On Fri, 16 Feb 2024 08:07:05 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On 2/16/2024 4:13 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 20:58:31 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2/15/2024 12:56 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>>>>
>>>> He said he was "riding in Pittsburgh in 5 PM Friday rush hour traffic
>>>> during a pouring thunderstorm."
>>>>
>>>> Why would anyone post such a detailed anecdote if not to brag.
>>>
>>> I posted that because some people here had claimed I rode only in my
>>> suburban village.
>>
>> ...and you just had to add that you rode "in 5 PM Friday rush hour
>> traffic during a pouring thunderstorm," didn't you?
>>
>>> According to this yapping Floridian Yorkshire terrier, I'm not allowed
>>> to refute lies.
>>
>> Bragging and exaggerating is such second nature to a narcissist that
>> they don't even know when they're doing it.
>
> lol...kitty yapping at frank once again begging for his attention and
>acceptance
>
>You chased him around looking for his latest posts and it this thread
>posted three nonsensical whiny (and frankly embarrassing) posts designed
>only to get his attention that you're so desperate for
>
>4:09 AM
>4:11 AM
>4:13 am
>
>Talk about having a life so pathetic and empty you have nothing better
>to do that chase another person around the web.

<grin>

Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
> Am Wed, 14 Feb 2024 22:47:25 -0500 schrieb Frank Krygowski
> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>:
>
>> On 2/14/2024 5:03 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
>>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 2/13/2024 4:16 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 21:55:07 +0100, Wolfgang Strobl
>>>>> <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Fine. But that park won't get me from Bonn to Cologne, for a familiy
>>>>>> visit.
>>>>> Well, that's not the kind of thing I want to do. Actually, it's
>>>>> something I've never done, and likely will never do.
>>>>
>>>> It's scary! :-)
>>>
>>> You have family in Cologne?
>>
>> Nope. But as we've seen, for some it's scary to venture onto any normal
>> roads.
>
> Right. But it's little more complicated to explain, at least in this
> case. Reason is, that very connection it almost optimal for establishing
> the narrative told by segregation fans. But as always, the devil is in
> the details.
>
> Bonn and Cologne are located at the Rhine river. Rivers don't have
> towpaths for a long time now, riverside ways are now popular, instead.
> These most often are broad, free of crossings and are popular as wide
> promenades near and within cities, mostly car traffic free, for these
> reasons. You need a bridge to cross a river, though, spanning both this
> promenade and the river. In other words, the paths that run alongside
> rivers, canals or coastlines deliver exactly what fans of cycle paths
> want, namely ultimate separation.
>
> Unfortunately, as one might easily guess, using that as a general model
> for "biycle infrastructure" is grossly misleading, because most trips
> neither start nor end at a river and even when they do, riding along a
> river promenade most often isn't the best choice, or even good choice.
>
> Often that route is neither continuous, nor safe, nor fast enough,
> especially for longer trips. My long time commute crossing the Rhine,
> for example, was essentially riding through the city to the central of
> three bridges, crossing the river and then finally riding up an ascent
> to a local hill at the edge of the Siebengebirge. Dig up a river and
> they will come? Sorry, just kidding.
>
> Earnestly, even in this almost ideal example for bike infrastructure
> advocates, finding an optimal route for a road bicyclce gets you a route
> not touching that riverside course, because there are many better routes
> that avoid the river meanders and avoid most of its twists and turns.
>
> Unfortunately, those better roads often got inferiour, but mandatory
> "bicycle infrastructure", and so are usuable only for those who have
> enough thick skin (and riding capabilities) for handing the harrasments
> to be expected.
>
> In short: that very infrastructure creates a lot of pain and fear that
> makes people cry for more.
>
> It is quite easy to demonstrate this practically with a routing software
> of your choice. I'll leave that as an exercise for the reader, for now.
>
>
Essentially you can’t force folks to go a route they don’t wish to! See
quiet ways and other meandering type routes, fine on a quiet day with time
to burn but hardly useful transport.

Hence it’s wise to use the routes folks already use for infrastructure
which seems to largely work in london, in that the big segregated stuff is
built on routes being used and which are direct and so on.

Out where I am the river curves so while you can take the tow path a number
of miles along side the river fast it is not!

