Thanks for your comments.

I confess I don’t understand your labeling of my previous suggestion as totalitarian and insane. My understanding of totalitarianism is where a central person or body exerts complete control over many different aspects of something, including aspects very minor and inconsequential. The reason I took issue was because the gentleman joined the ride yet was behaving contrary to the very purpose and goal of the ride. I only suggested that he be removed if he remained unwilling to honour this central purpose and goal after it had been explained to him again. To me, if a person joins a group or a club that is all about performing a certain function, and then the person not only refuses to perform that function but instead performs a function that completely conflicts with the purpose of the group, it is reasonable to have that person excused from the group.

It seems to me you’ve created a bit of a paradox here. On the one hand you’re suggesting that to sole purpose of the ride is to get more respect on roadways, yet you also believe people should be welcome to join the ride and behave in a manner that only pushes this goal further away.

In regard to the purpose(s) of the ride, as I mentioned above in my reply to Lee, I would appreciate some clarification from the organizer as to whether the primary goal is to ride on roadways, if there are other goals too, and how they rank. I’d suggested the seawall route because I thought there were some other goals also (eg riding respectfully in general, social interaction, etc), and thought that they might be better accomplished at the expense of the roadway one.

Cheers

Thanks for your comments.

To clarify, I’m not saying I have an issue with people promoting other random things during the ride, eg Olympics or whatever. My issues with the fellow in question were

1) That people might see his trailer and not only incorrectly identify our group as a result, but possibly identify us as being part of Critical Mass when the Critical Manners ride is designed to be the antithesis of Critical Mass.

2)That he was riding in a manner exactly opposite to what the Critical Manners ride was intended to promote, ie sharing the road, using bike lanes where they are available, not blocking vehicle traffic and obeying the law. (As Mark pointed out, he was also apparently breaking the law by not using the bike lanes.) This was one of the founding principles and top priorities of the ride. When the group was formed for such a purpose, and this purpose was clearly communicated, I don’t understand why someone would want to join the group on inaugural outing yet behave in a way completely contrary to this central goal.

As for riding on bike paths that are not located on vehicle roadways, such as the seawall, I’d still be up for it. Perhaps I could benefit from a further clarification of the priorities for these rides. My understanding is that these rides are intended to promote things like sharing the road, obeying the laws, having a good time and meeting other cyclists etc. To me, riding on a non-vehicle roadway like the seawall would lessen our visibility on vehicle roadways but we’d still be visible to many people, we’d still be observing laws, we’d still be making use of some of the cycling infrastructure that the city has provided explicitly for cyclists, we’d still be sharing such pathways with other cyclists and pedestrians, and we’d probably be more able to enjoy the ride as a social experience also. So we’d still be covering a lot of our bases. But if the top priority of the ride is to share vehicle roadways then I agree this would be a bad choice. Again, I’d therefore appreciate some clarification on the priorities and how important it is that we ride on vehicle roadways.

Thanks

Each step does need to be performed with care (like anything else you’re doing out there), as you may have cars following close behind you, and the new street may have cars in motion, preparing to do a (right) turn of their own. This is just a suggestion; make your own choices.

I feel that planning the route ahead of time was a great idea, and essential for this event since by following the rules of the road we will naturally splinter into sub-groups and some solo riders. I thought the route was a good one, criss-crossing nicely over the downtown core. There were only a few wrinkles, like turning up Davie (which just isn’t very friendly at that time of day, especially sharing it with buses (I’d rather have used Helmecken or Drake)

I’d also recommend riders consider using the alternative style of left-hand turn where you simply ride straight through the intersection and just pull off to the right side of the road on the far corner. Then you need only to change direction to the left, and head off in that new direction once the light changes, again on the right-hand side of traffic. I don’t use this method very often when riding on my own, but it seemed preferable for me at Pender and Richards, for instance, when there were about fifteen riders all staging up and into the left-turn lane. (of course there could be a clumping problem with several people all using this approach too – so perhaps a mix of both techniques, with half the people using each, might help everyone get through more readily)

Thanks again for organizing this!