Cycling splintered on Usenet

"Just zis Guy, you know?"

wrote:

My alt.bike is a wedgie, my everyday.bike is a recumbent. Make of
that what you will ;-)

All I'd make of that is that you like riding your 'bent more than you like
riding uprights. To each his own.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

wrote in part:

Part of recognizing
bicycling as a serious form of transportation would be having a
newsgroup named along the same guidelines as the other "serious"
transportation groups.

Is there a reason you can't start such a group yourself? That's a serious
question not a shot.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

On 17 Dec 2003 17:41:48 GMT, (Hunrobe) wrote:

My alt.bike is a wedgie, my everyday.bike is a recumbent. Make of
that what you will ;-)

All I'd make of that is that you like riding your 'bent more than you like
riding uprights.

That's pretty much normal for anybody who owns a 'bent. Why suffer on
a wedgie when you can travel by lawn furniture with wheels?

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

Wed, 17 Dec 2003 19:16:25 +0000,
, "Just zis Guy, you
know?" wrote:

On 17 Dec 2003 17:41:48 GMT, (Hunrobe) wrote:

My alt.bike is a wedgie, my everyday.bike is a recumbent. Make of
that what you will ;-)

All I'd make of that is that you like riding your 'bent more than you like
riding uprights.

That's pretty much normal for anybody who owns a 'bent. Why suffer on
a wedgie when you can travel by lawn furniture with wheels?

Guy

Were one riding around a golf course its propriety should seem
unquestionable.

Maybe rig an umbrella holder. Lots of room for hauling the martini
shaker and clubs.
--
zk

On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 11:40:30 -0800, Zoot Katz
wrote:

That's pretty much normal for anybody who owns a 'bent. Why suffer on
a wedgie when you can travel by lawn furniture with wheels?

Were one riding around a golf course its propriety should seem
unquestionable.

Ride round a golf club? Too dangerous. People keep hitting little
white balls at the flag...

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

Wed, 17 Dec 2003 19:56:17 +0000,
, "Just zis Guy, you
know?" wrote:

On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 11:40:30 -0800, Zoot Katz
wrote:

That's pretty much normal for anybody who owns a 'bent. Why suffer on
a wedgie when you can travel by lawn furniture with wheels?

Were one riding around a golf course its propriety should seem
unquestionable.

Ride round a golf club? Too dangerous. People keep hitting little
white balls at the flag...

Guy

Kevlar belted umbrella and styrofoam ice bucket - no problem.
--
zk

Hunrobe wrote:


wrote in part:

Part of recognizing
bicycling as a serious form of transportation would be having a
newsgroup named along the same guidelines as the other "serious"
transportation groups.

Is there a reason you can't start such a group yourself? That's a serious
question not a shot.

Isn't a discussion such as this part of that process?

--
Steven O'Neill
www.bridgetolls.org

In article ,
(Hunrobe) wrote:



wrote in part:

Hunrobe wrote:

: 1- recumbents are interesting machines but they truly do belong in an
"alt."
: category,

I see the alt.* category more as a technical or Usenet-related
political decision, not primarily an indicator of the subject
matter being alternative.

I view the alt. category as being loosely related to but an alternative (hence
the "alt." designation) to their mainstream counterparts, rather like a "niche
market". In that respect, 'bents are definitely alt. material.

Historically, all that alt.* meant was that the group could be created
by anybody, rather than going through the stricter voting system
mandated for sci/rec/etc. groups. For this reason, two things happen:
rec.* groups tend to be older and more established, and there tends to
be thousands and thousands of alt. groups with minimal propagation that
were started basically as a one-off joke or worse.

I don't know what quirk of fate made alt.mountain-bike more popular than
rec.bicycles.off-road (maybe the improbable name), but in general rec.*
groups will be more active than parallel alt groups.

That said, there are many super-popular alt groups, especially in topics
that have no parallel in the main hierarchy.

--
Ryan Cousineau, http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine
President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club

Ryan Cousineau wrote:
: That said, there are many super-popular alt groups, especially in topics
: that have no parallel in the main hierarchy.

yea sure, the super popular alt groups all starts with alt.binaries or
alt.sex.

warez and porn. misc/sci/rec are relatively free of warez and porn. and to
reiterate what you said for emphasis. a *lot* of nntp servers either do not
carry the alt hierarchy, carry a small subset or expire the messages very
rapidly.

being on alt.* is not a good thing.
--
david reuteler

"Ryan Cousineau" wrote

I don't know what quirk of fate made alt.mountain-bike more popular than
rec.bicycles.off-road (maybe the improbable name), but in general rec.*
groups will be more active than parallel alt groups.

They used to be virtual twins. Very little was posted on one and not the
other. Including the demented doctor. A few years ago, in an effort to
reduce/eliminate idiot trolls in one of the two, moderation of rbor was
voted on, approved, and implemented. For a variety of reasons, it didn't
work well, and rbor has never recovered.

a.m-b, OTOH, is no more on or off topic than the various wreck.bikes NG's.
Oft times, far less off topic, especially when r.b.s goes off into a long
political rant.

Pete