HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ovr@vipunen.hut.fi (Otto-Ville Ronkainen)
Subject: Re: Nomenclature: "Bike Lanes" and "Bike Paths"
Reply-To: ovr@vipunen.hut.fi (Otto-Ville Ronkainen)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 22:47:25 GMT

jym@mica.berkeley.edu (Jym Dyer) writes:
>    Bike Lane:  A part of the road marked as separate from the
>                rest of the road with a painted line.

>    Bike Path:  A bicycles-only road upon which no motorized
>                vehicles are permitted.

I think there should be a distinction between a sidewalk (well, a former
sidewalk now called a "light traffic route" by bureaucrats around here)
ie. a bike path following a road closely (you may prefer the word sidepath)
and a real path that is pretty much separate from motor traffic (not that
it cannot follow a road, see my description of two paths some articles ago).

Or maybe 'a #$%^#$% bike path' and 'a bike path', respectively, are enough.

As far as I know, there are no bike lanes in this country.
--
Ott-Vill R________________   "The first time we walked into our local bike
ovr@vipunen.hut.fi            shop, the guy started talking about chain rings
                              and headsets. We thought he was inviting us to
                              have kinky sex with his twin sisters."
From: kkrueger@cwis.unomaha.edu (Kurt Krueger)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
Subject: Women and Cycling
Date: 14 Sep 92 15:48:17 GMT
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha


The "Women and Bicycles" thread made me think of discussion some of us had
in our club.  Why aren't there more single women in cycling.  I noted that
nearly all the women in our club are in their 40s, are married, and got into
cycling because of their husbands.  Now there are a few exceptions to the
rule, of course.  But in our big club which has hundreds of members, I have
seen not one female who is single, young, and involved in many activities.
There are a couple women who almost fit this description, but they come to
virtually no rides or meetings.  I don't even know why they're members.
   Beyond this observation, there really aren't many men my age (26) who are
active, either, but there are some.  This club is a general-purpose cycling
club, so one might think it would attract all sorts of people.  Now I also
ride with, but haven't yet joined, a racing club.  As one might expect,
the majority of the members are around my age, some a little older.  Nearly
all are men, once again, but there are a few women.  Considering the mind-
numbing pace that these people ride at, it is surprising that there are
some young women who are very actively involved.  It seems strange that
there are more young women in the racing club than in the much larger, gen-
eral-purpose club, but be that as it may, it's undeniable that few young
women are involved in cycling clubs in Omaha.
   I rarely even see women out riding; nearly all riders are middle-aged
men on off-road bikes.  I'd be tempted to say that the reason may be due
to women feeling vulnerable, and this might be so because the percentage
increases quite a bit on the local Rails-to-Trails route which is well pop-
ulated with riders.  Yet from talking to people in other clubs, I'd say that
more of the reason is due to the fact that women do not tend to be hobbyists
unless a husband involves them in their hobbies.  Any other thoughts on
this?
   (BTW, I don't mean to imply that it is just single women who are not in-
volved--I think there is only one black member.  The discussion might even
be broadened to "Why is cycling so homogeneous?")

Kurt R. Krueger
kkrueger@unomaha.edu
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: praetzel@marconi.uwaterloo.ca (Eric Praetzel)
Subject: Re: women working on bikes
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 12:32:56 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.164623.19872@cbnews.cb.att.com> ampe@cbnews.cb.att.com (john.e.ampe) writes:
>In article <9209042339.AA22951@hplomg.hpl.hp.com> BRANDT_JOBST/HP1900_01@HPLOMG.HPL.HP.COM writes:
>>As I said, this concept raises problems for which I have no solutions but
>>I believe that hereditary characteristics are pronounced and strong
>>statistically.  Fortunately there are enough exceptions to allow escape
>>for the individual.
>Really, Jobst, I surprised that you can be so unscientific as soon as
>we get off the topic of mechanics.  I guess you would conclude from

