If Adults on bikes could be as simple as kids on bikes

This works well for passing pedistrians who have wandered onto the bike
paths:

If you yell "cycle path" it sounds sufficiently like "psychopath" which
tends to make people scramble.

--ag

Maggie wrote:
Roger Zoul wrote:

You're really not learning much here, Mags. Must be a sign of getting old.



I'm learning I do not enjoy posting to this group. No matter what you
post, there is someone who will take what you say and try to make a
major issue out of it.

Got that right. Baka

I ride my bike on a bike path.....I walk on a
track.

Tracks are for running, at least for me, keeps some extra muscles going.

I enjoyed what the kids did and wrote about it. I thought
they were very polite on a very congested track filled with older
people, dogs, babies etc. I give kudos to their parents for teaching
them manners. I am glad I joined a cycling club, as they found the
story very cute. They took it for what it was....just a cute story
about three little boys on their bikes.

FYI I have learned alot since I fell in the park last spring when
someone yelled ON YOUR LEFT.

I've been in a 25 mile and a 50 mile ride charity ride and I am setting
my sights on a century. I followed some advice I received from this
group and found people to ride with and I also bike to work. I've come
a long way since I first bought my bike and wrote my first post.

Now I post to people personally when I read this newsgroup. It saves
alot of aggravation. Have you noticed I don't post much. I read and
respond individually. It is a heck of a lot better and I have learned
much from many of you. I thank you for that.
Maggie
http://www.geocities.com/lindaannbus...?1100212880789
http://www.walkamerica.org/personal_page.asp?w=272039

That makes a lot of sense. I may post something in good faith and
someone will still take offense to it. Even pointers to pictures taken
on rides devolve into arguments sometimes. I don't mind an occasional
email that is not spam since I already have to sort through about 80 a
day anyway. I ride on people paths at people speeds and slowing to a
walking speed is not a big effort as a few hard pedals and I am on my
way again, safely. Those who think every ride is a training ride and has
to be done at 20-25 MPH do deserve a ticket for reckless endangerment on
a people path or sidewalk.
Bill Baka

Robert Uhl wrote:
"Mike Jacoubowsky" writes:

When I'm overtaking other cyclists, and note that they're riding in a
predictable fashion, I say nothing. Actually, that's not quite true;
if there's an opportunity to make myself known audibly, as in casual
chat with other cyclists, I do so. Why? Because it's not intimidating,
and lets someone know you're there

On Saturday last I was doing a slow 62 mile metric century and had some
call from behind "Coming on your left.", and then a "Good morning" as he
passed me about 5 MPH faster on a training ride. Good manners.


In Anglo-Saxon (and possibly later) England, it was the law the one
should sing in the forest; this prevented one from being able to
surprise others, as a bandit would. Perhaps we cyclists should adapt
this simple technique?

Although judging by my own voice, cycling would be quickly outlawed...

What I do is not called 'singing' even by my closest friends.
Bill Baka
How about whistling?

"Maggie" wrote: I'm learning I do not enjoy posting to this group. No
matter what you post, there is someone who will take what you say and try to
make a major issue out of it. (clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Maggie, I enjoyed your description of those kids. They were children being
cute and doing what they taught by their parents. I wish more parents cared
enough to think ahead and teach their kids properly.

You are right. There are a lot of people in the newsgroups who read every
post, looking for something to take issue with. There are also a lot of
people whose posts are useful, helpful and entertaining. Most of the people
who agree with a post tend to keep silent, so this creates an unbalanced
tone in the threads--most every statement is followed by more argument than
praise.

Set your internal mind filter to compensate for this, and you'll be just
fine.

In article ,
jj wrote:
On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 18:18:47 +0000 (UTC),
(Dave Vandervies) wrote:

Yep. Simple enough to write it on your hands if you can't memorize it:
-Stay to your right

You have GOT to be kidding. All joggers -must- run against "vehicular
traffic". (uh, even though, on a trail, there's no "vehicles"). ;-D

This was on a trail that we were talking about. In that situation,
everybody IS traffic, and it makes as much sense to walk/run/ride "against
traffic" as it makes to drive your car against traffic on the road.


UNLESS:
-you're passing somebody going the same direction as you, then pass on
your left.
-you're walking a dog, then if the dog wants to go to the left side go
with it so the leash doesn't cross the path.

Far too complex for peds to deal, lol.

Most of them don't seem to have a problem with it. Of the ones that
can't seem to deal with it, I see about as many on bikes as on foot.


dave

--
Dave Vandervies
[i]t was basically "my compiler's UB is better than your compiler's
UB" -- a statement I agree with, but you can't base a discussion in
c.l.c on UB effects. --Arthur J. O'Dwyer in comp.lang.c

Maggie wrote:
Actually I was trying to praise three little cyclists who were polite
and trained quite well in riding.

Actually, Maggie, kids speeding through pedestrian traffic yelling "BIKES
COMING THROUGH!" is not polite or well-trained. It's rude and dangerous.

HTH, Bill S.

Bill Sornson wrote:
:: Maggie wrote:
::: Actually I was trying to praise three little cyclists who were
::: polite and trained quite well in riding.
::
:: Actually, Maggie, kids speeding through pedestrian traffic yelling
:: "BIKES COMING THROUGH!" is not polite or well-trained. It's rude
:: and dangerous.

