Where "Safety Inflation" leads

On 10/19/2019 10:18 AM, jbeattie wrote:

snip

This is not a marketing issue. We can argue over the need for a light to illuminate low hanging branches, but the fact that Frank doesn't encounter branches doesn't make that experience universal. I poke fun at Joerg, but his commuting experience is very different from mine -- as is yours and everyone elses'. I hit six branches coming home from work on Thursday night, but I was trying -- I was motivated by this thread. It was pouring rain and dark, so even without trying, I probably would have hit one -- maybe. This cedar, for example. https://tinyurl.com/yyzw2gxx There is a crazy fir, too -- and even an azalea on that road, although more effort is needed to hit that. You do end up dodging shrubs if you get squeezed by downhill traffic.

OMG, now we're all going to have to interrupt our rides, pull out our
phones, and take pictures of trees, just to humor Frank?! Oy. What about
Hillary's e-mails?

On Saturday, 19 October 2019 13:18:55 UTC-4, jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, October 19, 2019 at 8:52:56 AM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Saturday, 19 October 2019 11:31:29 UTC-4, sms wrote:
On 10/18/2019 3:08 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:

Do you
have photos?

I can get some, but I'm simply incredulous that you are seriously doubting my experience, as well as every one else here.

Don't be incredulous. This is S.O.P.. "If I don't experience something
then it's simply not possible that anyone else on the planet has
experienced it, they must be lying and until they provide
incontrovertible evidence I won't believe it and no one else should either.

We aren't arguing with you simply to argue ala jute. The roadside
foliage around here simply isn't trimmed to the highway safety standards
you are quoting. Most of the towns have budgetary considerations, and
they are not going to perform that maintenance unless there is a hazard
to motor vehicles. Bikes - most towns could simply not care less about.

Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Saturday, 19 October 2019 13:18:55 UTC-4, jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, October 19, 2019 at 8:52:56 AM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Saturday, 19 October 2019 11:31:29 UTC-4, sms wrote:
On 10/18/2019 3:08 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:

Do you
have photos?

I can get some, but I'm simply incredulous that you are seriously
doubting my experience, as well as every one else here.

Don't be incredulous. This is S.O.P.. "If I don't experience something
then it's simply not possible that anyone else on the planet has
experienced it, they must be lying and until they provide
incontrovertible evidence I won't believe it and no one else should either.

We aren't arguing with you simply to argue ala jute. The roadside
foliage around here simply isn't trimmed to the highway safety standards
you are quoting. Most of the towns have budgetary considerations, and
they are not going to perform that maintenance unless there is a hazard
to motor vehicles. Bikes - most towns could simply not care less about.

In my town, if someone called about a hazard to cyclists, whether it's
low-hanging branches, bike lanes that need cleaning, etc., someone would
be sent out within a day. But there aren't crews driving around the city
looking for low-hanging branches. There is scheduled tree trimming of
city trees, but it's definitely possible for a hazard to develop prior
to the schedule for a particular street.

Outside of Cambridge, most towns have only started painting bikes
lanes in the past few years, and that's still a rare occurrence.
Seriously frank, Why do you refuse to accept my experience?

You can't possibly be telling the truth because where Frank lives no one
has the same experiences as you.

Personally I ceased to be amused by his ramblings years ago and simply
filtered him out on Usenet. Someone that argues simply to argue is not
contributing much to the level of debate.

So says the RBT Resident Guerilla Marketer.

This is not a marketing issue. We can argue over the need for a light
to illuminate low hanging branches, but the fact that Frank doesn't
encounter branches doesn't make that experience universal. I poke fun
at Joerg, but his commuting experience is very different from mine -- as
is yours and everyone elses'. I hit six branches coming home from work
on Thursday night, but I was trying -- I was motivated by this thread.
It was pouring rain and dark, so even without trying, I probably would
have hit one -- maybe. This cedar, for example.
https://tinyurl.com/yyzw2gxx There is a crazy fir, too -- and even an
azalea on that road, although more effort is needed to hit that. You do
end up dodging shrubs if you get squeezed by downhill traffic.

-- Jay Beattie.

I wasn't saying it was a marketing issue. I was think about how SMS
argues so much for flashlights as bicycle lights when he got/gets a
payment from promoting them. also his arguing about needing a machine
shop to install a Rivnut on a bicycle frame. Or many other things he's
argued about in t he past that were simply wrong yet he continued to
argue them. It seems that SMS OFTEN argues simply to argue. that's what I was referring to.