Roger Merriman

On 2/16/2024 12:10 AM, sms wrote:
> On 2/15/2024 3:52 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Makes free medical for illegals look cheap!
>
> The alternative is worse. That's why, in 1986, President
> Reagan signed the law that requires hospitals to treat poor
> people and illegal aliens. It was called the "Emergency
> Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act." It requires
> hospitals to treat patients in need of emergency care
> regardless of their ability to pay, citizenship or legal
> status. It applies to any hospital that takes Medicare
> funds, which is nearly every hospital.
>
> Hopefully you realize just exactly which entities are behind
> allowing more illegal immigration into the U.S., and why.
> Agribusiness, construction interests, and hospitality
> companies, contribute big bucks to politicians to ensure
> constant flow of illegal immigrants that can be easily
> exploited.
>

You're advocating this situation?
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 2/16/2024 7:09 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> On 2/16/2024 1:10 AM, sms wrote:
>> On 2/15/2024 3:52 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> Makes free medical for illegals look cheap!
>>
>> The alternative is worse. That's why, in 1986, President
>> Reagan signed the law that requires hospitals to treat
>> poor people and illegal aliens. It was called the
>> "Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act." It
>> requires hospitals to treat patients in need of emergency
>> care regardless of their ability to pay, citizenship or
>> legal status. It applies to any hospital that takes
>> Medicare funds, which is nearly every hospital.
>>
>> Hopefully you realize just exactly which entities are
>> behind allowing more illegal immigration into the U.S.,
>> and why. Agribusiness, construction interests, and
>> hospitality companies, contribute big bucks to politicians
>> to ensure constant flow of illegal immigrants that can be
>> easily exploited.
>>
>
> +1
>
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/zacheverson/2021/11/17/the-trump-organization-sought-to-hire-87-foreign-workers-at-mar-a-lago-this-year

I-129 temporary work visas are not illegal aliens.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 2/16/2024 4:36 AM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:

<snip>

> Unfortunately, as one might easily guess, using that as a general model
> for "biycle infrastructure" is grossly misleading, because most trips
> neither start nor end at a river and even when they do, riding along a
> river promenade most often isn't the best choice, or even good choice.
>
> Often that route is neither continuous, nor safe, nor fast enough,
> especially for longer trips. My long time commute crossing the Rhine,
> for example, was essentially riding through the city to the central of
> three bridges, crossing the river and then finally riding up an ascent
> to a local hill at the edge of the Siebengebirge. Dig up a river and
> they will come? Sorry, just kidding.

We must be lucky in my area, Silicon Valley, because the bicycle
infrastructure that is alongside creeks and rivers is both continuous
and safe, and is especially suited for longer trips.

These multi-use paths tend to go right by major job centers in Silicon
Valley, including Google, Intel, Nvidia, Microsoft, NASA, Adobe,
Samsung, Netflix, as well as hundreds of smaller companies (ee map at
<https://i.imgur.com/ISTthDR.jpeg>). These routes are usually faster
than using roads because, with few exceptions, there are very few
at-grade crossings of roads so there is no stopping to wait at traffic
lights, and no stop signs. On one of the river paths there is a little
meandering, but not a significant amount. There is also one hard-pack,
unpaved section, in the baylands near San Francisco Bay.

Apple, in my own city, has no multi-use paths to their three campuses
and multiple buildings but has funded protected bike lanes and is
funding a path between their campuses
<https://www.cupertino.org/home/showpublisheddocument/29329/637564172124900000>.
Their employees often use the corporate bicycle fleet to go between
buildings. At their newest campus, the parking garages are so far from
"the Spaceship" that employees ride bicycles from where they park to the
closest entrance to their office. I know one employee who brings his own
bike on his car because he said that often there are no corporate bikes
available in the parking garages.

On 2/16/2024 5:31 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:

<snip>

> Essentially you can’t force folks to go a route they don’t wish to! See
> quiet ways and other meandering type routes, fine on a quiet day with time
> to burn but hardly useful transport.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers can fix your meandering rivers by
straightening them. "The Corps has straightened the river’s path by
cutting off meander bends, and has built multiple flood control
structures capable of diverting a portion of the river's flow." This was
done to make the river usable for barges.

