HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rlk@underprize.think.com (Robert Krawitz)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
Subject: Re: riding against traffic; bikepaths
Date: 11 Sep 92 16:41:49 GMT
	<rlewis.715969508@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca>
	<18l2ffINNplt@stanley.cis.Brown.EDU>
	<rlewis.716177431@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca>
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge Mass., USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: underprize.think.com
In-reply-to: rlewis@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca's message of Fri, 11 Sep 1992 02:10:31 GMT

In article <rlewis.716177431@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca> rlewis@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca (Robert Lewis) writes:

   No you agree, that was one of the main points of what I was getting at
   (and have in other postings), bike lanes/paths don't work.  Look, I'm 
   an unrepentant, born again, holly roling Foresterite.  Hell, I've even 
   switched from grease to oil (and I refuse to ride on bike lanes or paths).

All I need to say about that is that since I bought his book and
followed the rules about cycling on the roads I've never been in an iffy
situation (not only no dangerous situations, no really iffy ones
either!).  Except on one ride earlier this year that was partly on the
Charles River bikepath, where I could rarely exceed 12 mph and had to
stop any number of times for the usual hazards.  I'm a weekend-only
rider (less than 300 miles this year), and I don't ride during rush hour
in the city, so this may or may not be worth much as a comment, but
there's nothing like something that works...
--
ames >>>>>>>>>  |	Robert Krawitz <rlk@think.com>	245 First St.
bloom-beacon >  |think!rlk				Cambridge, MA  02142
harvard >>>>>>  .	Thinking Machines Corp.		(617)234-2116

Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- write league@prep.ai.mit.edu
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: laforce@xenon.arc.nasa.gov (Soren LaForce)
Subject: Re: riding against traffic; bikepaths
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Ames Res. Ctr. Mtn Vw CA 94035
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 15:36:00 GMT

In article <18l2ffINNplt@stanley.cis.Brown.EDU>, plutchak@pilsner.geo.brown.edu (Joel Plutchak) writes...
>In article <rlewis.715969508@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca> rlewis@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca (Robert Lewis) writes:
>>But that is the whole philosophy behind bike paths, at least in North
>>America (and from my limited experience there, England), i.e., bike
>>paths are needed because it is useless to train the vast majority of 
>>cyclists in how to ride in traffic (only an 'elite' few will ever be
>>able to ride on the roads safely).
> 
>   I disagree.  All it takes to bicycle reasonably safely on roads is
>a combination of following traffic regulations and a good dose of
>common sense (call it defensive cycling if you like).
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Sounds like support for the elite few argument...[ ;-) ]


--Soren            laforce@xenon.arc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: tomk@netcom.com (Thomas H. Kunich)
Subject: Re: Let's be careful out there
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 20:58:53 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <35137@cbmvax.commodore.com> adam@cbmcats.UUCP (Adam Keith Levin-Delson) writes:
>
>I would think it should be second degree as Garcia had to have known the
>possible consequence of his actions.  I'll see if I can find more info on
>the incident for the group.

I guess that technically he could have been construed as 'merely' wantingh
to hurt the cyclist and had no desire to kill him. This is the sort of 
criminal prosecution that leads to still more incidences. Second degree
murder should have been the case, not third.

Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: ncherry@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (neil j.cherry)
Subject: Re: Nomenclature: "Bike Lanes" and "Bike Paths"
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 17:45:29 GMT

In article <JYM.92Sep14174123@remarque.berkeley.edu> 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.
>
Bike Route:  A road with a sign on it, where lots of cyclists ride.

(At least here in New Jersey).

NJC


Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: silvert@cs.dal.ca (Bill Silvert)
Subject: Re: riding against traffic; bikepaths
Reply-To: silvert@biome.bio.ns.ca (Bill Silvert)
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 19:31:14 GMT

In <1992Sep7.174947.236@ugle.unit.no> hallstro@solan.unit.no (Lars Hallstr|m Eriksen) writes:

>I've biked in both the Netherlands and USA, as well as my native Norway, so
>perhaps I can add something to this thread.

>Now, as Thomas Kunich pointed out, distances in Holland are usually shorter than
>in USA, and Dutch commuters are usually sedate (in Holland, "everybody" bikes;
>not only the sporty bicycle fan minority as is more or less the case in USA), but
>speed is seldom limited by the bikepaths (except traffic lights).

Lars raises a good point (several in fact).  Bike paths in the
Netherlands are professionally designed to usually high standards, and
the amount of bicycle traffic is such that motorists are used to
checking before crossing the bike paths.  North American drivers are not
used to yielding to bike paths parallel to the motorways, and I've heard
of numerous close calls involving foreign drivers in the Netherlands.

