are moving towards a US Parks Service
style active recreationalized policy. In fact, many people in Marin
prefer our pastoral, low-use, open-space preserves system, but they
have neither the lobbying clout nor the sophistication of the Mt.
Bike community.
While a much smaller project, the 680 Trail, required at least a
minimum of a mitigated negative declaration under CEQA to litigation
proof its planning and processing, it was much more environmentally
impactful than the low-threshold CEQA requirements misled the public
into believing. The regional, state and national environmental
protection and regulatory agencies found many more impacts
andrequired many more mitigations for this one trial, yet this new
RTMP,which sees the potential for abandoning, rebuilding,
realignment, orimproving as many as half or more of all 250 miles of
trails and roads, yet finds not impacts, and contains no mitigations.

It seems to me that a plan of such magnitude should be vetted by the
regional, state, and national regulatory agencies to insure that the
assessment of impacts and mitigation inherent in this plan are
consonant with current law. There are issues of trust and credibility
in play here,because assurances during the selling of Measure A to
the local population insisted that it was essential to ameliorating
the risks to our parks, which were in great danger. They were not,
and in times of deep cut-backs and recessions we were budgeting $13
million dollars a year and more for these programs. Furthermore other
gifts, grants and revenues submitted through other agencies were
neither disclosed or publicized during Measure A's marketing program.
In retrospect it appears that 680 trail was rammed through without
sufficient review to win the support of the Mt. Bike community for Measure A.
I would urge you to extend your outreach into various other
communities and users of these open spaces to determine for yourself
if what I am saying is correct or not. Most people have no idea that
these plans are afoot, and neither would I have, had I not been sent
a letter notifying me that I am listed as a supporter. This is far
from the case, and I would appreciate a correction in the record and publicity.
Thank you for your consideration,
Sincerely,

Peter Coyote

On Tue, 5 Nov 2013 00:38:59 -0600, "EdwardDolan"
wrote:

"John B." wrote in message ...

On Sat, 2 Nov 2013 22:49:26 -0500, "EdwardDolan"
wrote:
[...]

Envy is the worst of all the vices because it gives no pleasure, I suggest you take up gluttony or lust.

The story of how I became a Saint on Usenet is an interesting one. All things are relative and it shortly became apparent that compared to the rest of the poor souls on these cycling forums Ed Dolan stood out as having some morality, maybe not much, but one hell of lot more than anybody else. The few women posters we had at one time were especially wicked, regular spawns of the Devil if I do say so myself. I got rid of all those female vixens by being holier than thou. I shamed them in to leaving. It was at that point that I realized that I was not only a Saint, but a Great Saint. You may address me in all subsequent correspondence as “Your Holiness”, although “Your Excellency” will also do. But what I really am to you is “Your Majesty”. Now get with the program and stop ****ing around!

Gee, I hate to be the one to enlighten you but the first requirement
for sainthood is to be dead, so either you aren't a saint or you are a
ghost, in the latter case of course, your wants and notions are of no
interest to the living, except on Dia de Muertos (Or hungry ghost day
if you have the squinty eyes).

You have got Me confused with ordinary Saints. I am a Great Saint ... which is as near to God as you can get. I have His Ear so you had better watch out!


Interesting. I did a Google search on "Great Saint" and all the "Great
Saints" they mention are dead. I than did a search for "Saint Dolan"
and got nothing.

Are you sure you aren't just a figment of someone's imagination?


Ed Dolan the Great
aka
Saint Edward the Great
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Tue, 5 Nov 2013 00:54:40 -0600, "EdwardDolan"
wrote:

"Phil W Lee" wrote in message ...
[...]

He's [Ed Dolan] saying that he only has contempt for the courts.
And by writing as he has, he has opened himself to action by the court
for contempt.

Cyclists (mountain bikers) who ride their bikes on hiking trials occasion nothing but contempt and scorn from the civilized community. Mr. Vandeman is as pure as the driven snow. The bikers were dirty rotten swine, but I think we can say that about all bikers who ride their bikes on hiking trails. If there were any justice in this world, they would all be struck dead as they engage in their nefarious activities. I rejoice whenever I hear of any of them getting themselves killed. It is always good riddance to bad rubbish!

By the way, my contempt for you overfloweth. That is because you are an asshole. You prove it with your every post.

Trails are for walking. What’s the matter? Can’t walk?

Ed Dolan the Great
aka
Saint Edward the Great


Just imagine... "my contempt for you overfloweth" some wannabe limp
wristed hero has contempt. Imagine that.

Tell us wannabe, how come you are not out on the "Trails" defending
the walking way? Instead you are in the house, at the keyboard, typing
away.

So loud in the mouth for trail saving but rather weak on the actual
policing of the nation's public facilities.

So we have a bloke with a loud mouth and apparently a fear of
activity, and this "no nothing but make loud noises" has contempt.
Tell us. when can we expect to see something other then loud noises
emanating from your corner? A little public service; saving the
trails; you know, keeping the demon cyclists off the trails, and all
that. A little action.
--
Cheers,

John B.