The Chainlink

I'm sorry you were so offended that I tapped on your car mirror. You were glued to your phone and it was the only way to get your attention and let you know you were blocking the entire bike lane (N. Deaborn @ Post Office) during the rush and forcing cyclists into traffic.

And while I think it was a little ironic to speed down the street to tell me I broke the law, I definitely think throwing a glass bottle was a bit much. However, since it shattered in your car and not on me, I'll let it slide.

I can't even fathom the courage and strength it must have took to put your foot down and whip down the block and around the corner. But boy were you red with embarrassment when I took the alley and cut you off. You must have ran out of bottles because this time you kept the windows up. I'm sure your partner will be proud of the example you set for your daughter in the back seat.

Views: 1078

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I think calling that logic is overly generous. This is just textbook projection.

To address clp's rhetorical question, before there were bike lanes drivers just illegally double parked, or parked in loading zones, bus stop zones, etc., where they didn't belong. They of course still do all of these things, all the bike lane does is put this behavior into focus as we see the impact through the lens of a cyclist - who as we all know are required to bike in the street from the age of 12 onwards.

yeah, so, in case you aren't familiar with the history...

clp trolls. That's the truth. Just trolls and trolls and trolls. And over some pretty odd/crazy stuff too. Against all logic, he blamed the MTB riders that were victims of booby-trapped trails set up to cause serious injury because a trail user was mad at them. If there's a logical topic 99% of us agree on, there's always clp on a mission to be the lone dissenter.

C'mon Yasmeen, don't be mean....I thought we had a truce.  No more name-calling; no more personal attacks.  You may not agree with what I say, but as the list owner, you certainly should respect my right to say it.  After all, don't you want to develop interesting ideas on this list?   Or just a chorus of 'yes ma'ams?' in lock-step, 100% agreement?

Maybe you just don't want disagreement.  After all, it IS your list.  And all the wonderful past posts of challenging and conflicting ideas, by so many interesting, provocative personalities such as Howard, Notorious Dug, Tank-Ridin' Ryan, and all the rest....have all seemed to disappear.  Hardly anyone left on the Chainlink anymore.  Wonder why?

The Urban Dictionary defines a troll as

...One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument...

I'm not trying for disruption, just discussion.  I know there are other cyclists that agree with me about bike lanes.  As I've written him, I'd just like Ron Burke and the ATA to realize that bike lanes have their downside.   And stop pressing the City to build so many more bike lanes and PBLs, and ruining great biking streets such as Clybourne, California, Dodge...and Dearborn.  So...


That's the funny thing about you clp. You can't handle me arguing with you. Apparently, I have no right to according to you. Personal attacks? Whatever. More like I call you out for what you are doing. 

You tell me I don't want disagreement but actually, I think that's your problem because the second I disagree with you and your approach to the discussion, you immediately scream "foul" and devolve into whining that I have no right to disagree with you. Is it because I own the site or because I am a woman? I ride my bike every day. I participate in discussions. And I express my disagreement when I don't agree with what someone is saying. 

What makes you a troll? The fact that you don't acknowledge anyone else's POV, you just scream at all of us that we have it all wrong. e.g. "STOP THE INSANITY! NO MORE BIKE LANES!"

This forum thread is about someone pulling over, blocking a bike lane to take a call and you disrupted (see urban dictionary) the discussion to say over and over again that bike lanes should be eliminated. Complete disregard for anyone else's POV. Not really participating in the discussion but rather, trying to take over the thread with some crazy, unsubstantiated nonsense. 

I've seen dozens of drivers illegally parked in no parking zones, bus stops, etc. The one that frosts me the most is vehicles parked in crosswalks. It p*sses me off, too.

I've been a firm believer for years that one should have to have a special license to drive downtown. If a driver is incapable of following some basic rules of the road in the city, stay the f*ck out!!!



Fo some reason I cannot reply to individual replies.

By your logic we shouldn't have sidewalks, bus lanes, or bus stops either. If this call (but really, he was just staring at his phone, double parked) was so important, there were plenty of other places to pull over out of the moving lanes. The driver was double parked, in the bike lane. Echoing Carter: had this been a regular travel lane, I would have had the same choice: go around him into a lane with much faster moving vehicle traffic. I'm not sure how you think the driver was in the right as he was illegally double parked. And had he been travel lane, yes, I would have done the same thing. I'm tired of people putting their convenience above the safety and convenience of tens to hundreds of others. I think you are confused with who was claiming "ownership": I wasn't stopped there preventing others from using the lane.

Thank you for the kind words. Because of the tinted windows, I did not see the child until the end. Had I, I would never engaged him after he threw the bottle.

Good point about the sidewalks, bus lanes, bus stops. :-) 

Well pedestrians are not vehicles, so they need raised sidewalks to separate them from vehicles. 

But bicycles ARE vehicles; they ARE the intended users of the road...even tho the State of Illinois disputes that right now.

And as for planes, trains and buses, they're all vehicles too...that provide public transit for everyone.  And so I agree that there should be separate facilities for them too...even if it cuts into the domain formerly given to private cars. 

You may be tired of drivers acting selfishly...but expecting that to change is not reality.  Any more than asking cars on LSD to observe the 45mph posted speed limit.  Ain't gonna happen!

Don't know why you picked on the black Acura guy...haven't you seen the 10 000 photos A69 has posted on that other bike lane thread?  NO ONE respects bike lanes in Chicago.  And to keep building and striping them is perpetuating a cruel and dangerous pipe dream.


The funny thing is, my confrontation with him did move him out of the bike lane. Maybe next time he'll think better and not embarrass himself in front of his daughter. Maybe not.

If you want to act selfishly and put your convenience over everyone else, you should be prepared to take the abuse or in an act of God, a ticket. Sooner or later you might find that it's not worth the aggravation.

"Well A69, where do you want him to pull over to take that call?"

Here's a crazy idea - how about the driver just let the call go through to voice mail, then call back when they are somewhere appropriate. Many people actually enable an automatic reply on their text messaging that says exactly that, with the added note that it's dangerous to stop driving to address your phone.

You say (with no logic or evidence) that bike lanes are counterproductive. I say that CDOT is not, and should not be, required to consider drivers talking on the phone when designing streets.


"I'm sorry, I can't take your call right now. I'm in the middle of the f*cking city, and I'm trying not to kill somebody. I'm sure your call is urgent, and I'll call you back when I can find a safe, legal spot to park. Thanks for understanding."


© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service