Critical

Tim McNamara wrote:
In article ,
Nate Nagel wrote:

Dan O wrote:

What do *you* think will get motorists to appreciate the bicyclists
right to the road?
As a motorist, the only thing that rude, asshole cyclists make me
appreciate is police officers with bad attitudes. As a cyclist,
rude, asshole cyclists make me want to push them off into the bushes
so motorists don't think that *ALL* cyclists are assholes.

Unfortunately, my observation is that 99% of cyclists ride like
assholes. This makes me sad, because I do enjoy riding (well, when
it's not 40 degrees and raining) and I don't necessarily want
motorists to automatically assume I'm an asshole. But I understand
why they do.

So the 99% of drivers that drive like assholes are OK?

I'd say it's closer to 80%, and since when did two wrongs make a right?

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

Tim McNamara wrote:


Antisocial personality disorder is thought to have a prevalence of about
3.6% the US. Paranoid personality disorder it thought to have a
prevalence of about 4.5% Both can readily lead to antisocial behavior.
Overall about 14.8% of the US population are thought to meet the
criteria for at least one of the identified personality disorders,
meaning that the traits are of sufficient severity to interfere with
employment, personal relationships, etc. Many more people have
significant traits of various personality disorders but are able to get
along reasonably well in the world. Most of us have some personality
disorder traits that tend to come out under stress.

http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/c.../full/39/17/12

If you are a professional in this field, perhaps you can tell me what a
'disorder' is. When does a trait become a disorder? The article states
that the most common 'disorder' is obsessive / compulsive but that this
doesn't lead to any societal dysfunction. That is, folks who are OCD do
well at jobs and presumably in life in general.

So why is it a disorder?

Tim McNamara wrote:

Antisocial personality disorder is thought to have a prevalence of about
3.6% the US. Paranoid personality disorder it thought to have a
prevalence of about 4.5% Both can readily lead to antisocial behavior.
Overall about 14.8% of the US population are thought to meet the
criteria for at least one of the identified personality disorders,
meaning that the traits are of sufficient severity to interfere with
employment, personal relationships, etc. Many more people have
significant traits of various personality disorders but are able to get
along reasonably well in the world. Most of us have some personality
disorder traits that tend to come out under stress.

http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/c.../full/39/17/12

This agrees pretty well with the very subjective experiences reported by
waiters/waitresses. I've read that 80-90% of diners were fine, the
remainder a nightmare, or words to that effect.

terryc wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 19:34:30 -0800, Ron Wallenfang wrote:
illegal.
In Wisconsin, and I presume many other states

bad assumption to make

there's a law requiring bicyclists to ride single file

You might want to investigate exactly what that means.
Many people in australia think so too, but the our law(s) say TWO abreats
no more than two meters fro the edge of the road(read lane)

when they would otherwise be interfering with traffic.

and is that the exact wording of the law(s)?


The only
Critical Mass ride I recall seeing in Milwuakee involved many riders
occupying the entire width of the street and going very slowly. So they
were breaking the law. The police made a probably wise prudential
judgment to do nothing. Motorists were presumably annoyed, although in
our not so big town, motorist could turn at the next corner and minimize
the problem.

I doubt anyone had the lightest idea of the point of the whold thing.
For all anyone knew they could have been protesting the Iraq war - or
abortion, or just disrupting traffic for the sake of disrupting traffic
- kind of like the kids driving cars who occupy every lane in an x-way
and then go 30 mph.

As far as I could tell, the incident did no good but perhaps very slight
harm to an atitude of tolerance for bike riders.

Ron Wallenfang wrote:
In Wisconsin, and I presume many other states
there's a law requiring bicyclists to ride single file


Not in Wisconsin Statutes:
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/safety/...s/bikelaws.pdf

specifically:
"346.80(2)(a)
(a) Any person operating a bicycle or electric personal assistive
mobility device upon a roadway at less than the normal speed of traffic
at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall ride
as close as practicable to the right-hand edge or curb of the
unobstructed traveled roadway, including operators who are riding 2 or
more abreast where permitted under sub. (3)"

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

Ron Wallenfang wrote:
In Wisconsin, and I presume many other states
there's a law requiring bicyclists to ride single file
when they would otherwise be interfering with traffic.

terryc wrote:
and is that the exact wording of the law(s)?