--
“If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
they do about the subject.”—Tin Foil Awards

sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
> On 2/16/2024 5:31 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Essentially you can’t force folks to go a route they don’t wish to! See
>> quiet ways and other meandering type routes, fine on a quiet day with time
>> to burn but hardly useful transport.
>
> The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers can fix your meandering rivers by
> straightening them. "The Corps has straightened the river’s path by
> cutting off meander bends, and has built multiple flood control
> structures capable of diverting a portion of the river's flow." This was
> done to make the river usable for barges.
>

I believe they are reversing that in Los Angeles? Clearly London the river
path is as it was but it’s embanked ie deeper and narrower than it was. And
has various locks certainly in the west end of the river.

Roger Merriman

On Fri Feb 2 13:34:00 2024 sms wrote:
> "Biking in cities can be complicated, and map apps can only help so
> much." "They were finding the main roads because they?re faster, but
> they?re unpleasant to cycle on."
>
> https://www.marketplace.org/2024/01/31/cyclists-cities-bike-infrastructure-maps/
>
> Kai Ryssdall interviewing Laura Laker, freelance journalist in London
> writing about active transit and the author of the upcoming book,
> ?Potholes and Pavements: A bumpy ride on Britain?s National Cycle Network.?

Did you every in yhour wildest dreams think that your sim[ple statement of fact would trigger 350 responses? Good thing you didn't say something arguable.

Am Thu, 15 Feb 2024 11:48:58 -0500 schrieb Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>:

>About clipless: I've never wanted them. I'm certainly not afraid of
>them; what's to fear anyway? I used old-style classic cycling shoes with
>cleats, toe clips and straps during time trials, back in the day. A
>person who can handle those should have no problem with clipless.

I never used pedals with toe clips like those
<https://www.pinterest.com.mx/pin/371969250455779002/>
with their leather-straps. When I got my Peugeot PR60/L in 1978, I
removed the straps and rode without. My wife initially got clips called
"lady clips" similar to these
<https://fawkes-cycles.co.uk/mks-half-clip-steel-toe-clips-deep-with-leather-p14678>
on her 1978 randonneur and still uses similar clips made from plastic on
her current, very old, but somewhat newer utility bike
("Fahrradmanufaktur", Anglais frame, Sachs 3x7).

I switched to clipless pedals a long time ago for everything except a
Dutch bike, both for leisure rides and for my commute to work.

Peugeot PR60/L
<https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/fahrrad/bilder/Alltagsraeder/images/janaufrad.jpg>

Sparta Cornwall
<https://www.mystrobl.de/Plone/radfahren/bild12.jpeg>.

My wife switched from lady clips to SPD, too, when we bought two new
racing bikes in early 2010.

>
>As I've said many times, one of my priorities is to be able to use my
>bikes with (almost) any shoes I own.

I'm able to use any of my bikes with almost any shoes, for short trips
on flat ground. But I rarely do, because most of my bicycle shoes are
good enough for walking and don't look much different from sneakers.
Perfect if you have an office job in a science-related field, as I did.
I even bought a special pair of SPD shoes for commuting in winter.
<https://www.mystrobl.de/Plone/radfahren/technik/komponenten/winterausruestung/IMG_1272.jpeg>.
Those shoes of course had to be changed at the office.

As I have never practiced cycling as a competitive sport, there was no
reason to use anything other than SPD.

>If I ride to a store, to a library,
>to visit a friend etc., I don't want to have to change shoes. For me,
>toe clips and straps (usually fairly loose) work perfectly. YMMV.

Our sons use Look compatible pedals on their racing bikes and SPD or
ordinary pedals on their other bikes.

--
Bicycle helmets are the Bach flower remedies of traffic

Am Thu, 15 Feb 2024 15:44:03 -0500 schrieb Zen Cycle
<funkmaster@hotmail.com>:

>On 2/15/2024 1:38 PM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 11:48:58 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2/15/2024 9:06 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>>>> On 2/15/2024 8:23 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> ..and for some, as we've seen, it's scary to ride with clipless
>>>>> pedals.
>>>>
>>>> There's a big difference between being afraid to do something and
>>>> preferring not to do something. It's not surprising you don't get that.
>>>
>>> The Florida guy is desperately compensating for his feelings of
>>> inferiority. He yaps at me at every opportunity, in every way possible.
>>
>> Yeah, I do enjoy making sure that everyone knows that the reason for
>> your braggs and other posting nonsense is because of your narcissism.
>>
>> Consider it a free service.
>
>You certainly are free to make the world aware of your narcissism though
>projection.