 Well I thought that I would get some hard data so I grabbed a few of the
female kind and gave them a quick quiz.
  It seems that first year female artsies are unable to do tripple integrals
and have no concept of integraing over a volume at all.  First year eng.
fem's were not much better.  As a comparison all of the 4th year male eng.
students had no problem and spontaneously brought in the applications to 
Greens theorm and subsequently proved that space is finite.
  There were some studies which have shown differences between males and
females in spacial, mathematical and language skills.  However, as Jobst pointed
out, individual variation is far greater.  Any yes women are (to this day)
raised to be dependant upon men.  Society is slowly changing but it will be
another generation or two before anybody thinks twice about a female mechanic.
  Personally I can't stand it.  When I go home I check my mothers car.  Several
times I have found it with about 1L of oil (ie had to add 2L before it hit the
dipstick).  Most of the women I have met are utterly unable to dissassemble or
reassemble anything.  They will do things like wash a motor (coffee grinder)
without thinking twice about it.  Then several months later I am trying to
seperate the rusted shaft from the bronze sleves.  But my bet is that this is
because they just don't have any experience in the mechanical realm.  Heck may
years ago I put 10W30 into the power steering pump because I thought that was
were the oil went. 
  So the question becomes how do you force a woman to fix her own bike?  After
all if you are going to force them to wear helments they should be forced to
learn to fix their bikes. It is for their own good.  Perhaps each of us should
find the bike of a female and stratigically sabotage a part of it so that they
have to learn the skills?  Either way I think that I will dig my tongue out of
my cheek, my foot out of my mouth and be glad if I can find a female who needs
instruction in the field of bike repair.  < insert sexist joke about sockets
and having the _right_tool_for_the_job here >
 - Eric
From: sham@cs.arizona.edu (Shamim Zvonko Mohamed)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
Subject: Re: Gas subsidies and taxes
Date: 7 Sep 92 18:13:59 GMT
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson

In article <1992Sep6.093320.2930@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> les@sail.stanford.edu (Les Earnest) writes:
>I'm tired of Tom's sleazy drivel.  I've avoided having a kill file
>till now, but the time has come.  Unfortunately I don't know of a good
>way to get rid of postings from the other folks who are still trying
>to straighten him out.

The following line in the kill file works well: (I use rn)

/tomk@netcom.com/h:j

All of his messages have the above string in the Message-id; so if anyone
follows up to his articles, this string will be in the References line, and
the follow-up articles will also get junked.

-s
--
Henri Desgrange, 1902: "Variable gears are only for people over forty-five.
Isn't it better to triumph by the strength of your muscles rather than by the
artifice of a derailleur? We are getting soft. Come on, fellows. Let's say that
the test was a fine demonstration---for our grandparents! As for me, give me a
fixed gear!"

  Shamim Mohamed / {uunet,noao,cmcl2..}!arizona!shamim / shamim@cs.arizona.edu
 Member of the League for Programming Freedom - write to league@prep.ai.mit.edu
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: tomk@netcom.com (Thomas H. Kunich)
Subject: Re: Gas subsidies and taxes (was Re: Bicyc
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 92 22:19:23 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <1992Sep4.192138.6926@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> les@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Les Earnest) writes:
>Yes, but the group in control is not the one that Tom seems to have in
>mind -- it is the petroleum/motor vehicle establishment that calls the
>shots and has been doing so for the last 60+ years.

I'm sure that there are several CEO's of oil companies that
would be interested to find out that they are the one's running the
country, Les.

Of course, there have always been people who believe the Conspiracy
Theory of History. Nothing is the way it seems! Everything is controlled
by the evil Rothschilds (or add the group you most dispise here.)

But observe Jobst's postings about Shimano. He has gone out of his way
on many occassions to really harpoon Shimano. Shimano has had
the temerity to not be perfect. They have stooped to using market
differentiation instead of scientific evidence to market products.
These products were cheap, efficient and high quality -- generally
higher quality than comparably priced rings because they were better
stampings -- but they didn't suit Jobst so Shimano is dispicable.

But did you see Jobst answering any of the charges on the accuracy of
the Avocet 50? He has implied on several occassions that he had a hand
in developing that device, yet he didn't seem altogether comfortable
in explaining why virtually everyone that has compared the altitude
recordings with map and other altimeter reportings finds discrepancies
larger than Avocet's specifications.

My feeling is that it doens't matter -- that altimeters are only of
limited accuracy in the first place (if you are recording your yearly
climbing you're going to get at least 1% inaccuracy anyway so why worry?)
But is he afraid that he might be lumped in with Shimano?