Ron Wallenfang wrote:
No, the exact wording is tougher than that:
"Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway shall ride single file on all
roadways which have center lines or lane lines indicated by painting
or other marking and in all unincorporated areas. On roadways not
divided by painted or other marked center lines or lane lines, bicycle
operators may ride two abreast in incorporated areas." 346.80(2)

Deep breath, moment's reflection.
That's in reality a reasonable distinction between a rural road and an
expressway.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

On Dec 20, 2:21*pm, A Muzi wrote:
*Ron Wallenfang wrote:
In Wisconsin, and I presume many other states
there's a law requiring bicyclists to ride single file
when they would otherwise be interfering with traffic.
*terryc wrote:
and is that the exact wording of the law(s)?
Ron Wallenfang wrote:
No, the exact wording is tougher than that:
"Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway shall ride single file on all
roadways which have center lines or lane lines indicated by painting
or other marking and in all unincorporated areas. *On roadways not
divided by painted or other marked center lines or lane lines, bicycle
operators may ride two abreast in incorporated areas." * 346.80(2)

Deep breath, moment's reflection.
That's in reality a reasonable distinction between a rural road and an
expressway.

The meaning of the statute quoted by Ron
appears not to be a rural vs expressway distinction.
Rather, it says that bicycles may not ride two
abreast on either
1. roads with center or lane lines
OR 2. roads in unincorporated areas.

By this law, two-abreast is permitted only
in roads without lane markings that are
also in incorporated areas. Thus, you
could legally ride two-abreast on a city
backstreet that has no center line, but not
on a quiet country road.

Of course, I'm sure people break this rule
and get away with it unless they run into a
trooper who wants to be a pain in the neck.
But in general, we should limit the number
of rules whose enforcement depends on
whether an authority figure likes the cut
of your jib.

Ben

In article ,
slide wrote:

Tim McNamara wrote:


Antisocial personality disorder is thought to have a prevalence of
about 3.6% the US. Paranoid personality disorder it thought to
have a prevalence of about 4.5% Both can readily lead to
antisocial behavior. Overall about 14.8% of the US population are
thought to meet the criteria for at least one of the identified
personality disorders, meaning that the traits are of sufficient
severity to interfere with employment, personal relationships, etc.
Many more people have significant traits of various personality
disorders but are able to get along reasonably well in the world.
Most of us have some personality disorder traits that tend to come
out under stress.

http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/c.../full/39/17/12

If you are a professional in this field, perhaps you can tell me what
a 'disorder' is. When does a trait become a disorder? The article
states that the most common 'disorder' is obsessive / compulsive but
that this doesn't lead to any societal dysfunction. That is, folks
who are OCD do well at jobs and presumably in life in general.

So why is it a disorder?

I'm a psychologist. Behavioral patterns, personality traits, etc. cross
the line into disorders when they create significant problems in
people's lives or the lives of others around them- impairing their
ability to maintain relationships, to maintain employment, etc. We've
all got some tweaks to our personalities that sometimes cause trouble in
our lives; personality disorders go well beyond those to be persistently
problematic across almost all relationships and social roles. (I
realize that's a touch vague, and would mention that the existence of
personality disorders at all remains somewhat controversial among
clinicians. Most would agree on the existence of antisocial personality
disorder, paranoid personality disorder, borderline personality disorder
and narcissistic personality disorder, but the other personality
disorders might be less universally accepted).