What's wrong with talking about ones preferences and the reasons
thereabout?

--
Wir danken für die Beachtung aller Sicherheitsbestimmungen

Am Fri, 16 Feb 2024 13:31:24 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
<roger@sarlet.com>:

>Essentially you can’t force folks to go a route they don’t wish to!

Of course you can't do that. But you can roughly calculate that a long
but direct route on good asphalt, which is at the limit of what someone
can manage, is no longer manageable if you hold a meandering route with
high rolling resistance and many obstacles against it.

--
Thank you for observing all safety precautions

Am Fri, 16 Feb 2024 06:36:40 -0800 schrieb sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com>:

>On 2/16/2024 4:36 AM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> Unfortunately, as one might easily guess, using that as a general model
>> for "biycle infrastructure" is grossly misleading, because most trips
>> neither start nor end at a river and even when they do, riding along a
>> river promenade most often isn't the best choice, or even good choice.
>>
>> Often that route is neither continuous, nor safe, nor fast enough,
>> especially for longer trips. My long time commute crossing the Rhine,
>> for example, was essentially riding through the city to the central of
>> three bridges, crossing the river and then finally riding up an ascent
>> to a local hill at the edge of the Siebengebirge. Dig up a river and
>> they will come? Sorry, just kidding.

>We must be lucky in my area, Silicon Valley, because the bicycle
>infrastructure that is alongside creeks and rivers is both continuous
>and safe, and is especially suited for longer trips.

Perhaps. But pointing at lucky people (or anxious people living at a
river who have all the time in the world) isn't very usefull as a
general traffic planning concept.

As I said, you're hardly going to dig a canal everywhere where people
want to use bicycles as a means of transportation. Apart from that, it
wouldn't work well in hilly areas anyway.

--
Wir danken für die Beachtung aller Sicherheitsbestimmungen

On 2/17/2024 7:30 AM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
> Am Thu, 15 Feb 2024 11:48:58 -0500 schrieb Frank Krygowski
> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>:
>
>> About clipless: I've never wanted them. I'm certainly not afraid of
>> them; what's to fear anyway? I used old-style classic cycling shoes with
>> cleats, toe clips and straps during time trials, back in the day. A
>> person who can handle those should have no problem with clipless.
>
> I never used pedals with toe clips like those
> <https://www.pinterest.com.mx/pin/371969250455779002/>
> with their leather-straps. When I got my Peugeot PR60/L in 1978, I
> removed the straps and rode without. My wife initially got clips called
> "lady clips" similar to these
> <https://fawkes-cycles.co.uk/mks-half-clip-steel-toe-clips-deep-with-leather-p14678>
> on her 1978 randonneur and still uses similar clips made from plastic on
> her current, very old, but somewhat newer utility bike
> ("Fahrradmanufaktur", Anglais frame, Sachs 3x7).
>
> I switched to clipless pedals a long time ago for everything except a
> Dutch bike, both for leisure rides and for my commute to work.
>
> Peugeot PR60/L
> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/fahrrad/bilder/Alltagsraeder/images/janaufrad.jpg>
>
> Sparta Cornwall
> <https://www.mystrobl.de/Plone/radfahren/bild12.jpeg>.
>
>
> My wife switched from lady clips to SPD, too, when we bought two new
> racing bikes in early 2010.
>
>>
>> As I've said many times, one of my priorities is to be able to use my
>> bikes with (almost) any shoes I own.
>
> I'm able to use any of my bikes with almost any shoes, for short trips
> on flat ground. But I rarely do, because most of my bicycle shoes are
> good enough for walking and don't look much different from sneakers.
> Perfect if you have an office job in a science-related field, as I did.
> I even bought a special pair of SPD shoes for commuting in winter.
> <https://www.mystrobl.de/Plone/radfahren/technik/komponenten/winterausruestung/IMG_1272.jpeg>.
> Those shoes of course had to be changed at the office.
>
> As I have never practiced cycling as a competitive sport, there was no
> reason to use anything other than SPD.
>
>> If I ride to a store, to a library,
>> to visit a friend etc., I don't want to have to change shoes. For me,
>> toe clips and straps (usually fairly loose) work perfectly. YMMV.
>
> Our sons use Look compatible pedals on their racing bikes and SPD or
> ordinary pedals on their other bikes.
>
>

