The idée fixe of the anti-helmet zealots, the vehicular cyclists, etc

On 12/17/2013 4:36 AM, Andre Jute wrote:
This is an entire thread of old guys discussing filtering out other old guys. Soon there will be no one left on RBT who knows what a bicycle is. My spot is reserved on a forum where knowledgeable and interesting cyclists courteously illuminate a wide range of cycling matters, including daily a better class of tech than we've seen on RBT since Sheldon and Jobst moved on. What arrangements have you made?


Well since you asked, I'm on a couple other forums. One of which is my
bike club's forum where I'm a moderator. Another which was referred to
me by a member of this group but which deals more with touring and less
with the type of riding that I do so I mostly lurk.

As for tech, I have a good relationship with my LBS and tend to take
their advice. I sometime post questions here but mostly to double
check. Admittedly it's difficult to maintain an actual tech related
thread here for very long before it's hijacked but sometime I get my
answers before then.

Not sure why I hang out here except that there are a few like minded
cyclists left here that aren't religious zealots, self appointed experts
or wielders of the sword and shield of righteousness. There are a few
people here that care about riding bikes and sharing knowledge about
riding bikes in spite of these other clowns.

As far as I'm concerned, if you want to joust with the purveyors of the
one true religion then feel free to do so.


On Monday, December 16, 2013 11:51:27 PM UTC, Duane wrote:
Jay Beattie wrote:

On Monday, December 16, 2013 1:26:35 PM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote:

On Monday, December 16, 2013 9:12:54 PM UTC, davethedave wrote:

On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 13:04:32 -0800, Andre Jute wrote:

Since when do you tell me what I can and cannot say, Scharfie? Just who
do you think you are?

fetches popcorn, gets comfy

Scharfie's a sideshow, Dave.

We're all sideshows. About 5% of the posts (even excluding the whacko

cross-postings) is about bike tech. We should just re-name the group

"rec.oldcurmudgeonswhosometimesdiscussthingsrelati ngtobicycles.tech."

+1

We're all sideshows

*********************

WE'RE PRINT readers, then relatively in either $ or time or both.

The gamers, color print and video riders moved to....color print and video.

Jocks, by and large, doahn read but DO !

Read thru Yellow Jersey....out in the boonies with Goering et al.

Yet 21C component life at this level reduces DIY. Less tinkering.

I have FOUR ! new ideas in 24 hrs.

That's what Beattie does all day then rides thru a grave yard in the rain...

DANO slogs to work thru Portland, environmentally aware fersure.

I'm reviewing Bike Forums....know what ? some invention, lotta dreaming planning.

WHAT I WANT TO KNOW IS HOW IN THE HELL DO THOSE WOMEN AT TUBUS GET UP THOSE HILLS ??????

On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 1:36:39 PM UTC, Duane wrote:

As far as I'm concerned, if you want to joust with the purveyors of the
one true religion then feel free to do so.

Everyone else does all the time. Count the posts: most people correspond with Krygowski much more than I do, including Scharfie. It is a sickening hypocrisy for Scharfie (or for that idiot that Scharfie resembles, Rideablot) to tell me to filter Krygowski out.

Out for a ride before the wind rises further and drives the temperature down any more.

Andre Jute

On 12/17/2013 9:48 AM, Andre Jute wrote:
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 1:36:39 PM UTC, Duane wrote:

As far as I'm concerned, if you want to joust with the purveyors of the
one true religion then feel free to do so.

Everyone else does all the time. Count the posts: most people correspond with Krygowski much more than I do, including Scharfie. It is a sickening hypocrisy for Scharfie (or for that idiot that Scharfie resembles, Rideablot) to tell me to filter Krygowski out.


I'm guilty of the same though I'm trying to ignore him. I'm not always
successful though. Maybe Ridesalot hasn't had his fill yet.

Out for a ride before the wind rises further and drives the temperature down any more.

-28C here and frozen snow everywhere.

On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 1:36:10 AM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote:
This is an entire thread of old guys discussing filtering out other old guys. Soon there will be no one left on RBT who knows what a bicycle is. My spot is reserved on a forum where knowledgeable and interesting cyclists courteously illuminate a wide range of cycling matters, including daily a better class of tech than we've seen on RBT since Sheldon and Jobst moved on. What arrangements have you made?

When I began watching this group back in the early '90s, it was one of the few places you could get technical information. The information was practical and theoretical, and the posters used their own names and the group self-policed. The "Sheldon is a party doll" thread was ground-breaking as the first super-long political rant. It would be ho-hum these days -- lost in the noise of political rants.