In the case of obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (not the same
as obsessive compulsive disorder which is an anxiety disorder; the name
for this personality disorder is poorly chosen IMHO), which that
research found to be the most prevalent of the personality disorders,
the characteristics are a personality style that is rigid, poorly able
to adapt to changes, overly focused on detail to the point that the big
picture is lost, perfectionistic to the point of being unable to finish
tasks, etc.

http://psychcentral.com/disorders/sx26.htm

These folks are often irritable and excessively demanding of others.
They poorly tolerate not being in control. Think of "The Great Santini"
as an example. A little bit of these traits would be helpful, promoting
organization, commitment to work, etc. Too much of a good thing becomes
a bad thing.

Tim McNamara wrote:


I'm a psychologist. Behavioral patterns, personality traits, etc. cross
the line into disorders when they create significant problems in
people's lives or the lives of others around them- impairing their
ability to maintain relationships, to maintain employment, etc. We've
all got some tweaks to our personalities that sometimes cause trouble in
our lives; personality disorders go well beyond those to be persistently
problematic across almost all relationships and social roles. (I
realize that's a touch vague, and would mention that the existence of
personality disorders at all remains somewhat controversial among
clinicians. Most would agree on the existence of antisocial personality
disorder, paranoid personality disorder, borderline personality disorder
and narcissistic personality disorder, but the other personality
disorders might be less universally accepted).

In the case of obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (not the same
as obsessive compulsive disorder which is an anxiety disorder; the name
for this personality disorder is poorly chosen IMHO), which that
research found to be the most prevalent of the personality disorders,
the characteristics are a personality style that is rigid, poorly able
to adapt to changes, overly focused on detail to the point that the big
picture is lost, perfectionistic to the point of being unable to finish
tasks, etc.

http://psychcentral.com/disorders/sx26.htm

These folks are often irritable and excessively demanding of others.
They poorly tolerate not being in control. Think of "The Great Santini"
as an example. A little bit of these traits would be helpful, promoting
organization, commitment to work, etc. Too much of a good thing becomes
a bad thing.

Thanks, Tim. I suppose, as you imply, determining when a trait moves
into being a disorder is quite difficult to determine unless the line is
well behind the person in the sense that the person is clearly
dysfunctional.

There may also be value and self interest involved. Frex, children may
think their aged parent dysfunctional because, at 80 years old, he takes
up with a 23 year old who knows more than anything how to spend a lot of
money. The old guy may think he's getting his money's worth while the
children think he deranged.

In article
,
Dan O wrote:

On Dec 19, 5:25 pm, Nate Nagel wrote:
Dan O wrote:
On Dec 18, 7:34 pm, Ron Wallenfang wrote:
On Dec 18, 4:30 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:

On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 13:36:50 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:
The stupidity of gathering together to do the very things that annoy
motorists-- breaking the law and "getting in the way" is... well, it's
incredibly stupid.
What breaking the law? They're just riding on the road. That's not
illegal.
In Wisconsin, and I presume many other states, there's a law requiring
bicyclists to ride single file when they would otherwise be
interfering with traffic. The only Critical Mass ride I recall seeing
in Milwuakee involved many riders occupying the entire width of the
street and going very slowly. So they were breaking the law.

Sure, that's the civil disobedience. And maybe that's what's needed
to get people to *think* about what it means to share the road.

Think about what you just said...


Notice that I said "maybe". Think Alabama '64 if it helps you with
the concept.

What do *you* think will get motorists to appreciate the bicyclists
right to the road?

A cheerful wave.

At traffic signals I move to the left so that drivers can
make right turns on a red light signal. I do so even when
it means abandoning the bicycle lane. Drivers have thanked
me. The drivers behind me that I move in front of I turn
around to and acknowledge with a wave, then move out of
their way when the light is about to turn green.

--
Michael Press

Michael Press wrote:

At traffic signals I move to the left so that drivers can
make right turns on a red light signal. I do so even when
it means abandoning the bicycle lane. Drivers have thanked
me. The drivers behind me that I move in front of I turn
around to and acknowledge with a wave, then move out of
their way when the light is about to turn green.

Same here. Almost always gets a nod or wave of appreciation.

Bill "small gestures produce good will" S.