Cheers


Doesn’t mean that this particular observation was wrong though. :-)

On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 10:45:43 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 10/19/2019 10:18 AM, jbeattie wrote:

snip

This is not a marketing issue. We can argue over the need for a light to illuminate low hanging branches, but the fact that Frank doesn't encounter branches doesn't make that experience universal. I poke fun at Joerg, but his commuting experience is very different from mine -- as is yours and everyone elses'. I hit six branches coming home from work on Thursday night, but I was trying -- I was motivated by this thread. It was pouring rain and dark, so even without trying, I probably would have hit one -- maybe. This cedar, for example. https://tinyurl.com/yyzw2gxx There is a crazy fir, too -- and even an azalea on that road, although more effort is needed to hit that. You do end up dodging shrubs if you get squeezed by downhill traffic.

OMG, now we're all going to have to interrupt our rides, pull out our
phones, and take pictures of trees, just to humor Frank?! Oy. What about
Hillary's e-mails?

Errrr... it wasn't a photograph. It was Google Map, Street View.
Which would seem to pose the question, "Do you frequently expound on
things that you so obviously know nothing about?"

--
cheers,

John B.

On Saturday, October 19, 2019 at 11:31:29 AM UTC-4, sms wrote:

In my town, if someone called about a hazard to cyclists, whether it's
low-hanging branches, bike lanes that need cleaning, etc., someone would
be sent out within a day. But there aren't crews driving around the city
looking for low-hanging branches. There is scheduled tree trimming of
city trees, but it's definitely possible for a hazard to develop prior
to the schedule for a particular street.

Sigh OK, as we know, Mayor Scharf has a long history of kill-filing anyone
he loses debates with.

So will someone else please ask him:

Mayor Scharf, how often do your city workers respond to calls for thick tree
branches hanging less than six feet over ordinary streets?

How long does it take before your crews clear that hazard?

And are the calls usually from cyclists (who typically need just 6.5 feet of
clearance) or are they from drivers of big SUVs (who typically need over 7 feet)
or drivers of Postal Service trucks, UPS trucks, etc. (who need at least 8 feet,
often much more)?

I'd think that after dealing with claims for damaged roofs and windshields,
you'd keep the overhead space sufficiently clear for legal motor vehicles. That
guarantees clearance for bicyclists. Exceptions must be rare and quickly dealt
with - not the frequent and persistent hazard that you've claimed in the past.

And don't divert into talking about paths, poorly maintained bike trails, etc.!
I'm talking about streets and roads. Although if your multi-use paths are that
poorly maintained, that should also embarrass your city.

- Frank Krygowski





Outside of Cambridge, most towns have only started painting bikes lanes in the past few years, and that's still a rare occurrence. Seriously frank, Why do you refuse to accept my experience?

You can't possibly be telling the truth because where Frank lives no one
has the same experiences as you.

Personally I ceased to be amused by his ramblings years ago and simply
filtered him out on Usenet. Someone that argues simply to argue is not
contributing much to the level of debate.

On Saturday, October 19, 2019 at 7:31:55 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 10:45:43 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 10/19/2019 10:18 AM, jbeattie wrote:

snip

This is not a marketing issue. We can argue over the need for a light to illuminate low hanging branches, but the fact that Frank doesn't encounter branches doesn't make that experience universal. I poke fun at Joerg, but his commuting experience is very different from mine -- as is yours and everyone elses'. I hit six branches coming home from work on Thursday night, but I was trying -- I was motivated by this thread. It was pouring rain and dark, so even without trying, I probably would have hit one -- maybe. This cedar, for example. https://tinyurl.com/yyzw2gxx There is a crazy fir, too -- and even an azalea on that road, although more effort is needed to hit that. You do end up dodging shrubs if you get squeezed by downhill traffic.

OMG, now we're all going to have to interrupt our rides, pull out our
phones, and take pictures of trees, just to humor Frank?! Oy. What about
Hillary's e-mails?

Errrr... it wasn't a photograph. It was Google Map, Street View.
Which would seem to pose the question, "Do you frequently expound on
things that you so obviously know nothing about?"

