Or an air rifle ... or a .40 caliber pistol .... but let's not go there. :D

Other than wanting to shoot the occasional idiot, I think you and I and all smart cyclists do the same.

And again ... all the good we do only really affects good people. The idiots will be idiots no matter how we acknowledge them.

As a driver I get annoyed with cyclists who feel like they need to tell me how to drive. Don't run into them often, fortunately.

I acknowledge motorists' behind me. By 'taking the lane'. So they can suck up all the fumes of my smaller carbon footprint.:D

Exactly, and then the cyclist breaks every law of the road but thinks motorists shouldn't.

As I posted earlier on this thread,In a bad situation if the driver was to swerve into an oncoming car, I'm sure I would raise my hand in a slow/stop signal in a panic.

And yet Jon PLENTY of motorists feel compelled to tell us cyclists how to drive.

And don't forget that there are plenty of motorists who are doing exactly the same thing, they're breaking the laws of the road by speeding, tailgating, failing to stop for red lights & stop signs, failing to yield the right of way. And then they're the one's who are getting upset that cyclists are doing the same damn thing.

I hear you, but in general, percentage wise, I see more cyclists disobeying far more laws and more often then cars except for speeding! LOL!!!

I hope that when you do run into them you are kind enough to go back and put them out of their misery, rather than leaving them suffering on the side of the road.

I aways run over a cyclist twice just to make sure they're not suffering.

No0t complicated!!
I acknowledge every motorist, cyclist and pedestrian behind me.
I have a red flashing light on the back of my bike..

I don't know if that is a good or a bad thing. I do know that my experience is the opposite, in that I see far more motorists breaking the law than I do cyclists. Yes, I see cyclists who fail to stop for red lights and stop signs. As well as those who are operating after sunset without any sort of lights, and those who fail to signal, and in the interest of full disclosure. I have to admit that particularly if I feel that I need to keep both hands on the handlebars to maintain control of my bike. That I do not always signal.

But that overall I see far more motorists who:

1. Fail to signal turns/lane changes
2. Fail to stop for red lights and stop signs
   1. To include failing to come to a complete stop before making a right on red
3. Tailgate
4. Speed
5. Engage in all forms of road rage
6. Fail to turn their headlights on after sunset
7. Fail to turn their headlights on while using their windshield wipers when it is raining

I could go on, but I think that you get the point.

As for not wearing helmets .... that is as important as wearing chartreuse tights ... a non-issue for drivers or other cyclists.

As for wearing dark clothes ... people drive black cars.

As for taking the lane .... I will pass on this We all know.

Don't pay for roads? Sheer ignorance.

No lights is an issue at night. Often self-correcting, judging by reports on cyclist fatalities.


Feel entitled? Some folks do ... no matter what conveyance they choose.

As for rolling stop signs ... more than cars, yes. And since intersections are choke points, getting a bike past the intersection and down the road ahead of traffic benefits Everyone.

On the other hand ... drunk drivers.

As for acknowledging drivers .... needs better definition. If it means waving ... how am I supposed to wave at cars behind me? How do they know if I am waving at them if I am facing forward, and how do I ride forward safely if I am turning back to wave at cars?

This thread is now officially ridiculous.

What is "acknowledge"?

It appears to be active, something the cyclist does ion a car-by-car basis, as opposed to something passive like having a tail light, which would "acknowledge" traffic, trees, pavement, and passers-by equally. Obviously not someone who has ever ridden in steady traffic.

that's because the person that coined that phrase is an elitist, and elitist think they're above the law, and a lot of cyclists think they're above the law and don't care what motorists think, and then they scratch their asses, because that's where their brains are, when they can't figure out why motorists hate them.

Counterpoint: A cyclist has all the same rights and responsibilities of use to the road as any other vehicle. Because, motorist will sometimes have to wait for a cyclist does not make them an elitist. Rather, it makes them fellow users of the road. Always keep this in mind when you're behind the wheel of a motor vehicle.

sorry but that made no sense. If a cyclist is, for example, taking the lane because it isn't safe to ride to the far right, doesn't make the cyclist an elitist, the cyclist is following the rules of the road when they are doing that, just as a horse and buggy can take the lane even though they will impede traffic, the law states we can do that because we are treated as if we are driving a car; now if there is space to the right where we can ride safely then we need to do that because the law says we are suppose to ride as far right as possible and safely can do so. An elitist is a cyclist who breaks laws that pertain to them but think they are above the law and can do whatever they damn want and to hell with whatever the motorists think. I'm a Californian, but I'm not a self righteous liberal who thinks we all should be on bikes and lets burn the cars to save the planet because I hate cars, I own both bikes and cars, and I like to use both. And since I do drive a car and ride bikes I see a lot more cyclists abusing laws that put them into danger then I do seeing cars doing the same thing percentage wise, get what I said, percentage wise.