Nice summary.
We enjoy an advanced cycle industry such that flat pedals,
half-clips, toeclips, SPD type or Look type (& more)
clipless are plentiful enough to suit any taste or need.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
> Am Fri, 16 Feb 2024 13:31:24 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>
>> Essentially you can’t force folks to go a route they don’t wish to!
>
> Of course you can't do that. But you can roughly calculate that a long
> but direct route on good asphalt, which is at the limit of what someone
> can manage, is no longer manageable if you hold a meandering route with
> high rolling resistance and many obstacles against it.
>
>
At least locally the meandering type stuff are leisure routes and in a lot
of cases more walking than cycles areas which is fine.

Which is why the main cycling routes into london don’t use them and these
are where the main effort with cycling infrastructure has been focused such
as the Embankment which does follow the river but it’s more gently curving
and is direct and fast. Or Chiswick High street which is direct though
being a high street multiple junctions as you’d expect.

Both if one wanted to you can take quieter alternatives though at a cost of
time and distance, and with the Embankment you can take slightly more
direct routes which would be 5.4 miles vs 6.15 miles but the Embankment is
by some margin faster for all traffic due to less junctions bikes even more
so on the segregated 2nd half.

it’s the logical choice to use the embankment be bike be that fast roadie
or slow hire bike. Or mopeds/cars.

driving though Trafalgar Square and the city of London to the tower is fine
for the tourist buses and so on but not useful as method of getting from A
to B.

Roger Merriman

On 2/17/2024 10:34 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>> Am Fri, 16 Feb 2024 13:31:24 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>
>>> Essentially you can’t force folks to go a route they don’t wish to!
>>
>> Of course you can't do that. But you can roughly calculate that a long
>> but direct route on good asphalt, which is at the limit of what someone
>> can manage, is no longer manageable if you hold a meandering route with
>> high rolling resistance and many obstacles against it.
>>
>>
> At least locally the meandering type stuff are leisure routes and in a lot
> of cases more walking than cycles areas which is fine.

It's fine if your objective is to give people a place to putter about on
a bike for recreation. But usually, proponents of "innovative" bike
infrastructure say it's to significantly increase bike mode share,
reduce motor vehicle congestion, reduce pollution, etc.

All that seems very unrealistic, at least for the U.S. But if the
promoted routes to traffic generators are too indirect, it seems
completely hopeless.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 2/17/2024 8:30 AM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
> Am Thu, 15 Feb 2024 11:48:58 -0500 schrieb Frank Krygowski
> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>:
>
>> As I've said many times, one of my priorities is to be able to use my
>> bikes with (almost) any shoes I own.
>
> I'm able to use any of my bikes with almost any shoes, for short trips
> on flat ground. But I rarely do, because most of my bicycle shoes are
> good enough for walking and don't look much different from sneakers.
> Perfect if you have an office job in a science-related field, as I did.

I'm sure it varies with one's personal choice of clothing style.

The most dedicated utility cyclist I know was, until he retired, a
history professor at our university. He and his wife were (and still
are) comfortable attending all sorts of functions in cycling-oriented
clothing. They'll be the ones at the symphony performance in bright
yellow Gore-Tex jackets, surrounded by more formally dressed attendees.

But when he rode his bike to the university, he'd be in clothing more
suited for the classroom or other professional business, just as I was.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On 2/17/2024 10:34 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>>> Am Fri, 16 Feb 2024 13:31:24 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>>
>>>> Essentially you can’t force folks to go a route they don’t wish to!
>>>
>>> Of course you can't do that. But you can roughly calculate that a long
>>> but direct route on good asphalt, which is at the limit of what someone
>>> can manage, is no longer manageable if you hold a meandering route with
>>> high rolling resistance and many obstacles against it.
>>>
>>>
>> At least locally the meandering type stuff are leisure routes and in a lot
>> of cases more walking than cycles areas which is fine.
>
> It's fine if your objective is to give people a place to putter about on
> a bike for recreation. But usually, proponents of "innovative" bike
> infrastructure say it's to significantly increase bike mode share,
> reduce motor vehicle congestion, reduce pollution, etc.
>
> All that seems very unrealistic, at least for the U.S. But if the
> promoted routes to traffic generators are too indirect, it seems
> completely hopeless.
>
To honest tends to be very different organisations and persons. Sustrans
and their national cycle network in the uk is infamous for being well
disingenuous ie it’s clearly for most part leisure infrastructure old
railway lines and towpaths and so on, let alone using old unpaved roads
which unless your ok with Hike A bike aren’t really passable for anything
roadie like.

