Can somebody fill me in on Critical Mass?

[Nyrides]

Sorry. I guess I haven't paid much attention to this "Critical Mass" thing. Can you tell me what it
is and why so many cyclists are against it?

Thank you.

--
Low-Impact Rides in the NY/LI region www.geocities.com/NYRides

 

[George Shaffer]

Try this...

http://criticalmassrides.info/

"NYRides" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Sorry. I guess I haven't paid much attention to this "Critical Mass"
thing.
> Can you tell me what it is and why so many cyclists are against it?
>
> Thank you.
>
> --
> Low-Impact Rides in the NY/LI region www.geocities.com/NYRides

 

[Sc Hiker Biker]

NYRides wrote:
> Sorry. I guess I haven't paid much attention to this "Critical Mass" thing. Can you tell me what
> it is and why so many cyclists are against it?

Because they are designed to back up traffic and annoy motorist in order to push bicycling rights.
What they do is gather dozens of bicyclist and ride real slow on main streets on purpose trying to
disrupt and back up traffic. In very liberal places like San Francisco, these blockades have had an
effect. But generally, it is a good idea with horrible execution and gives bicyclist a lot more
negative press than positive.

http://www.portlandtribune.com/viewcurr.cgi?id=15558

quote from a mainstream bicyclist group in Portland

Many avid cyclists respect traffic laws The Portland Wheelmen Touring Club sponsors rides 365 days a
year as part of Portland’s transportation picture. We do not intentionally block roads, purposefully
provoke motorists or have melees with our police departments. Our members use their bikes for
pleasure, exercise and commuting. And, like most cyclists, we are responsible, law-abiding users of
our area’s roadways. The recent Critical Mass rides in no way represent the beliefs or purposes of
our organization. It hurts the cause of cycling to have the public link bicyclists with conflicts
with the police. Having motorists look at a group of cyclists as an enemy will not increase our
safety or bicycling privileges.

end quote

Critical Mass are the extremist in bicycling advocacy.

 

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <[email protected]>, "George Shaffer"
<[email protected]> wrote:

> "NYRides" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Sorry. I guess I haven't paid much attention to this "Critical Mass"
> thing.
> > Can you tell me what it is and why so many cyclists are against it?
> >
> > Thank you.
> >
> > --
> > Low-Impact Rides in the NY/LI region www.geocities.com/NYRides

> Try this...
>
> http://criticalmassrides.info/

That may not fully explain why some cyclists are annoyed by the Critical Mass concept (well, except
for Cyclists Against **** Web Design; they have an obvious motive).

Critical Mass uses very, er, guerilla, not to say obnoxious, tactics in promoting cycling. The
primary tactic is basically to annoy rush-hour car drivers, by staging mass rides on major streets
during rush hour (the Vancouver ride is last Friday of each month, starting downtown at 6pm).

I don't want to take a position on this either way. The Critical Mass position is that they aren't
blocking traffic, they _are_ traffic, and I sympathize to a certain extent. The anti-Mass crowd
tends to believe that routinely screwing up rush-hour traffic with bicycle mass rides is an
excellent tactic for pissing off people in cars, and little else.

I straddle the fence: I do my own one-man Critical Mass rides on some fairly busy streets in the
'burbs. I just ride to work, as safely and legally as I can. I also ride recreationally, and have an
ambitious plan to compete in various rides and races this year. I don't think of cars as the enemy,
since I've been known to drive one quite often. Instead, I think of them as friendly 3000-lb. metal
boxes that could kill me with an instant of inattention.

--
Ryan Cousineau, [email protected] http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club

 

[Dennis P. Harri]

On Sun, 26 Jan 2003 15:54:32 GMT in rec.bicycles.misc, "NYRides" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Can you tell me what it is and why so many cyclists are against it?
>
I'm in favor of it, simply because it raises public awareness of cycling as traffic.

 

[Bluto]

"NYRides" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Sorry. I guess I haven't paid much attention to this "Critical Mass" thing. Can you tell me what
> it is and why so many cyclists are against it?

As to the latter question, it is because those cyclists' brains are owned by the same interests that
own most motorists' brains.

