On 23/08/11 12:36 PM, Jonz wrote:

Heh... Sounds like... I was here first so I get to make up the rules.

No. It's more like "You wouldn't HAVE these parks if the hikers and
equestrians hadn't fought to establish them many years ago, so please
respect their efforts as you work to become part of the solution, rather
than the problem."

Sorry, It doesn't work that way.

I don't think you have the foggiest idea how it works.

Like too many spokeheads, you hide behind an anonymous handle and bogus
email address, and make threats about anyone who doesn't see things your
way 100% of the time. You are part of the problem, and those who know
better how to get along with other trail users, and how to share trails
in a civilized fashion (which means compromise, recognizing and
understanding the needs of other trail users) despair that they will
never make any progress given how much they have to fight with the guys
who are supposed to be on their own team, before they can present a
civilized and unified front to help craft rules that benefit everyone.
Every time they make some progress, some hothead starts flaming and
generates increased opposition to bikes on trails, and they are pushed
back to square one.

So, go ahead, keep on agitating and help ensure that the opposition
stays very active to fight any attempt to expand trail access to bikes
given that bikers (like you) obviously don't know how to get along, and
don't care to get along, and don't care about anyone or anything except
their own selfish selves. You will continue to be part of the problem
and be a perfect poster-boy for everyone who wants to restrict bike
access on trails.

jc