Anyway, apart from the group basically cannibalizing itself, there is just less tech to talk about -- you can practically build a bike with a pocket tool these days, assuming you have a press-fit BB. And there are a lot more outlets for information. A lot of tech is also just brand endorsement, e.g. which wheels to buy, or it's very manufacturer specific and apparently too new and not very interesting to this group.

I have a BB30 on my new Cannondale. I'm pretty sure it is press fit, but it has spacers and apparently extraneous parts that are unfamiliar to me. I look at it and think that one day I'll have to take it apart. I will go to YouTube or Park Tool or SRAM (it's a Red crank)and figure it out. Fifteen years ago, I would have gone to this group -- although I would have braced for Jobst cross-examining me on why I bought such a ridiculous piece of technology, etc., etc.

-- Jay Beattie.

On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 8:36:39 AM UTC-5, Duane wrote:

Not sure why I hang out here except that there are a few like minded
cyclists left here that aren't religious zealots, self appointed experts
or wielders of the sword and shield of righteousness. There are a few
people here that care about riding bikes and sharing knowledge about
riding bikes in spite of these other clowns.

As far as I'm concerned, if you want to joust with the purveyors of the
one true religion then feel free to do so.

Duane, be honest. You were greatly offended that I debated you on the absolute necessity of bike lanes to remove the (supposed) great dangers of bicycling. And you were _extremely_ offended when I rebutted your "It's dangerous _here!_" claims with data indicating cycling in your area was significantly safer than in the U.S. on average. You were so offended that you kill-filed me and never forgave me.

Your problem is not my "religion." (The closest I have to a "religion" is relevant facts, data and their citations.) Your problem is that my views differ from YOUR "one true religion" of danger, bike lanes and edge riding, and that I've posted data showing your religion to be wrong.

- Frank Krygowski

On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 10:44:44 AM UTC-5, Jay Beattie wrote:

When I began watching this group back in the early '90s, it was one of the few places you could get technical information. The information was practical and theoretical, and the posters used their own names and the group self-policed. The "Sheldon is a party doll" thread was ground-breaking as the first super-long political rant. It would be ho-hum these days -- lost in the noise of political rants.

Well, we should recognize that the political ranters are not bike people anyway. Someone somehow invited in a gaggle of multi-group-spamming trolls.

Anyway, apart from the group basically cannibalizing itself, there is just less tech to talk about -- you can practically build a bike with a pocket tool these days, assuming you have a press-fit BB.

That's certainly a large part of it. The technology has improved significantly, so there are fewer problems to solve. Most new tech seems to be chasing ever-diminishing benefits. (It's interesting that thanks largely to Jobst, the problem of broken spokes has largely gone away; but thanks to weight-reducing manufacturers, has been replaced by the problem of cracked rims..)

And there are a lot more outlets for information. A lot of tech is also just brand endorsement, e.g. which wheels to buy, or it's very manufacturer specific and apparently too new and not very interesting to this group.

"What brand should I buy?" does have limited appeal. It usually devolves to "Gee, I sure like this!" And people who have long ago settled on reliable equipment don't have much to say about "THIS year's model!!" because they don't need to buy it.

I have a BB30 on my new Cannondale. I'm pretty sure it is press fit, but it has spacers and apparently extraneous parts that are unfamiliar to me. I look at it and think that one day I'll have to take it apart.

But maybe not!

I will go to YouTube or Park Tool or SRAM (it's a Red crank)and figure it out. Fifteen years ago, I would have gone to this group -- although I would have braced for Jobst cross-examining me on why I bought such a ridiculous piece of technology, etc., etc.

Jobst always was curmudgeonly, but brilliant. He and I corresponded a bit, rather pleasantly, although I thought he was too fond of edge riding.

He had to put up with "jim beam." I wonder how he'd feel about some of the current vitriol.

- Frank Krygowski

On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 9:26:12 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 8:36:39 AM UTC-5, Duane wrote:



Not sure why I hang out here except that there are a few like minded

cyclists left here that aren't religious zealots, self appointed experts

or wielders of the sword and shield of righteousness. There are a few

people here that care about riding bikes and sharing knowledge about

riding bikes in spite of these other clowns.



As far as I'm concerned, if you want to joust with the purveyors of the

one true religion then feel free to do so.