There were slaves who opposed the struggle for Emancipation too, oddly enough.

Chalo Colina

 

[Mark Freedman]

"NYRides" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> Sorry. I guess I haven't paid much attention to this "Critical Mass" thing. Can you tell me what
> it is and why so many cyclists are against it?
>
> Thank you.

Imagine that you're trying to get somewhere using a major downtown city street. Suddenly, a bunch
of yahoos on bicycles block the intersection and prevent traffic from flowing through numerous
cycles of the traffic lights, while a parade of yahoos on bicycles rides SLOWLY past blowing
whistles and ringing bells. It's not a special occasion - unless you consider one Friday
afternoon rush hour each month to be a special occasion. This takes about 10 minutes, and is
repeated at each intersection along the route.

I'm a yahoo on a bicycle myself, and was stopped on the main street watching the parade go by.
My first reaction was "cool," but by the third traffic light cycle I was wondering why they'd
want to contribute to the hostility cyclists get from motorists.

I have a different approach. I obey traffic laws and try to be visible.

I stopped for a red light, and had a driver lean over, roll down the passenger window, and shout
"&^%$# *&^%%, you're the first guy on a bike I've ever seen stopping for a red light."

I stopped at a pedestrian crossing. The pedestrian turned to me and said "&^%$# YU&^%$$, you're
the first cyclist I've ever seen stopping at a pedestrian crossing."

I stopped for a traffic policeman. He looked at me in shock and said "thank you. You're the
first cyclist I've seen who paid attention to my hand signals." He thanked me twice more while I
was stopped.

I realize there's something seriously wrong with me
(and I've had this pointed out to me by other cyclists) but
I see no reason to give people REASONS to resent cyclists.

 

[Luigi De Guzman]

[email protected] (Bluto) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> "NYRides" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Sorry. I guess I haven't paid much attention to this "Critical Mass" thing. Can you tell me what
> > it is and why so many cyclists are against it?
>
> As to the latter question, it is because those cyclists' brains are owned by the same interests
> that own most motorists' brains.
>
> There were slaves who opposed the struggle for Emancipation too, oddly enough.
>
> Chalo Colina

*pins on Red Star*

Depends on how you want to read the Revolution, brotha.

You can either believe that the revolution will be brought on by purely material factors. Human will
has nothing to do with it; the revolution and the collapse of the present society is inevitable due
to the contradictions inherent in the system. [Marx]

Or you can believe that while the revolution is inevitable, you must do everything possible to
sharpen the existing contradictions--the faster to spark your revolution. Moreover, these must be
led by a disciplined class of professional revolutionaries (Massholes?) and they must lead to
violent confrontation with the enemy. [Lenin]

Or you can believe that there are many roads to the eventual goal of a New Society; Violent,
revolutionary means are not totally necessary. You can believe in peaceful coexistence and even
parliamentary struggle. [Khrushchev].

For my part, I support Critical Mass so long as they obey the very laws they want enforced. A CM
ride that rides four or five abreast on a heavily-trafficked public road, or which rides onto
expressly-prohibited roads (eg, freeways, tunnels, narrow bridges) or swarms over both street and
sidewalk, is counter-productive. It does bicyclists of all kinds no good at all to have us tarred as
hazardous scofflaws, or heavily-pierced, disrespectful urban savages. We're not, obviously; we're
just people who want to get around, just like everybody else.

I want integration on my terms, as a law-abiding and peaceful road user, not on theirs. Single- or
double-file, and following all the stoplights, etc, is better still. I like predictable bicycle
traffic. Easier to ride in. Easier to drive by. Easier to walk through.

I'd be interested to know how many CMers ride those bikes every day of the week, or every other day
of the week, and not just on the last Friday of every month.

-Luigi

"Too early to tell."

- Chou En-lai, on whether or not the French Revolution had succeeded.

 

[Nyrides]

Cool. You and I are in the same league, then. I had a feeling these Critical Mass guys were typical
angry bicyclists. What're we gonna do about 'em?

