Paul Barnard

People who dodge reasonable questions about their opinions are trolls. Pure and simple. If you are posting your opinion without any desire to discuss it, that certainly doesn't serve the purpose of discussion on a forum does it?

trailangel

^^^ That's not the definition of an internet troll.

Iride01 

I think the term troll gets slung around too casually. There is a lot to the definition of troll that need to be met. And in this case I don't think it's been met.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intern...o%20displaying

Paul Barnard

How sincere is someone about having a discussion when they don't even answer very simple questions about their opinions?

In internet slang, a troll is a person who posts inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community

Paul Barnard

I don't care what you call it. If you think evading simple questions about positions that you stake out lends itself well to discussion, there's not much more we have to discuss here. I'll note that you have still not answered the questions. I am not new to the internet. There's always a reason that people evade legitimate questions.

livedarklions

What you're failing to grasp here is all this "do as I say or get killed" nonsense is both really obnoxious and obviously not credible. I ride on roads with tractor trailers all the time. Getting passed by one is a non-event. I actually had a driver of one completely mishandle a right turn immediately in front of me today (he came from behind me, then started his turn as he was passing me), and I was situationally aware enough to slow so I didn't run into his trailer. I know there's risks to riding on the road just as there's risks to any activity, but I have skills and preparation designed to minimize that risk. I don't care that you won't ride on that road, that's your right. But yeah, people who have better road riding skills than you apparently do get pretty offended when you tell us we're "dead wrong". If you don't want pushback, stop telling us how you think we should ride. I guarantee you know less about the risk calculations and mitigation techniques of any person on this forum than they do, maybe stop being so condescending and arrogant.

No one asked you if you thought it was a " poor choice".

Iride01 

If it wasn't for the use of the word Troll, I'd pretty much be on your side for the discussion. However the word troll, tainted the issue because while you are defending yourself by expounding on and creating other reasonable arguments, I feel the other person is simply defending being called a troll.

Chuck M 

I don't know that trailangel is trying to be a troll and I think that term gets thrown out at a lot of people unfairly too often. But it is easy to see why many feel that his assessment that the riders should not have been riding in that area or two abreast is not what of most experienced cyclists would agree with. Looking at a satellite image of the map area posted above, that is certainly a sidewalk and not a bike lane or multi-use path. The satellite view also shows that area may be hairy riding at certain times of the day, but the video also shows IMHO that at that time of day the cyclists were not flirting with death.

I have a major US highway a mile from my home that I can safely cross at certain times on certain days easily and safely. In the opposite direction I have a traffic circle that I will only take during certain times of the day. I plan my rides accordingly avoiding these areas but the closest calls I've ever had were within a half mile radius of my residential area from people pulling out of their driveways or overtaking me at intersections and turning right in front of me. The laws in my state afford me the right to use the entire line and while I keep right when possible, I will use the lane in situations where I feel it safe and appropriate.

But I won't ride on the sidewalk because someone thinks I don't belong on the roadway. I stopped that when my dad took my training wheels off.

JW Fas

Troll or not, it's pretty clear when someone enters a conversation in bad faith. The whole concept of riding two abreast among motor vehicles is a complete red herring with regards to the issue at hand.

I-Like-To-Bike

It is also easy to see that some so-called "experienced" cyclists on BF are intolerant of anyone expressing an opinion that they do not agree with and resort to responding with ad hominem arguments and insults.

Daniel4

Several years ago, someone on BikeForums corrected me by stating FRAP means as Far Right As Practical not as Far Right As Possible.

There's a reason for that. When you hug the curb not only do you put your bike at risk with sewer grates, broken glass and potholes, you are inviting motorists to side swipe you.

The unscientific poll (now closed) indicates that more members have had incidences with riding on the far right of the lane than taking the lane. However, that result is based on so few participants.

Many other sources encourage that Practical in FRAP means you have to sometimes take the lane to force motorists to notice you and change lanes properly. So yes, there will be a lot of upset drivers having to change lanes, but that's what they have to do anyways even though they don't want to. In many jurisdictions, the law says for motorists to give 3ft (1m) clearance when passing cyclists. That's barely possible if you're hugging the curb while the driver stays in the same lane.

