ARBR has gone downhill

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 00:37:48 -0600, Tom Sherman
wrote:

Mr. V's tactics reputedly go beyond Usenet postings.

It might explain why he was bounced out of the Sierra Club. But his
real problem is that his ideal human-free wilderness is only a
mountain biker free wilderness. He sees no problem with humans
driving into the wilderness in 4x4s and wandering round, it's only
when they have bikes they become an issue for him.

??? According to his website, Mr. V hates personal use of motor
vehicles. He also believes that many areas should be off limits even to
hikers.

Tom Sherman - Planet Earth

EVSolutions wrote:

Tom
Canyou email a pic of the Dragonflyer, when my PS crashed all my Dragonflyer
pics went to heaven and I have been missing my view of the trike. The pic
showing the MAXXIS label on the tires is good.

Joshua

I have started a new thread to answer this [Earth Cycles Dragonflyer
Pictures].

Tom Sherman - Planet Earth

Edward Dolan wrote:


I have several trikes. The secret to enjoying trikes is to realize
that you are going to be slower on them and not to care about that. If
you want the ultimate speed, you had better stick to 2 wheelers.

In my experience it's in the first line the weight, which is determining
the speed, not the number of wheels, at least in our hilly area. I'm
riding a rather hefty utility trike in winter, the Antrotech[1].
It weighs about 23kg(51lbs) while my SWB only has a few pounds less.
It's Dutch, that explains all. ;-)

Given the same efforts I'd say the speed is overall comparable, at least
on good roads. My trike seems to roll very well on asphalt with high
pressure tires, on rough roads or in winter on snow things are different
according to the significantly higher rolling resistance, but the heck,
I wouldn't want to ride my SWB on ice or frozen snow.

I'm quite sure I'd be faster on a low and light trike like the
Windcheetah than in comparison on my SWB, even uphill. The same is true
if velomobiles come into the play, which are basically also trikes. At
least on the flats and under windy conditions Dutch velomobiles as the
Mango, Quest[2] or Versatile[3] are faster than most other recumbents.
It's hard to imagine, but even on slightly hilly terrain, a Quest
weighing 30+kg is faster than a light semi-low, obviously aerodynamics
rule in this case. When it comes to real mountains things may change,
but there goes the story of Ymte Sybrandij who rode with a friend over
the Alps from the Netherlands to Italy, both on(in) heavily loaded
Alleweders[4] weighing 50+kg(111lbs). But then, Ymte is a killer. ;-)

Regards,
Kurt

[1] http://anthrotech.de/
[2] http://velomobiel.nl (seems not to work at the moment)
[3] http://www.flevobike.nl/indexmodellen.html
[4] http://home.nikocity.de/jp/alleweder/

Tom Sherman wrote:


Some of us just feel a need to correct misinformation.

Yes, I can understand it, but please keep some things in mind:

First, there is only one absolute truth on this earth: there is no
absolute truth on this earth.(It's a contradiction, I know). ;-)
So almost any information comes sooner or later down to opinions,
beliefs, judgments and personal experiences. That's true for recumbents
- which bent is best, fastest, climbs best... - and more so for politics
and religion.

Second it's a fact that a lot of people only see what they want to see.
Confronted with any kind of facts or information they don't like, they
simply ignore them and keep on thinking and acting like before.

And as I told already Ed before, each of your responses will give him a
welcomed opportunity to deny your facts and opinions and to present two
or more new theses instead. Such "Hydra"-games are hardly to win and
will frustrate sooner or later big parts of the group.

Most of us know meanwhile the basic positions of the main opponents, a
clear statement now and then goes in order, but I can't see any good in
repeating them again and again till it gets boring.

I see you're showing a slight tendency towards pedantry[1], so I'm
probably writing this in vain. I'm just throwing in another opinion in
this game, that's all.

Regards,
Kurt

[1] While I'm obviously showing a slight tendency towards understatement
;-)

On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 09:08:05 -0600, Tom Sherman
wrote:

??? According to his website, Mr. V hates personal use of motor
vehicles. He also believes that many areas should be off limits even to
hikers.