I edited out most of Lars' comments, but I want to add to his remarks
about speed.  I find that riding a North American touring bike at speeds
around 30 km/hr (20 mph) or more is pretty hair-raising in the
Netherlands, because it is much higher than the usual bike path traffic
and much less likely to be anticipated by motorists.  This is not so
much of a problem on paths shared with motorbikes, but on bicycles-only
paths it is a real problem.

By the way, although I consider bells pointless for typical North
American riding on the roads, I always mount a bell when visiting
Europe, since it is essential to ring it when passing on bike paths.

-- 
William Silvert, Habitat Ecology Division, Bedford Inst. of Oceanography
P. O. Box 1006, Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, CANADA B2Y 4A2.  Tel. (902)426-1577
InterNet Address: silvert@biome.bio.ns.ca
From: roat@rrc.chevron.com (Suzanne Roat,Chevron,(510)242-5313)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
Subject: Re: Let's be careful out there
Date: 14 Sep 92 17:07:48 GMT
Reply-To: roat@rrc.chevron.com
Organization: Chevron, Richmond, California

In article 2@cs.cmu.edu, moore+@CS.CMU.EDU (Dale Moore) writes:
>
>	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.

Dirt motor bike or MTB? In this part of the country, 'dirt bike' generally
refers to an obnoxious, loud, non-street legal version of a motorcycle.  Still
no excuse for the young man's actions.

---
Suzanne Roat				Phone:	(510) 242-5313 Voice 
Chevron Research and Technology Company		(510) 242-4647 FAX
100 Chevron Way				Email:	roat@rrc.chevron.com
Richmond, CA  94802-0627
From: tomk@netcom.com (Thomas H. Kunich)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
Subject: Re: riding against traffic; bikepaths
Date: 7 Sep 92 23:17:16 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <1992Sep6.150717.7714@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> rvanderb@nyx.cs.du.edu (Rian van der Borgt) writes:
> 
>They may be slower on average, but I never had any problems when I
>wanted to cycle rather fast (That's 28-30 km/hour on a standard bike
>with 3 gears, and an 8-10 kg bag on it...no light weight race bike)

Well, that's pretty fast, but it isn't obtainable on most
bike paths here without being pretty careless about other people
being in the way.

>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!

>You're very right here. I Always felt that gasoline was _way_
>too cheap in the USA. Here it's about $1.15 per liter ...that
>would be over $5 per gallon. (and that's about average in W-Europe)
>What's the price over there?
>(and when is it going to raise? If (When :-) Clinton gets elected?)

The whole market based system here is what drives the prices of
commodities. Aside from the drivel of the social reformists, I can
assure you that government control of gasoline prices would soon
bring in a new government unless the price was being maintained
artificially low.
 
It is Europe that is the problem. :-) If you were all equally
greedy the supply of oil would soon dry up and oil could
no longer be used for personal transport.
From: plutchak@pilsner.geo.brown.edu (Joel Plutchak)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
Subject: Re: riding against traffic; bikepaths
Date: 9 Sep 92 14:41:51 GMT
Organization: Brown University Planetary Geology
NNTP-Posting-Host: pilsner.geo.brown.edu

In article <rlewis.715969508@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca> rlewis@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca (Robert Lewis) writes:
>But that is the whole philosophy behind bike paths, at least in North
>America (and from my limited experience there, England), i.e., bike
>paths are needed because it is useless to train the vast majority of 
>cyclists in how to ride in traffic (only an 'elite' few will ever be
>able to ride on the roads safely).

   I disagree.  All it takes to bicycle reasonably safely on roads is
a combination of following traffic regulations and a good dose of
common sense (call it defensive cycling if you like).
--
Joel Plutchak, Research Programmer/Analyst
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: bgeer@javelin.sim.es.com (Bob Geer)
Subject: Re: Nomenclature: "Bike Lanes" and "Bike Paths"
Reply-To: bgeer@javelin.sim.es.com
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corporation
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 21:06:51 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'll vote in favor of this distinction.
-- 
<> 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     |  / \  |    / \       / \    <>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: les@sail.stanford.edu (Les Earnest)
Subject: Re: Gas subsidies and taxes (was Re: Bicyc
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 04:18:23 GMT

Earlier I said:
. 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.

Tom Kunich curously responds with a rambling, irrelevant attack on Jobst
then says:
>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.

Everyone?  Tom's Bozometer appears to be pegged.

>Politicians would only be looking out for their constituencies if
>they didn't give lots of latitude to these sorts of endevours.

I'm sure that this is not what Tom intended to say, but what he
apparently did mean is just as vapid.

>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!

They usually don't relinquish their power, they exercise it on behalf
of their major financial supporters, often to the detriment of their
other constitutents.

>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.