The whole point is this -- the world is just a bunch of people trying
to get by. The oil companies are major employers and they provide products
like gas, oil and fertilizer that benefit everyone. Politicians would
only be looking out for their constituencies if they didn't give
lots of latitude to these sorts of endevours.

But that isn't letting large companies run the world. As if some sleaze
ball politician is going to relenquish any political power he might have!

Let's get real Les. I don't believe you're a jackass looking out only
for yourself in the manner with which you deal with the USCF, so
don't assume the same sort of things about everything else.

Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: moore+@CS.CMU.EDU (Dale Moore)
Subject: Let's be careful out there
Organization: Carnegie Mellon University
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 13:45:01 GMT


	WEST CHESTER, Pa. (UPI) -- A 20-year-old Montgomery County man has
been convicted of fatally shooting a 13-year-old dirt bike rider in the
back because he blocked the roadway.
	The Chester County jury convicted Fernando Garcia of third degree
murder in the August 1991 death of Thomas Mumma.
	According to testimony Mumma was riding home on a country road when
he was approached by two carloads of teens going to a barbecue. Mumma,
apparently by accident, pulled into the middle of the road, forcing the
cars to swerve and brake.
	As Mumma sped off, Garcia climbed out of a car, took aim with a .22-
caliber pistol and fired, striking him in the back.
	Garcia faces 10 to 20 years in prison when he comes up for
sentencing. No sentencing date has been set.
From: chrisv@carnival.lbl.gov (Chris Moll)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
Subject: Re: Women and Cycling
Date: 14 Sep 1992 22:53:10 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
Reply-To: chris@carnival.lbl.gov (Chris Moll)
NNTP-Posting-Host: carnival.lbl.gov

Kurt R. Krueger (kkrueger@unomaha.edu) writes:
>The "Women and Bicycles" thread made me think of discussion some of us had
>in our club.  Why aren't there more single women in cycling.  I noted that
>nearly all the women in our club are in their 40s, are married, and got into
>cycling because of their husbands. 

My experience with a racing club is similar to yours.

The more social club that I ride with, however, is another question.  The
majority of the women are unmarried women in there late thirties/early
forties.  Some are divorced, some were never married.  Some have been active
all their lives, some are becoming athletic for the first time (especially
the divorcees).  My impression is different from yours: the majority
seem to be women who DON'T have husbands/boyfriends to divert their energies.
The remainder have boyfriends/husbands who also cycle.  Of these, a significant
number met their boyfriends/husbands through cycling, rather than being
introduced to it by them.

The men cover a broader age range, though the average is about the same.
They are about equally divided married/unmarried.
--
Chris Moll                       (510)486-7891
---
"Blessed are they who Go Around in Circles, for they Shall
be Known as Wheels."
From: plutchak@pilsner.geo.brown.edu (Joel Plutchak)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
Subject: Re: riding against traffic; bikepaths
Date: 9 Sep 92 14:43:51 GMT
Organization: Brown University Planetary Geology
NNTP-Posting-Host: pilsner.geo.brown.edu

In article <1992Sep8.200844.11295@cbfsb.cb.att.com> ncherry@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (neil j.cherry) writes:
>Here in New Jersey (USA) the bike paths are really nothing more then roads
>with signs on it stating bike path. I have to consider a bike path to
>be anything right of the right most solid line on the road.

   I call those bike routes, and reserve the term "bike path" for
something built specifically for bicyclists (which typically get
used primarily as a social area for pet owners :-).
--
Joel Plutchak, Research Programmer/Analyst
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: ovr@vipunen.hut.fi (Otto-Ville Ronkainen)
Subject: Bike paths (Was: Re: riding against traffic; bikepaths)
Reply-To: ovr@vipunen.hut.fi (Otto-Ville Ronkainen)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 22:30:00 GMT

In article <Bu83K2.D4n@cs.dal.ca> silvert@biome.bio.ns.ca (Bill Silvert) writes:
>Lars raises a good point (several in fact).  Bike paths in the
>Netherlands are professionally designed to usually high standards, and

This is a problem around here. Let me briefly describe two paths, one of
which I use a lot, the other not at all.