You mean you didn't understand it? I will answer any legitimate question regarding my point if you need further clarification. As to your point, its an emotional one, and one that I have not intention of debating.

Wow ... I am not a big fan of @Krane XL as a rule but this post of his made perfect sense and was a really good post. Anyone looking for an issue with kraneXL would do better to pick another post to attack. this one mmakes perfect snes ... to me at leadt. maybe that should scare krane XL? :D

For @greatscott and any others .... here is what i read:

A cyclist is a road user, exactly the same as a car driver, truck driver, motorcyclist .... and the fact that a motorist might have to wait for a cyclist does not mean the cyclist is "elite," special, powerful, selfish, or anything negative ... the cyclist is riding for safety and the motorist is waiting not because s/he is being "controlled" by by the "elite cyclist," but because basic decency in sharing the road dictates that at thet point the motorist slow down and wait for the cyclist to reach a safer place for passing.

Krane XL seems to be saying that cyclists and motorists are equal, and both need to cooperate with the other for safe operation.

Who has a problem with that? Did I misinterpret?

Well if you ask me it sounds like you're just getting a lot smarter. 😊

My work here is done.

The discreetly stylish lines of my bike, and my obviously superior social stature, are sufficient acknowledgement.

I don't consider cyclists or motorists following the rules of the road as being emotional thing to do, do you? From what I can tell you and I agree that cyclists should follow the rules of the road, and AGAIN I NEVER said that a cyclist is an elitist if they follow other rules of the road, not sure why you can't understand what I said. Let me rephrase what I said: an elitist is one who breaks the rules of the road because they don't think the rules apply to them; did that rephrasing help any with your understanding?

I would like to take some credit for this reconciliation.

Earlier on this thread I posted from a different thread, quotes from @bicyclelove and @spare_wheel as a seemingly witty repartee of cyclists’ transgressions to the list of motorists’ transgressions by Digital_Cowboy on this thread.

I had no intention of presenting it as evidence ofcyclists’ elitism as interpreted by @greatscott in his more recent post in reply

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bicyclelove (Post 17500339)

Running a red light gives us (cyclists) a bad rap. Motorists see us as just scofflaws and don't respect our right to be on the road because of that. This is really the biggest thing I hear from drivers. Running red lights just makes us all look bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spare_wheel (Post 17505575)

You are forgetting a few:

1. Bikers/cyclists are entitled (or think they are better than us.)
2. Bikers/cyclists don't pay for bike lanes/roads.
3. Bikers/cyclists ride in the middle of the lane (and should ride on the sidewalk/or on a different road/or not at all)).....
8. Bikers/cyclists don't wear helmets.
9. Bikers/cyclists don't use lights.

---

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greatscott (Post 20850846)

that's because the person that coined that phrase is an elitist, and elitist think they're above the law, and a lot of cyclists think they're above the law and don't care what motorists think, and then they scratch their asses, because that's where their brains are, when they can't figure out why motorists hate them.

---

Apropos of this lame attempt at humor, I had posted just yesterday to another thread about communicating on Forums:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim from Boston (Post 20852234)

FYA see this now-closed thread, started 7/12/13, “How Do You Communicate on Forums vs Face-to-Face" (probably closed because of some overt hostility). While it was still civil, I posted:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim from Boston

Do you think that smilies (emoticons) help in fleshing out the vibes and flow of conversation and personal interaction in a posted message? It seems that Bike Forums provide a pretty wide range of smilies to express and vitalize as it were one's comments.

Personally, I do try to express any emotive content in writing as precisely as I can. The Merriam-Webster online dictionary is on my bookmark list to find the right synonym for any key words I use.

One thing that compelled me to reconsider smilies though was this. I once saw an ad in a sports magazine for something [Radio Shack] being endorsed by Lance Armstrong. He was quoted as something like, "No man over thirty should ever use smilies...period." :rolleyes:

---

---