Let's get real, Tom.  I don't believe you're a jackass either.  Just
someone who often attempts to put fabricated words in other people's
mouths and then flails away at irrelevant refutations.  As a result,
neither you nor anyone else learns from these exchanges.  We would all
be better off if you worked harder on quality and less on quantity of
postings.

--
Les Earnest                                  Phone:  415 941-3984
Internet: Les@cs.Stanford.edu              USMail: 12769 Dianne Drive
UUCP: . . . decwrl!cs.Stanford.edu!Les         Los Altos Hills, CA 94022
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: tomk@netcom.com (Thomas H. Kunich)
Subject: Re: Gas subsidies and taxes (was Re: Bicyc
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 21:05:07 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Summary: Expires: 

In article <mellon.716137923@pepper> mellon@ncd.com (Ted Lemon) writes:
>
>Good.   Maybe the people who came here for jobs rather than because it's
>where they want to live will go back home.   Unfortunately, there's no
>evidence that that's happening yet.

Apparently you cannot read the statistics. California's population is
growing. But the wage earners nd companies are leaving.

>BTW, your point about the GNP falling regularly isn't true

Where did I say such a thing?

>If you're upset about the percentage of the load that you're shouldering,
>work to support the repeal of the Reagan/Bush tax reform which reduced income
>little as 27% (yes, that's less than *you* pay), and raised taxes on the middle
>class (remember how they called that increase temporary?   I do!) to support
>the tax reduction for the rich.

It is unfortunate this sort of thing simply goes on and on. The tax
restructuring that was pawned of as a tax cut was the biggest tax increase
in history and those that got the biggest increase in taxes were the
so called rich.

If you wish to start class warfare why not simply say so?

Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: tomk@netcom.com (Thomas H. Kunich)
Subject: Re: riding against traffic; bikepaths
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 92 22:29:46 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <1992Sep5.205459.15294@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> rvanderb@nyx.cs.du.edu (Rian van der Borgt) writes:
> 
>I almost can't believe that someone would even consider to ride
>against traffic. Here (in the Netherlands, that is) noone would
>ever think of it.

Rian, it is against the law here also. But it is seldom
enforced. And it is actually rare for people to ride on the
wrong side of the street. It is generally students (By the way,
student and pupil are both correct) or young people followed
closely by the uninformed new rider.

The discsussion here is probably misleading becasue it has to do with
methods of informing these uninformed riders of the law. There is the
group who believes in insulting those riders, those who would politely
inform them and another group that just ignores them and assumes they
will learn by example.

>Here most bikepaths are on the side of the roads and cyclists
>(almost) always have to use them.

The question here is how fast do you ride on the bikepaths there.
The information we have here is that dutch commuters are
rather sedate (slow). That is fine in a country where distances
are in single digit kilometers. Here the average commute might be
closer to 25 km one way. Bicycle commuters are then pressured
to ride at much higher speeds.

Bicycle paths that cross roads are generally considered to
be very dangerous because neither bicyclist or motorist
expect the other to appear at right angle to his path.
In the USA 90% of the bicycle path accidents occur at these
points.

Also it must be said that bicycle paths in the USA are generally
constructed as multiple use recreational pathways and are often
covered with joggers, walkers, people walking dogs both on and
off leashes, children, children on small slow bicycles etc. Add
to this the problem that these recreational pathways are seldom
designed to commute from one point to another on and you can see
the problem here.

>Here, a bike _is_ considered as a means to go from A to B (to
>go shopping, to go to work, to school, to go out, etc).
>From my 12th to my 18th I rode to school (12 km) every day,
>and so did 75% of the rest of the students (or pupils? what do
>you call them?) (well, not everybody rode 12 km, of course :-)

Students still use bicycles, particularly those in college and
on a limited income (that's most.) But bicycling, for reasons
that are rather difficult for me to understand, has never become
a very important means of transportation.

In the future, when gasoline and other cheap energy resources
become scarce and expensive, we will see the bicycle make it's
reappearance as a means of transportation. But it will take
a while for the American, in love with his private automobile,
to accept having to work to go to work. :-)

Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: ronf@panther3.panther.mot.com (Ron Feigen)
Subject: Re: Women and Cycling
Organization: Motorola Panther Project, Chandler, AZ
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 19:27:09 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.154817.21355@news.unomaha.edu> kkrueger@cwis.unomaha.edu (Kurt Krueger) 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.  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.

Move to Arizona,  during the MS 150 bike rides I see lots of girls, most in 
college (pant, pant, pant).  Now that I think of it, the Diabetes rides had
some pretty cute girls as well.  I don't know about bike clubs, but we have
a couple of very attractive females that ride in my group...  all but one is
already taken.  Of course his is OK with me since one is my girlfriend (we met
at the gym).