And please keep in mind the "Sagan Standard":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sagan_standard

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

- Frank Krygowski

On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 19:07:49 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Saturday, October 19, 2019 at 7:31:55 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 10:45:43 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 10/19/2019 10:18 AM, jbeattie wrote:

snip

This is not a marketing issue. We can argue over the need for a light to illuminate low hanging branches, but the fact that Frank doesn't encounter branches doesn't make that experience universal. I poke fun at Joerg, but his commuting experience is very different from mine -- as is yours and everyone elses'. I hit six branches coming home from work on Thursday night, but I was trying -- I was motivated by this thread. It was pouring rain and dark, so even without trying, I probably would have hit one -- maybe. This cedar, for example. https://tinyurl.com/yyzw2gxx There is a crazy fir, too -- and even an azalea on that road, although more effort is needed to hit that. You do end up dodging shrubs if you get squeezed by downhill traffic.

OMG, now we're all going to have to interrupt our rides, pull out our
phones, and take pictures of trees, just to humor Frank?! Oy. What about
Hillary's e-mails?

Errrr... it wasn't a photograph. It was Google Map, Street View.
Which would seem to pose the question, "Do you frequently expound on
things that you so obviously know nothing about?"

And please keep in mind the "Sagan Standard":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sagan_standard

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

- Frank Krygowski

Way down to the bottom of the page that you refer to is a reference to
"Hitchen's razor" which sounded sort of spiffy so I looked it up and
found that:

Hitchen's razor is an epistemological razor asserting that the burden
of proof regarding the truthfulness of a claim lies with the one who
makes the claim; if this burden is not met, then the claim is
unfounded, and its opponents need not argue further in order to
dismiss it.

Which seems so appropriate to RBT that it might have been written
especially for the site :-)

(for those who have trouble with big words epistemology refers to the
philosophical theory of knowledge)
--
cheers,

John B.

On Saturday, October 19, 2019 at 8:31:29 AM UTC-7, sms wrote:
On 10/18/2019 3:08 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:

Do you
have photos?

I can get some, but I'm simply incredulous that you are seriously doubting my experience, as well as every one else here.

Don't be incredulous. This is S.O.P.. "If I don't experience something
then it's simply not possible that anyone else on the planet has
experienced it, they must be lying and until they provide
incontrovertible evidence I won't believe it and no one else should either.

On Saturday, October 19, 2019 at 8:31:29 AM UTC-7, sms wrote:
On 10/18/2019 3:08 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:

Do you
have photos?

I can get some, but I'm simply incredulous that you are seriously doubting my experience, as well as every one else here.

Don't be incredulous. This is S.O.P.. "If I don't experience something
then it's simply not possible that anyone else on the planet has
experienced it, they must be lying and until they provide
incontrovertible evidence I won't believe it and no one else should either.

On 10/20/2019 7:01 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, October 20, 2019 at 10:23:10 AM UTC-7, Tom Kunich wrote:

This is like Jay calling me a liar because I was called by NASA. I worked for them before as a subcontractor so they know my capabilities. What is going on in his mind? Is he jealous that people want me to work for them? Just not in the areas I chose to work in? I could pick up a job tomorrow if I was willing to commute to Mt. View or Sunnyvale. All that would be necessary is the willingness to commute 3 hours each way in good traffic days and a LOT longer on bad traffic days.

I have a doctor in Palo Alto and it is only 25 miles away and morning appointments take me 2 hours to get there. So you suppose that Frank or Jay would be willing to so that?

If it were a good job, I'd move. I've done that with every job I've ever had. My current job, however, has lasted 33 years.

And I'm not calling you a liar. I'm calling you bizarre. Why do you feel the need to tell us that NASA called, true or not. You didn't take the job. You're still unemployed.

And you should be unemployed. When I'm your age, I will have no interest in finding a job. Why are you even bothering to look for work? You should spend your retirement doing community service. Become mayor of Oakland or San Leandro, wherever. Write the next great American-Irish-Croatian novel with Andre.

Exactly! The purpose of retirement is to do what you want and be
content. For a lot of people, that includes a component of community
service. I volunteer on three boards plus another "standing committee,"
I organize music sessions, volunteer for the bike club, play in a band
and with other music friends, help with various tasks for the extended
family, travel, bicycle, do some writing, help my wife with her garden, etc.

If a person is as miserable as Tom and is looking for a job, he's not
retired. He's just out of work.


--
- Frank Krygowski