--
Low-Impact Rides in the NY/LI region www.geocities.com/NYRides "mark freedman" <[email protected]>
wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> "NYRides" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > Sorry. I guess I haven't paid much attention to this "Critical Mass"
thing.
> > Can you tell me what it is and why so many cyclists are against it?
> >
> > Thank you.
>
> Imagine that you're trying to get somewhere using a major downtown city street. Suddenly, a
> bunch of yahoos on bicycles block the intersection and prevent traffic from flowing through
> numerous cycles of the traffic lights, while a parade of yahoos on bicycles rides SLOWLY past
> blowing whistles and ringing bells. It's not a special occasion - unless you consider one
> Friday afternoon rush hour each month to be a special occasion. This takes about 10 minutes,
> and is repeated at each intersection along the route.
>
> I'm a yahoo on a bicycle myself, and was stopped on the main street watching the parade go by.
> My first reaction was "cool," but by the third traffic light cycle I was wondering why they'd
> want to contribute to the hostility cyclists get from motorists.
>
> I have a different approach. I obey traffic laws and try to be visible.
>
> I stopped for a red light, and had a driver lean over, roll down the passenger window, and
> shout "&^%$# *&^%%, you're the first guy on a bike I've ever seen stopping for a red light."
>
> I stopped at a pedestrian crossing. The pedestrian turned to me and said "&^%$# YU&^%$$, you're
> the first cyclist I've ever seen stopping at a pedestrian crossing."
>
> I stopped for a traffic policeman. He looked at me in shock and said "thank you. You're the
> first cyclist I've seen who paid attention to my hand signals." He thanked me twice more while
> I was stopped.
>
> I realize there's something seriously wrong with me
> (and I've had this pointed out to me by other cyclists) but
> I see no reason to give people REASONS to resent cyclists.

 

[George Shaffer]

I thought about joining a CM ride, to see what it was like. But I enjoy riding alone on quiet
country roads or singletrack...

 

[Zoot Katz]

Mon, 27 Jan 2003 16:14:00 GMT,
<[email protected]>, "NYRides" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Cool. You and I are in the same league, then. I had a feeling these Critical Mass guys were typical
>angry bicyclists. What're we gonna do about 'em?

Without having participated in one, you're in no position to do anything about 'em because you
simply don't know what's going on.

Consider that those "typical angry bicyclists" of your fantasy are just ordinary people who, one day
per month, like to experience the absolute liberation of cycling on _their_ streets for a few hours
without the constant stench, noise and threat of caged yahoos who dominate _their_ streets the rest
of the month.

The Vancouver CM rides demonstrate to drivers that it's lots of fun and decidedly sexier to
ride a bike.

The "mass" is a safety device. The front of the mass stops at red lights but when the mass is too
large to pass through an intersection in one signal sequence, it's safer to block the cross traffic
to keep the caged yahoos from infiltrating.

The mass doesn't block emergency vehicles and the few conflicts that the media has seized upon are,
in reality, police riots instigated by city hall.

I too was anti CM until I took the time to investigate one and learned that my prejudice was based
on false premises.
--
zk

 

[Zoot Katz]

Sun, 26 Jan 2003 11:09:30 -0800, <r[email protected]>, Ryan Cousineau
<[email protected]> wrote:

>The anti-Mass crowd tends to believe that routinely screwing up rush-hour traffic with bicycle mass
>rides is an excellent tactic for pissing off people in cars, and little else.

Having participated in a few CM rides, I can say there are realtively few drivers who are actually
inconvenienced by them.
--
zk

 

[Tom Kunich]

SC Hiker Biker <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> NYRides wrote:
> > Sorry. I guess I haven't paid much attention to this "Critical Mass" thing. Can you tell me what
> > it is and why so many cyclists are against it?
>
> Because they are designed to back up traffic and annoy motorist in order to push bicycling rights.
> What they do is gather dozens of bicyclist and ride real slow on main streets on purpose trying to
> disrupt and back up traffic. In very liberal places like San Francisco, these blockades have had
> an effect. But generally, it is a good idea with horrible execution and gives bicyclist a lot more
> negative press than positive.