-- 

>
Ron Feigen
ronf@panther.mot.com
From: cargille@calypso.cs.wisc.edu (Allan Cargille)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
Subject: Re: women working on bikes
Date: 15 Sep 92 21:53:10 GMT
Organization: U of Wisconsin Madison - Computer Sciences

woodgold@emr1.emr.ca (Cathy Woodgold) writes:

>I used to take my unicycle and bicycle apart and fix them.  I never have
>time for that anymore so I either pay somebody to do it or just ride
>a bike that isn't adjusted right.  (Well, sometimes I still fix it a bit.)
>I'm very short of time because I'm a mother with a full-time job who
>probably spends a lot more time with her offspring than the typical
>father with a full-time job.  Woops, let's not overgeneralize:  I'm
>sure there are some fathers who spend a lot of time with their kids.

Howdy all,

Although this posting isn't *exactly* about bikes (gasp!), I thought
that you might enjoy knowing that there's a book out there titled
something like "Auto Repair for Dummies" written by a *woman* .  I
glanced at it about 3-6 years ago.  It looked like it had a lot of good
information, and promoted a really great "go ahead and get your hands
dirty and figure out how this thing works" attitude.

allan
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: rlewis@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca (Robert Lewis)
Subject: Re: riding against traffic; bikepaths
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 02:10:31 GMT

plutchak@pilsner.geo.brown.edu (Joel Plutchak) writes:

>In article <rlewis.715969508@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca> rlewis@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca (Robert Lewis) writes:
>>But that is the whole philosophy behind bike paths, at least in North
>>America (and from my limited experience there, England), i.e., bike
>>paths are needed because it is useless to train the vast majority of 
>>cyclists in how to ride in traffic (only an 'elite' few will ever be
>>able to ride on the roads safely).

>   I disagree.  All it takes to bicycle reasonably safely on roads is
>a combination of following traffic regulations and a good dose of
>common sense (call it defensive cycling if you like).

No you agree, that was one of the main points of what I was getting at
(and have in other postings), bike lanes/paths don't work.  Look, I'm 
an unrepentant, born again, holly roling Foresterite.  Hell, I've even 
switched from grease to oil (and I refuse to ride on bike lanes or paths).

Robert M. Lewis
Department of Sociology
University of Alberta
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: ilana@kiowa.scd.ucar.edu (Ilana Stern)
Subject: Re: traffic rules
Organization: NCAR/UCAR
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 20:47:03 GMT

In article <JYM.92Sep9123806@remarque.berkeley.edu>, jym@mica.berkeley.edu (Jym Dyer) writes:
> > In fact, wrong way cycling is one of the leading (if not
> > *the* leading, I can't remember for sure) cause of car-
> > bicycle collisions.
> 
> =v= Last I heard, it was *the* leading cause of fatalities
> in car/bicycle collisions.

It (wrong way cycling) is the leading cause of car-bicycle 
collisions in Colorado collisions involving a child cyclist.

The leading cause of car/bicycle collisions involving an adult
cyclist is the motorist turning left into an oncoming cyclist
heading straight.

60% of all bicycle crashes and deaths involve children between
the ages of 5 and 14.  Of these, 75% are the child's fault.

(Source -- Colorado Bicycle Program pamphlet dated 1991)

-- 
/\                Ilana Stern DoD#009  ilana@ncar.ucar.edu 
  \_][ <--NCAR       Colorado...is totally rectangular.
      \_Boulder______________________________________________________Kansas__
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles
From: gb0wbff@vm.tcs.tulane.edu
Subject: Burley Trailers
Keywords: two kids, jogging, trailers
Organization: Freeman School of Business, Tulane University
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 16:56:15 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host-[nntpd-23014]: boxorain.sob.tulane.edu

My wife & I have a new child arriving soon.  We already have one, a three year
old which loves her Rhodegear bike seat and baby jogger stroller.  With two we
are thinking of getting a bike trailer.  Has anyone in the group used one, what
do you think?

I am interested in the Burley, primarily because it breaks down and can convert
to jogging type push stroller.  I could be interested in any other brand.  Is
it foolish trying to use the trailer for two purposes,  running and biking? 
Sometimes when I've done this in the past I end up with something that is not
very good at anything.

Also does anyone know of a discount source for items like this, they aren't
available locally.

                             Thanks,       Rick Boebel



 
Organization: Junior, English, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 14:27:42 -0400 
From: "Douglas S. Brashear" <db6j+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: bottom brackets...sealed or regular?

I'm a bit fuzzy here on the whole bottom bracket thing...
Please clarify my cluelessness....

what are the advantages of sealed bottom brackets?
can you put a sealed bb on a bike that originally had a regular one?
Are they more/less expensive generally?

I was thinking of this for my TREK antelope mountainbike since I believe
one of my cups is scored on the inside...

Thanks in advance...
DOUG
db6j+@andrew.cmu.edu