Originally Posted by livedarklions

So basically, we just ignore everything John Forrester had to say on the subject? It was his label, I don't see any purpose in rehabilitating it.

You're also ignoring the whole philosophy of traffic design that was espoused which is understandable given that it has so thoroughly been rejected.

The problem with the whole project of this thread is that the connection between VC as an ideology is so opposed to common sense that it was widely acknowledged even by Forrester that it was never about having the masses bike--road riding was going to be the province of a few relatively elite riders.

I go back to my previous statement as it seems to agree with something you said-- biking is actually a very simple activity and a lot of people are trying to sound like they have some special expertise. I think that's supported by your observation that there really isn't a lot of difference between how experienced riders ride.

This is probably a US specific observation, but I think the past few decades have had way too much mystification of riding so that many people have been discouraged from trying it. I think we're now seeing the start of an era where a lot of people have just realized that the presence of relatively new bike paths means they can just pick up a bike and ride. I don't think we do those people any favor if we have safety discussions that stem from an ideology that doesn't want them to venture out on the roads .

VC is dead, take some stuff out of the pockets of the corpse, but don't consider "taking the lane where appropriate" as being the invention of VC. We figured that out when we were 12.