I'd sure like you to explain Santa Claus with the same attention to accuracy. Critical Mass get a
lot of bad press simply because they are confronting the autocentric ideal. Sometimes they do
purposely slow traffic but that is the exception and not the rule. In San Francisco the rides are
just that - rides. They used to back up traffic just from the sheer size of the ride but for the
most part members themselves didn't like holding up traffic and various strategies were attempted
where they would "cork" intersections so as to clear the ride through with the minimum of delay for
cars in general (though that irritated the guy at the front of the cars stopped at the corkers
because it cost them time.) Now the CM rides are broken up into smaller groups and generally head
out by different routes. Some have an end point in mind while others just do the ride and go home.

Bicycles ARE traffic. When they are in mass on a road they slow up traffic whether or not they wish
to. And it is the drivers who want to race to the next stop light that are the problem in SF and not
the critical massers.

> Critical Mass are the extremist in bicycling advocacy.

Nonviolent extremism in the pursuit of freedom is not extremism.

I am not nor have I ever been a Critical Masser. I find most of them to be young men with a chip on
their shoulders. Nevertheless, when some car can't squeeze by a group of bicyclists to make another
1/4th block to the next stoplight and the bicyclist flips the driver off for screaming at him, that
doesn't give the driver carte blanche to kill the bicyclist. BTW that happened in San Francisco and
they didn't file charges against the driver.

If that isn't proof that some major re-thinking about traffic control needs to be done, what
possibly could?

 

[Zoot Katz]

27 Jan 2003 07:42:17 -0800,
<[email protected]>, [email protected] (Luigi de Guzman) wrote:

>I'd be interested to know how many CMers ride those bikes every day of the week, or every other day
>of the week, and not just on the last Friday of every month.
>
>-Luigi

Participate. I think you'll find the majority of them are daily utility and commuter cyclists.
They are here.
--
zk

 

[Sam Huffman]

Zoot Katz <[email protected]> writes:

> Mon, 27 Jan 2003 16:14:00 GMT,
> <[email protected]>, "NYRides" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Cool. You and I are in the same league, then. I had a feeling these Critical Mass guys were
> >typical angry bicyclists. What're we gonna do about 'em?
>
> Without having participated in one, you're in no position to do anything about 'em because you
> simply don't know what's going on.

Having been subjected to one (while in a "cage") I can attest to the irritation they cause and the
ill will they engender towards cyclists. I felt those same emotions, even though I thoroughly enjoy
riding my bicycle in a safe and responsible fashion.

However now when I drive, every time I see a biker I wonder if he was one of the guys who felt it
necessary to create a spectacle, and feel that twinge of irritation all over again. And when I ride,
I just hope that the driver in the car coming up behind me hasn't had the same experience and
doesn't feel the same irritation.

The participants in the CM rides no doubt have cyclists' best interest in mind. However I think they
fail to consider the negative impression they give people of the cycling public in general. Their
short glory ride once per month increases the hazards for every other cyclist every day of the
month. It is fair to blame drivers who drive unsafely, but those who knowingly provoke unsafe
driving just to make a statement are also to blame.

In Portland we have a yearly bike ride where streets are closed to traffic on a 30 mile loop
(including several miles of interstate). I do completely agree that it's a liberating experience
having 4 lanes of tarmac to enjoy without worrying about whose behind you.

> The mass doesn't block emergency vehicles

I'm curious; Why the double standard?

Sam

 

[Sam Huffman]

Zoot Katz <[email protected]> writes:

> Sun, 26 Jan 2003 11:09:30 -0800, <r[email protected]>, Ryan Cousineau
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >The anti-Mass crowd tends to believe that routinely screwing up rush-hour traffic with bicycle
> >mass rides is an excellent tactic for pissing off people in cars, and little else.
>
> Having participated in a few CM rides, I can say there are realtively few drivers who are actually
> inconvenienced by them.

How do you know, since you weren't one of the drivers? And how do you judge "inconvenience"?

Sam

 

[J. Bruce Fields]

In article <[email protected]>, Zoot Katz <[email protected]> wrote:
>The "mass" is a safety device. The front of the mass stops at red lights but when the mass is too
>large to pass through an intersection in one signal sequence, it's safer to block the cross traffic
>to keep the caged yahoos from infiltrating.