And yes is still some “quiet ways” about with bike signs painted on back
roads which are nice places to roll along but not utility.

That’s why London and other uk Cities for most part have given up with such
stuff, I guess Low traffic neighbourhoods are vaguely related ie some sort
of barrier to prevent cars using a area as a cut through. Though bikes etc
can still use a direct route just cars etc would need to reroute on to the
main road.

All of the infrastructure I’ve seen certainly the big ticket stuff is on
the main routes in/out of london, they deliberately used those same routes
rather than directly them on a different route.

Richmond Park is famous used for traffic be that motorised or not as the
route into london, it’s size means going round is fair way. In winter can
see all the lights of the long distances cycle commuters heading home from
a high point in the Park.

So yes leisure stuff can be useful, I use 3 parks on way to work as my most
direct route is fairly tedious, and only a touch quicker so I prefer a
calmer route in, I do similar with the car for same reason.

And clearly the old cycleways down the bypasses are for most folks
pointless such as the one I use on the commute, though probably are obliged
to maintain pedestrian/cycle access plus the whole going to be a motorway
planning.

Roger Merriman

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On 2/17/2024 8:30 AM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>> Am Thu, 15 Feb 2024 11:48:58 -0500 schrieb Frank Krygowski
>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>:
>>
>>> As I've said many times, one of my priorities is to be able to use my
>>> bikes with (almost) any shoes I own.
>>
>> I'm able to use any of my bikes with almost any shoes, for short trips
>> on flat ground. But I rarely do, because most of my bicycle shoes are
>> good enough for walking and don't look much different from sneakers.
>> Perfect if you have an office job in a science-related field, as I did.
>
> I'm sure it varies with one's personal choice of clothing style.
>
> The most dedicated utility cyclist I know was, until he retired, a
> history professor at our university. He and his wife were (and still
> are) comfortable attending all sorts of functions in cycling-oriented
> clothing. They'll be the ones at the symphony performance in bright
> yellow Gore-Tex jackets, surrounded by more formally dressed attendees.
>
> But when he rode his bike to the university, he'd be in clothing more
> suited for the classroom or other professional business, just as I was.
>
My cycling kit or at least the commute stuff looks like some skate shoes,
which flat pedal MTB shoes are derived from, some subtle cycling trousers
that look like causal trousers and technical T shirts etc.

So bar changing the cycling shorts for pants which clearly aren’t visible
under the trousers. I might swap the T-shirt though don’t always.

This is more that it minimises amount of kit I have to take, so stuff that
I don’t need to change i will choose my jacket is a good example it doesn’t
shout bike it looks like a normal jacket but is cut for use on the bike.

Roger Merriman

On Sat, 17 Feb 2024 11:32:12 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 2/17/2024 10:34 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>>> Am Fri, 16 Feb 2024 13:31:24 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>>
>>>> Essentially you can’t force folks to go a route they don’t wish to!
>>>
>>> Of course you can't do that. But you can roughly calculate that a long
>>> but direct route on good asphalt, which is at the limit of what someone
>>> can manage, is no longer manageable if you hold a meandering route with
>>> high rolling resistance and many obstacles against it.
>>>
>>>
>> At least locally the meandering type stuff are leisure routes and in a lot
>> of cases more walking than cycles areas which is fine.
>
>It's fine if your objective is to give people a place to putter about on
>a bike for recreation. But usually, proponents of "innovative" bike
>infrastructure say it's to significantly increase bike mode share,
>reduce motor vehicle congestion, reduce pollution, etc.

I never heard the term "bike mode share" before RBT. I still don't
concern myself about it.