The difference is, after being hit before she was better prepared this time,
so the impact of being passed wasn't so bad for her...and the little kids
have that "cute" factor working for them....grown folks don't.

:
: Roger: In the auto world, you're generally paying attention to what's in
: FRONT of you, not what's behind (providing you're not changing lanes,
which
: is not the appropriate analogy in this case). You're not looking in the
: rear-view mirror to see if someone is using blinkers to indicate they're
: about to pass you. Perhaps you SHOULD, but unless you've spent much time
on
: a motorcycle, I'll bet you don't spend nearly as much time with your rear
: view mirror as you should (when you're driving in a straight line, not
: intending to pass anyone or change lanes).

I am constantly checking out what is behind me while I am driving a car. It
surprises me that you admit you don't. Everyone should; it's part of driving
a car.



:
: So saying "On your left" might make sense if you were doing something that
: requires the other person to take action (which isn't the case here; we're
: only expecting them to ride in a straight line) *or* if you're coming to
an
: intersection and they might be making a left turn in front of you. That
: would be where the blinker analogy might come in, but even then, it's
: reversed... blinkers are generally for the benefit of those BEHIND you,
with
: the exception of intersections.

I'm with Roger. When you hear a voice behind you yelling "on your left" that
means the person belonging to the voice is overtaking on your left side.
It's that simple! All it requires of the person hearing it is to NOT move
left.


:
: It may be common sense to you, but it's obviously not common sense to
those
: who get rattled when someone says that from behind. Predictable behaviour,
: that's the key to getting along on the roads. When I'm 78 and still riding
: but probably a lot slower than now, and who knows, maybe out on the
bikepath
: instead of the road, I'll still be doing what I can to ride in a
predictable
: manner, and I won't need some young whippersnapper coming up fast behind
me,
: yelling a warning to me that he's coming up fast so I'd better stand my
: ground. Most likely I'll be wondering why someone's yelling (which they're
: doing because they're moving fast but still a distance away) and thinking
: something's wrong. I wouldn't first think that it's *me* that's the wrong
: thing.

Okay, I understand now. Maggie gets rattled easily and is still trying to
convince people that she panicked and jumped all over the place when
somebody called out "on your left" ---but she was in the right behaving like
that and the cyclist was in the wrong. That's what the original post is all
about.


: Watch out for what? There should be nothing to watch out for, other than
: someone casually passing you at a higher speed. No different from what
: happens all the time on a multi-lane highway. On a four-lane road, cars in
: the fast lane pass cars in the slow lane all day long without ever giving
it
: a whole lot of thought. Should they be honking their horns to let those in
: the other lane know they're about to pass, so don't move into my lane? Or
do
: they look for visual cues as to the other driver's attention, and rely on
a
: relatively-predictable world in which people are assumed capable of acting
: intelligently?
:
: --Mike Jacoubowsky

car drivers pass cars on the left. when a car passes you on the left, you
don't panic and jump every which way. Besides, the car analogy on passing
doesn't work here because there were walkers AND vehicles using the same
path. That certainly doesn't happen on a four-lane road. At least not in
Texas....

Pat in TX

In article ,
Robert Uhl wrote:
(Dave Vandervies) writes:

Yep. Simple enough to write it on your hands if you can't memorize it:
-Stay to your right
UNLESS:
-you're passing somebody going the same direction as you, then pass on
your left.
-you're walking a dog, then if the dog wants to go to the left side go
with it so the leash doesn't cross the path.

Of course, really pedestrians should stick to the _left_ side of the
path, because that way one's right arm is to oncomers,

I seem to be missing the significance of this.

but that's a
battle lost quite a long time ago:-)

Well, if you don't like the way it's done on this continent, you could
always move to the UK.


dave

--
Dave Vandervies
Well, it's rather far from rocket science, mixing it up....
Actually, I hear it's a primary ingredient in the space shuttle's solid rocket
boosters. --Ingvar the Grey and Phillip Jones in the Scary Devil Monastery

In article ,
"wafflycat"
waffles*$*A**T*v21net$*££*D*O*T*co*D£$£*O*T*uk wrote:

"Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote in message
. ..


I like it, but think it's something that works for innocent kids but for
adults would tell people that hey, I'm on a bike, I'm superior, get the
heck out of my way! Which of course is true. If I were putting a lot of
time in riding on multi-use bikepaths, I'd invest in a ding-ding bell very
quickly. It's not rude, and people naturally move to the side.


Where I am, there's a lot of narrow country lanes, so I come across
pedestrians and horse riders quite often. I find a friendly "Cyclist
approaching behind you" in good time, works well, especially if a "thank
you" with a smile follows as I cycle past. I find people simply do not hear
a bell - I have one on the 'bent - the sound of my voice is much more
effective. Of course, my father was a regimental seargeant-major and my
mother could outshout him, so perhaps it's in the genes ;-)

I stay off most paths; but one that is lightly travelled,
fast, and convenient is used almost exclusively by
cyclists and women with strollers. At a hundred meters and
9 m/sec I project a "Helloooo-Ohhh." By the time they they
turn to see me they still have time to clear a lane
without having to move faster than they already are.
"Thank you."

--
Michael Press