So all the cyclists have to do to avoid riding two abreast is for the outer one to pull back a bit while taking the lane, just like what motorcycles do when they ride in the safe position in a scattered format.

Paul Barnard

Exactly, and if they answered the questions, it would expose their red herring argument. That's why the questions were dodged.

livedarklions

I don't care one way or the other about the word "troll", but to describe what he did as just post a differing " opinion " really is laughable. Let's be clear, he made a ridiculous assertion that sidewalk riding is preferred, and that the OP was going to die if he didn't do it.

Only in an echo chamber would such obnoxious nonsense go unanswered.

livedarklions

This is actually a friendly correction because you're more correct than you realize. The word is "practicable", not " practical ". Subtle, but practicable implies even more discretion on the part of the cyclist.

koala logs

I agree cyclists are well within their rights to do it. But because there are many drivers out there who are really stupid, have inflated sense of entitlement, and don't even know that cyclists have every right to fully occupy one lane of the road, it's sometimes prudent not to push our luck in pushing our rights to the limit.

grizzly59

Stupid car driver A vs normal car driver B = mostly non or slight injury. Stupid car driver A vs cyclist B = ___________. Asymmetric warfare. If you answered something like “crippled for life” or “death” I would say you’re in the ballpark.

livedarklions

Maybe, but this isn't even close to that level of "prudence". This was an uncrowded road with a wide-open second lane. If people don't do it here, how is that " false sense of entitlement " ever going to change?

livedarklions

I knew a guy who was killed in a bar when a crazy person drove through the store front. If this is your calculation, you can't go anywhere.

livedarklions

Gotta say, I think going on a cycling advocacy forum and telling people that if they ride on the road they're going to die seems to fit that definition. Lane positioning and sidewalk riding were not the topic of this thread when the person in question chose to attack the OP's choices.

koala logs

OP already showed us the best way to change the way motorists treat us and that is having cameras on our bike and report reckless driving behavior such as close passes. We just need a lot more riders doing it and hoping that law enforcement will take these reports seriously and act on them in a timely manner.

I also ride in the middle of the car lane if applicable (like in the OP's video). But if I see a driver behind me isn't slowing down and intending to make a close pass in my lane, I move aside. I just don't feel safe standing my ground against reckless drivers. If anything went wrong, I'll be the one ending up on ER with broken bones if I'm lucky to be alive. I also move aside if driver behind sounded their horn when they're about to pass.

I have helmet mirror and frequently watch my back for any approaching driver and take evasive action if necessary. Rear view mirror makes a huge difference in safety.

Juan Foote

Back on subject...I would MUCH rather be hit with some fast food trash or an empty oil bottle (NO one can afford to throw out one full) than the POS car they were driving.

work4bike

That last time I had something thrown at me it was a half-full cup of soda from a fast food place. When I was on a loaded bike tour, I got hit by what felt like a huge steel ball. In both cases I gave chase, but of course to no avail...

livedarklions

I agree that if a motorist is insisting on heading at me, I'm going to retreat or take evasive action. Now that you've clarified what you meant, I don't think we disagree about anything. I'm not moving just because someone honked in most circumstances, but that's a personal call to be made situationally. I certainly have no interest in second-guessing you on that. We're all dealing with roads where many drivers feel that the rules don't apply to them, and the fact is they are handling a very heavy motorized deadly implement and we are not. One needs to leave room for improvisation when there's no way to predict the misconduct of others.

My view on this is that we are generally the best judges of what works for us, which is why I have so little tolerance of those posters who want to lecture other posters about how they're doing it wrong.

livedarklions

Can't argue with that math, but I'd much rather choose not getting hit by anything.

Digger Goreman

Wish that karmic backlashes were truly instant (wind blowing trash back into face and car, or a cyclist spitting left at the same time), but sometimes it works out:

The first leg of my Saturday trip, a gasaholic close passes, then left turns in front of an oncoming car. Only the other motorist braking prevented a t-bone of the offending jeep. This all slows me to make the same turn, I see a nickel in the road. I park my bike and happen upon a $20 on the grassy corner. Also recovered over $3 in change from the road. Had the gashole not been acting out and in a hurry, he and passenger might be $23 richer! Five minutes later, I give the twenty to my LBS for labor and pocket the change.