>All that seems very unrealistic, at least for the U.S. But if the
>promoted routes to traffic generators are too indirect, it seems
>completely hopeless.

On 2/17/2024 1:53 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>
> I never heard the term "bike mode share" before RBT. I still don't
> concern myself about it.

More succinctly, our tricycle guy means: "I don't know and I don't care."

Which is his right, of course. But it makes one wonder why he bothers to
read, let alone post.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Sat, 17 Feb 2024 16:42:46 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 2/17/2024 1:53 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>>
>> I never heard the term "bike mode share" before RBT. I still don't
>> concern myself about it.
>
>More succinctly, our tricycle guy means: "I don't know and I don't care."

Exactly...

>Which is his right, of course.

Unlike you, little man, I don't try to get involved with things that
don't concern me.

> But it makes one wonder why he bothers to
>read, let alone post.

Ding goes the irony bell, again. Krykowski posts to make him feel
better about himself.

On Saturday, February 17, 2024 at 5:34:59 PM UTC-5, floriduh dumbass wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Feb 2024 16:42:46 -0500, Frank Krygowski
> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> >On 2/17/2024 1:53 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
> >>
> >> I never heard the term "bike mode share" before RBT. I still don't
> >> concern myself about it.
> >
> >More succinctly, our tricycle guy means: "I don't know and I don't care."
> Exactly...
> >Which is his right, of course.
> Unlike you, little man, I don't try to get involved with things that
> don't concern me.

Bullshit, little man. Franks posting and presence here don't concern you at all, yet you constantly yip and yap at him begging for his attention and praise. Just another example of floriduh dumbasses willfully ignorant hypocrisy.

On 2/17/2024 3:42 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 2/17/2024 1:53 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>>
>> I never heard the term "bike mode share" before RBT. I
>> still don't
>> concern myself about it.
>
> More succinctly, our tricycle guy means: "I don't know and I
> don't care."
>
> Which is his right, of course. But it makes one wonder why
> he bothers to read, let alone post.
>

Well it is an odd metric isn't it?

Despite 45 years of regular commuting on my bicycle, I also
walked, took taxis, drove my car and bummed rides from other
auto drivers, including hitchhiking. Mark me down in all
categories except trains!
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 2/17/2024 8:32 AM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
> Am Thu, 15 Feb 2024 15:44:03 -0500 schrieb Zen Cycle
> <funkmaster@hotmail.com>:
>
>> On 2/15/2024 1:38 PM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>>> On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 11:48:58 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2/15/2024 9:06 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>>>>> On 2/15/2024 8:23 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ..and for some, as we've seen, it's scary to ride with clipless
>>>>>> pedals.
>>>>>
>>>>> There's a big difference between being afraid to do something and
>>>>> preferring not to do something. It's not surprising you don't get that.
>>>>
>>>> The Florida guy is desperately compensating for his feelings of
>>>> inferiority. He yaps at me at every opportunity, in every way possible.
>>>
>>> Yeah, I do enjoy making sure that everyone knows that the reason for
>>> your braggs and other posting nonsense is because of your narcissism.
>>>
>>> Consider it a free service.
>>
>> You certainly are free to make the world aware of your narcissism though
>> projection.
>
> What's wrong with talking about ones preferences and the reasons
> thereabout?
>
>

Nothing at all, except that the floriduh dumbass regularly criticizes
other for expressing their opinions and preferences.

On 2/17/2024 5:34 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Feb 2024 16:42:46 -0500, Frank Krygowski
> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> On 2/17/2024 1:53 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>>>
>>> I never heard the term "bike mode share" before RBT. I still don't
>>> concern myself about it.
>>
>> More succinctly, our tricycle guy means: "I don't know and I don't care."
>
> Exactly...

proud and wilful ignorance on display

>
>> Which is his right, of course.
>
> Unlike you, little man, I don't try to get involved with things that
> don't concern me.

Bull
fucking
shit

You constantly yap at frank begging for his attention, while franks
presence and actions in this forum have absolutely no effect on you
whatsoever.

>
>> But it makes one wonder why he bothers to
>> read, let alone post.
>
> Ding goes the irony bell, again. Krykowski posts to make him feel
> better about himself.

It doesn't concern you, little man. hypocrite much?