Path 1: A 6 km path following an arterial (there's a freeway parallel to
this arterial less than half a kilometer away) 0-20 m to the side of it. 
Good to excellent surface. Little pedestrian traffic. 6 intersections
with traffic lights, 3 without, 3 residential driveways, 2 lethal bus stops
(where the passengers have to wait on the path). Several tunnels and light
controlled crosswalks across the arterial. Even feels like there's a green
wave for cyclists riding at 30-35 km/h. And it goes on like this beyond
this segment, in the other end there's a midsize commercial center with
streets and parking below ground.

Path 2: A 1,5 km path following an arterial (there's still a freeway
parallel to it less than half a kilometer away) 0 m to the side of it.
Poor to adequate surface (high curbs, potholes). Lots of pedestrian traffic,
very many old people. 4 intersections with traffic lights, 2 without, 15
residential driveways, 6 lethal bus stops. No tunnels. On one end, after
riding a bit on a real(tm) street you can choose between a path following
the freeway (some major repair being done there, you can actually ride
faster than the cars in the rush hours) or an unpaved trail. On the other
end, a whole new part of town is being built, so that one half of the path
(depends on destination) lacks a surface wholly, and the other isn't much
better.

So, it is quite obvious that in case 1 I have nothing against riding on
the sidepath, whereas in case 2 I wouldn't even think of it, which makes
some drivers (most noticeably bus drivers (half of the time I'm blocking
their way, and half of the time the other way around - there are a lot of
buses around there)) annoyed. Apparently the problem in bikepath planning
is having to retrofit a path to an already-built-up area as in case 2. In
case 1, a bikepath had been included in the plans since day 1. Bikepaths
aren't evil per se (is there a thing called bikepath inferiority syndrome?).

ObLegal: Cycling on the road is apparently legal around here, even if there
is a bikepath: "Due to special reasons a vehicle may also be temporarily
operated on other part of the roadway than the one meant for it if this
doesn't cause danger or considerable inconvenience."

Ride bike! (on a path if reasonable, otherwise on the road)
-- 
Ott-Vill R___________________        Nyrxfnagreva_xngh wn Xhavaxnna_xngh
ovr@vipunen.hut.fi                           ba erunovyvgbvgnin!
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: rvanderb@nyx.cs.du.edu (Rian van der Borgt)
Subject: Re: riding against traffic; bikepaths
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 92 02:15:38 GMT

Robert Lewis writes:
 
>* As an aside, when I have seen pictures of cycle lanes in the
>Netherlands I have noted that many/most cyclists do dismount at
>intersections (at least very busy ones) and walk their bikes across,
>is this required, advised, or common?
 
None of the above, I'd say.
I (almost) never do it. I hardly ever see it. I think that's because
you're faster when you cycle across the raod than when you walk.
 
Rian van der Borgt
email: u249011@hnykun11.urc.kun.nl
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: ncherry@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (neil j.cherry)
Subject: Re: riding against traffic; bikepaths
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 20:08:44 GMT

In article <3!rnmlr.akkana@netcom.com> akkana@netcom.com (Akkana Peck) writes:
>In article <+6qnb=#.tomk@netcom.com> tomk@netcom.com (Thomas H. Kunich) writes:
>>In article <1992Sep6.150717.7714@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> rvanderb@nyx.cs.du.edu (Rian van der Borgt) writes:
>>>I could understand that a motorist doen't expect a cyclist (not many
>>>cyclists in traffic) but isn't it a bit strange that a cyclist
>>>doesn't excpect a motorist?
>>
>>Well, it's a matter of bike paths crossing seldom used roads.
>>The bicyclist gets into the habit of not seeing cars on these
>>roads and then gets into the habit of not expecting cars. Then
>>on some occassion he expects no car when one is there and --splat!
>
>That's the problem I have with the "bike paths are dangerous" argument.
>If the accident occurred because the bicyclist "got into the habit of not
>expecting cars" and shot out across the road in front of a car, I just
>don't see the logic in blaming it on the bike path and proclaiming that
>all bike paths are dangerous.
>
>Maybe bike paths cause bad habits.  That doesn't make them dangerous --
>it just means that cyclists should remember to stay alert when on paths
>just as they would on the road.
>

Here in New Jersey (USA) the bike paths are really nothing more then roads
with signs on it stating bike path. I have to consider a bike path to
be anything right of the right most solid line on the road. These roads are
frequently traveled by cyclists, so the regular car drivers have no problem
(or so it seems). And the cyclists are very road curtious (sp?).