He made comments to that effect on r.b.s. I don't think he's terribly
consistent. He is, however, a prolific distorter.

Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk

Tom Sherman wrote in message ...

skip wrote:
...
But still, if you are wanting to do the same things Ed Dolan is being
accused of it might be a bit disingenuous for you to be riding on the Let's
Get Ed bandwagon. Perhaps you should follow Mr. Sherman's lead. He ducked
out when the mob started forming.

Actually, I have been in exile in purgatory, er DuPage County, Illinois
(an example of suburban sprawl gone wrong, at least from a cyclist's
point of view).

As for Mr. Dolan, I have provided him with enough opportunities to
discredit himself as someone who rants opinions as facts, but never has
any facts to back up his opinions. Since he has copiously availed
himself of these opportunities, I see no reason to pay further attention
to him. As the evidence of his posts indicate, he is the one obsessed
with me (considering the frequency with which he mentions my name, even
when I am not involved in the discussion), not I with him.

Tom Sherman - Planet Earth

No, you have just "mentioned" me yet once again - and so it shall
always be. I have your number and I know just what to say to get a
rise out of you. But now that I know that it annoys you to have me
mention you (always in a derogatory way too I can assure you) in posts
that are not directly responsive to you, I shall do it more than ever
and with relish. We will see whether or not you can restrain yourself
from replying.

You have become the liberal icon for this newsgroup and so it is
always proper and correct to bring you into any discussion where the
subject is ARBR liberals. You have worked tirelessly over the years
to become the liberal big gun here that we conservatives love to hate.
A liberal like GeoB (Barry) is so far left that it is easy for
everyone to dismiss him as the kook that he is. You are not quite so
far left and so it takes someone like me to expose you for the kook
that you are.

I think I have told you repeatedly what you can do with your facts and
evidence since they are always bogus and nothing but liberal
propaganda. The thought of you correcting anyone else's political
views by dredging up your so-called facts and evidence is laughable.
You are nothing but a pedant!

But I will admit, your posts to this newsgroup are lately so
incredibly stupid that you are not giving me any opportunities at all
to take you on. You are increasingly becoming irrelevant and foolish.
All you know how to do lately is idiotic banter. But whether banter or
serious, the idiocy is always there. That will never go away, but
since I have no interest in your idiotic banter, it is indeed possible
that I will have less and less to say about you in the future. I will
have to fight this tendency and remember what I owe you. My enmity.

There are other liberals on this newsgroup who are far more sane and
reasonable than you could ever hope to be. Frankly, there has got to
be something wrong with the way your brain works. Or maybe it is a
personality deficit. Whatever it is, you are one really weird
character.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Edward Dolan wrote:

: Yes, I have been saying this from day one, but then a newbie comes
: along and does the "logical" thing but it is to the detriment of the
: newsgroup as a whole. Believe you me, I could classify and catalog
: these threads on ARBR like you wouldn't believe, but it would serve no
: purpose because as soon as a thread is posted everyone quickly gets
: used to it and is able to work with it easily. Logic would be
: counterproductive.

Cataloguing could be useful for archiving as nobody can be
familiar with all the threads in the archives. But then again a
search engine might be just as useful. Maybe if one combined them
both...

Could mailing list or newsgroup archives serve as a bent FAQ or
knowledge base? I'm thinking of a system where one could quickly
find solutions for the various bent issues.

The system could have following components:
1. Raw data (discussion articles and threads, maybe also web pages)
2. The basic search engine (or any improvements like Google)
3. Cataloguing done by administrator or editor level users (sorta like
http://dmoz.org/about.html)
4. Ratings done by the users of the system

It could be a hypertext system with links...

Maybe it would work as a web-based engine. We would have the
questions catalogued by administrators. Then we add the links to
the raw data in WWW (the archives are there too). Finally we let
the users rank how good solutions the various units of raw data
are to the given question.

--
Risto Varanka | http://www.helsinki.fi/~rvaranka/

(Kurt Fischer) wrote in message ...

Edward Dolan wrote:

I have several trikes. The secret to enjoying trikes is to realize
that you are going to be slower on them and not to care about that. If
you want the ultimate speed, you had better stick to 2 wheelers.