I'm not convinced that you're necessarily safer in the middle of the mass than you would be in the
middle of mixed traffic. In any case the mass certainly isn't *required* for safety; solo bike
commuting is also reasonbly safe.

The only real reason I can see for keeping the mass together is that critical mass is basically just
a parade, and parades cease to make sense as parades if they're all split up into little bits.

Some like to speak of critical mass as a demonstration of what the world would be like without motor
vehicles. I don't see it. I don't see how riding in the mass bears much resemblance to riding in
real traffic of any kind.

It's just a parade.

--Bruce F.

 

[Paul Southworth]

In article <[email protected]>, Zoot Katz <[email protected]> wrote:
>27 Jan 2003 11:46:25 -0800, <[email protected]>, Sam Huffman
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>However now when I drive, every time I see a biker I wonder if he was one of the guys who felt it
>>necessary to create a spectacle, and feel that twinge of irritation all over again.
>
>You're sick. Get help.

I wouldn't call it "sick" but I agree it is a kind of broken thinking that makes people boil when
they have to wait for a stranger. But hey, there is just no guarantee that you get to go as fast as
you want and never wait for anyone - it is the same kind of thinking that makes people charge
pedestrians who are late getting off the cross-walk - being willing to threaten someone's life to
obtain pole position.

The sad thing is, this attitude is by no means restricted to people in cars - I see this type of
behavior exhibited by cyclists every day on the closed roads in a nearby park that has twisty
descents and cyclists who go zooming through families on foot with loose dogs and baby strollers
spread across the road. It's all the same thing. I have roughly zero sympathy for anyone who acts
this way using any vehicle. When I see cyclists do it I think "you are acting just like a driver".

The thing that is hard to teach (to the whole world) is how to just use the brakes and slow down
without getting all hot and bothered. If it was a back-hoe blocking the road at 10mph most decent
drivers would at least avoid expressing their irritation - waiting is inevitable so just deal with
it - a cyclist should be thought of the same way.

If I can't give a pedestrian an auto-lane worth of elbow room then I go 10mph or slower. For one
thing, the guy's dog or kid is going to come bursting out of the bushes on the side of the road as
soon as I get near. And pededstrians just don't feel comfortable when a high-speed cyclist comes by
with a yard or two of room - I know I don't when I'm on foot - there are few people I trust that
well and plenty of examples of cycling ineptitude.

--Paul

 

[Zoot Katz]

27 Jan 2003 11:46:25 -0800, <[email protected]>, Sam Huffman
<[email protected]> wrote:

>However now when I drive, every time I see a biker I wonder if he was one of the guys who felt it
>necessary to create a spectacle, and feel that twinge of irritation all over again.

You're sick. Get help.

>It is fair to blame drivers who drive unsafely, but those who knowingly provoke unsafe driving just
>to make a statement are also to blame.

This is ripe: "knowingly provoke unsafe driving". Settle down. See your doctor.

>> The mass doesn't block emergency vehicles
>
>I'm curious; Why the double standard?

Humanitarian concerns and social responsibility are not precluded by having an activist's mindset. I
could argue that they're actually prerequisite for cultivating that mindset.

Also, in Vancouver, we've fairly good rapport with city hall so we take care to not jeopardise that
relationship. The police found that their hard-line approach caused more problems than it solved.
So, they tolerate us as long as we don't threaten the public's safety.
--
zk

 

[Zoot Katz]

27 Jan 2003 11:47:26 -0800, <[email protected]>, Sam Huffman
<[email protected]> wrote:

>How do you know, since you weren't one of the drivers? And how do you judge "inconvenience"?

Relative to the number of cars behind the Mass or waiting at a cross street, there are far greater
numbers of cars moving freely on all the other streets.

Inconvenienced meaning they may have had to wait through an extra signal sequence or two.
(Vancouver's CM rides have never been larger than about 260 people and at times includes a cycle
commuting city councillor)

The same type of inconvenience that drivers may experience waiting for one of their kind to push a
derelict shitwagon out of the road from where it stalled in an intersection. Less inconvenience than
when some of their consorts smack into each other.
--
zk