>	...Akkana (watch for traffic *everywhere*, including off-road)

You can say that again, stray animals know nothing of boundaries, no to mention
kamakazi cyclists who get a little over their head. (I plead guilty!)

NJC

Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: burris@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Jim Burris)
Subject: Re: women working on bikes
Organization: TI Semiconductor Process and Design Center
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 18:23:07 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.164623.19872@cbnews.cb.att.com> ampe@cbnews.cb.att.com (john.e.ampe) writes:
>In article <9209042339.AA22951@hplomg.hpl.hp.com> BRANDT_JOBST/HP1900_01@HPLOMG.HPL.HP.COM writes:
>>As I said, this concept raises problems for which I have no solutions but
>>I believe that hereditary characteristics are pronounced and strong
>>statistically.  Fortunately there are enough exceptions to allow escape
>>for the individual.
>
>Really, Jobst, I surprised that you can be so unscientific as soon as
>we get off the topic of mechanics.  I guess you would conclude from
>the absence of white sprinters on the U.S. Olympic team that whites
>are at a genetic disadvantage when it comes to sprinting.  Or that the

Actually, in the August '92 "Runners' World" there is an article on why most
sprinters and long distance runners are of African descent. As for women CEOs,
we'll probably have to wait a while for women to advance along the curve. After
all, they got a late start in many fields, and there are still plenty of men
trying to keep them down. As for genetics, I cannot comment in an informed way.
There is also some evidence of a physical difference in part of the brain that
may influence homosexual tendencies. (from some PBS special I caught part of).
 
>dearth of women CEO's implies that women do not have the genes to run
>corporations.
>
>I don't blame you for your conclusions since most men (and even many
>women) have very little inkling of the depths of sexual conditioning
>in our society.  Women are taught from birth that their role in life
>is to be dependent on men.  The ideal for a woman is to find and marry
>the best man she can.  For a women to be successful in any career is
>frowned upon; for a woman to be successful in a "male" field like
>engineering is to be stigmatized.  These attitudes have come down to
>us over thousands of years.  Even though they are beginning to
>change slightly, one must not underestimate their power.
>
>I am not saying that your conclusions are incorrect, just that your
>reasoning is flawed.  You cannot make any inferences from statistics
>unless you have a control group to compare against.  Unfortunately, no
>such control group is possible on this planet.  Maybe in a few
>hundred years.
>
>John_Ampe@att.com

   I agree that societal influences create roles for the sexes, even if the
pendulum is beginning to swing the other way. However, genetics DO seem to help
predetermine superstars in a field. They do not necessarily prevent anyone from
attempting/enjoying/mastering a sport/field/etc.

Jim Burris
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: bgeer@javelin.sim.es.com (Bob Geer)
Subject: Re: Women and Cycling
Reply-To: bgeer@javelin.sim.es.com
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corporation
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 21:05:52 GMT

Our touring clubs aren't particularly strong of membership or of
participation in general, & there are relatively few young women
participating in particular.  The general participation during any
given year varies & I haven't noticed a correlation between
participation to any other particular variable.  However, when
participation in general is at a high point, there seem to be more
casually paced rides & riders, & subsequently there seem to be more
new members in general & young women in particular participating.
When participation is low, only the "hard core" riders are riding &
the pace is brisk to fast, & that generally is seriously discouraging
to new members.  I have no statistics to support my impressions.

My conclusion is that clubs must have a sufficient number of casually
paced rides &/or riders to make new members & particularly women feel
welcome.  With mentoring & encouragement, they become more confident
about participating & become avid participants.  When the pack
consistently rides off & leaves them to ride alone, they don't feel
particularly inclined to try again.

One guy's opinion...

-- 
<> Bob `Bear' Geer | bgeer@beorn.sim.es.com                        |_______| <>
<>      lift-holic |  (this *often* works)        _O_    |___O___| | |_O_| | <>
<> Salt Lake City, | speaking only for myself, |_|_|_|_| | `'|`' |     |     <>
<>          Ootah  | one of my many tricks     |  / \  |    / \       / \    <>