In my experience it's in the first line the weight, which is determining
the speed, not the number of wheels, at least in our hilly area. I'm
riding a rather hefty utility trike in winter, the Antrotech[1].
It weighs about 23kg(51lbs) while my SWB only has a few pounds less.
It's Dutch, that explains all. ;-)

Given the same efforts I'd say the speed is overall comparable, at least
on good roads. My trike seems to roll very well on asphalt with high
pressure tires, on rough roads or in winter on snow things are different
according to the significantly higher rolling resistance, but the heck,
I wouldn't want to ride my SWB on ice or frozen snow.

I'm quite sure I'd be faster on a low and light trike like the
Windcheetah than in comparison on my SWB, even uphill. The same is true
if velomobiles come into the play, which are basically also trikes. At
least on the flats and under windy conditions Dutch velomobiles as the
Mango, Quest[2] or Versatile[3] are faster than most other recumbents.
It's hard to imagine, but even on slightly hilly terrain, a Quest
weighing 30+kg is faster than a light semi-low, obviously aerodynamics
rule in this case. When it comes to real mountains things may change,
but there goes the story of Ymte Sybrandij who rode with a friend over
the Alps from the Netherlands to Italy, both on(in) heavily loaded
Alleweders[4] weighing 50+kg(111lbs). But then, Ymte is a killer. ;-)

Kurt, the minute you get into fairings, especially full body fairings,
everything changes drastically. You simply cannot compare full body
faired bikes with unfaired bikes.

I have seen plenty of guys riding trikes who are amazingly fast.
Obviously the rider has a lot to do with this, but still it has aways
been my very strong impression that those trikers who are fast are
working very hard in order to be fast. I do not think a trike can ever
be faster than a 2 wheeler everything else being equal. This is an
old topic on ARBR and has been discussed many times. I will admit I
always seem faster on my trikes because I am so low to the ground -
and then some little old lady on a mountain bike passes me and I
realize I am not as fast as I thought I was.

Thanks for those sites showing fully faired body trikes. I will never
get one but it is fun to dream about them.

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

wrote in message ...

Edward Dolan wrote:

: Yes, I have been saying this from day one, but then a newbie comes
: along and does the "logical" thing but it is to the detriment of the
: newsgroup as a whole. Believe you me, I could classify and catalog
: these threads on ARBR like you wouldn't believe, but it would serve no
: purpose because as soon as a thread is posted everyone quickly gets
: used to it and is able to work with it easily. Logic would be
: counterproductive.

Cataloging could be useful for archiving as nobody can be
familiar with all the threads in the archives. But then again a
search engine might be just as useful. Maybe if one combined them
both...

Could mailing list or newsgroup archives serve as a bent FAQ or
knowledge base? I'm thinking of a system where one could quickly
find solutions for the various bent issues.

The system could have following components:
1. Raw data (discussion articles and threads, maybe also web pages)
2. The basic search engine (or any improvements like Google)
3. Cataloging done by administrator or editor level users (sorta like
http://dmoz.org/about.html)
4. Ratings done by the users of the system

It could be a hypertext system with links...

Maybe it would work as a web-based engine. We would have the
questions catalogued by administrators. Then we add the links to
the raw data in WWW (the archives are there too). Finally we let
the users rank how good solutions the various units of raw data
are to the given question.

Ah ... to be young again and have the energy and enthusiasm of youth!
No thank you! I am old and tired and I would not wade into a newsgroup
site for the purpose of organinzing what is there for all the tea in
China. But I don't think anyone should do it actually. What gets
posted to a newsgroup is mostly garbage. It is like a million people
chatting away on a community telephone and it is quite enough just to
stay with what the current buzz is. Trust me on this. You do not want
to waste any time going back to see what is on ARBR. Finish your
course work for your degree and then get on with your life and forget
about newsgroups. They are a total dead end.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Zippy the Pinhead wrote:

**** you, Kurt, and the pferd you rode in on. You are irrelevant.

You are showing real class here, Mr. Too Cowardly To Use Your Real Name.

Tom Sherman - 41 N, 90 W