Duane, be honest. You were greatly offended that I debated you on the absolute necessity of bike lanes to remove the (supposed) great dangers of bicycling. And you were _extremely_ offended when I rebutted your "It's dangerous _here!_" claims with data indicating cycling in your area was significantly safer than in the U.S. on average. You were so offended that you kill-filed me and never forgave me.



Your problem is not my "religion." (The closest I have to a "religion" is relevant facts, data and their citations.) Your problem is that my views differ from YOUR "one true religion" of danger, bike lanes and edge riding, and that I've posted data showing your religion to be wrong.

But don't you remember that I rebutted your rebuttal with statistical evidence showing that it was very dangerous in the area where Duane rode but that the cyclists were extraordinarily skilled in avoiding injury, much like Ninja warriors or monks who can dodge bullets?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mAH_...FADBA8E8A1D02E

You must look beyond the numbers. We are not numbers! (repeat after me). We own the numbers. They do not own us!

-- Jay Beattie.

Jay Beattie wrote:
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 9:26:12 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 8:36:39 AM UTC-5, Duane wrote:



Not sure why I hang out here except that there are a few like minded

cyclists left here that aren't religious zealots, self appointed experts

or wielders of the sword and shield of righteousness. There are a few

people here that care about riding bikes and sharing knowledge about

riding bikes in spite of these other clowns.



As far as I'm concerned, if you want to joust with the purveyors of the

one true religion then feel free to do so.



Duane, be honest. You were greatly offended that I debated you on the
absolute necessity of bike lanes to remove the (supposed) great dangers
of bicycling. And you were _extremely_ offended when I rebutted your
"It's dangerous _here!_" claims with data indicating cycling in your
area was significantly safer than in the U.S. on average. You were so
offended that you kill-filed me and never forgave me.



Your problem is not my "religion." (The closest I have to a "religion"
is relevant facts, data and their citations.) Your problem is that my
views differ from YOUR "one true religion" of danger, bike lanes and
edge riding, and that I've posted data showing your religion to be wrong.

But don't you remember that I rebutted your rebuttal with statistical
evidence showing that it was very dangerous in the area where Duane rode
but that the cyclists were extraordinarily skilled in avoiding injury,
much like Ninja warriors or monks who can dodge bullets?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mAH_...FADBA8E8A1D02E

You must look beyond the numbers. We are not numbers! (repeat after me).
We own the numbers. They do not own us!


Jay you do realize that Frank is delusional ...


--
duane

On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 3:44:44 PM UTC, Jay Beattie wrote:
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 1:36:10 AM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote:

This is an entire thread of old guys discussing filtering out other old guys. Soon there will be no one left on RBT who knows what a bicycle is. My spot is reserved on a forum where knowledgeable and interesting cyclists courteously illuminate a wide range of cycling matters, including daily a better class of tech than we've seen on RBT since Sheldon and Jobst moved on.. What arrangements have you made?



When I began watching this group back in the early '90s, it was one of the few places you could get technical information. The information was practical and theoretical, and the posters used their own names and the group self-policed. The "Sheldon is a party doll" thread was ground-breaking as the first super-long political rant. It would be ho-hum these days -- lost in the noise of political rants.



Anyway, apart from the group basically cannibalizing itself, there is just less tech to talk about -- you can practically build a bike with a pocket tool these days, assuming you have a press-fit BB. And there are a lot more outlets for information. A lot of tech is also just brand endorsement, e.g. which wheels to buy, or it's very manufacturer specific and apparently too new and not very interesting to this group.



I have a BB30 on my new Cannondale. I'm pretty sure it is press fit, but it has spacers and apparently extraneous parts that are unfamiliar to me. I look at it and think that one day I'll have to take it apart. I will go to YouTube or Park Tool or SRAM (it's a Red crank)and figure it out. Fifteen years ago, I would have gone to this group -- although I would have braced for Jobst cross-examining me on why I bought such a ridiculous piece of technology, etc., etc.



-- Jay Beattie.

You're right and you're wrong. There IS new tech out there, but, you're right, there's little interest in it on RBT. For instance, the n'lock unlockable stem which makes the bike unrideable with the turn of a removable key, like a car. But when I mentioned it here, I was met with sneers, and so much irrelevant crap from the peanut gallery, it would take me a week to straighten out the misinformation the idiots sprayed like spittle. Same when I first mentioned the Hebie Chainglider. Same with the Rohloff hub gearbox, for that matter, though I wasn't the first to mention that one here. After a while I just got fed up with the clowns and found somewhere else to debut new tech I've bought or been given by manufacturers to try out.

Andre Jute