There is a cycling forum in Chicago whose owner steadfastly claims that references to the content of that forum is ‘illegal‘. But there is at least one contributor to that forum who writes comments intended for others on the home page of his section. I get a ‘good read‘ on what he thinks about what I write.
But what I want to know are two things:
- Why allow your users to reference another site while demanding that no other site reference yours?
- The other thing in question is why this particular miscreant is even interested in reviewing what is written on other sites?
If you firmly believe that your point of view is ‘holy‘ then why bother reading a different translation? Christians go out of their way to use only one particular translation of the Bible for personal study and reflection.
What is most interesting however are some of the lame excuses given for this or that practice amongst the Urban Cycling Community. They have had a field day with the author of the article:
Frankly, I like reading articles that differ to some degree from what I think. Evidently having people disagree with your world view is something that rankles a fair number of the cognoscenti in the Church of Urban Cycling. The biggest problem I see here is that they lack the capacity to be self-critical. That is what kills groups like the Tea Party.
Getting Back To The ‘Hide Behind The Skirts Critic’
What is going on when a person hides their critiques and messages in their home page on a given forum is that they ‘develop a certain quality of dishonest communication‘. That is of course what I would expect of the group (in general) but am wondering why this poor sap has been chosen for the task.
Half the time his comments about this or that aspect of recumbent bicycling are simply inaccurate. But then again most of what passes as part of the religious dogma of the Church of Urban Cycling is all about ‘deflection‘.
It goes something like this. If the cops get on your case for not stopping at a stop sign and have a ‘crackdown‘. You first find a means of saying that cars do it too. And when that does not work well, you then whine and hold your breath and decide to ‘obey the letter of the law‘ and completely trounce the spirit of it.
I am always reminded of the rather shallow ways in which staunch segregationists of the Old South did essentially the same thing. I view the Church of Urban Cycling as their spiritual offspring.
Here Is A Challenge
Stop hiding behind the skirts of the people whose forum you use. Say what you have to say, openly. Be a man. Or if you fail at that then be a wimp. But whatever you do, stop making a mockery of the system. Either you folks do not believe you want to have anyone challenge your close-minded world view or you do feel confident in going toe-to-toe.
My guess is that you will continue leaving silly photos, and vague quotes that reference something you read here and then behave as if your comments are not connected. Sorry, but that is pretty silly.
Trying to act as if the practice of ‘Corking Intersections‘ has any functional value to assisting the progress of a Critical Mass Ride is laughable. Own your silliness. The writer of this definition is a real mensch. What you present as the Gospel According To Critical Mass is simply pathetic. Grow up! Or better yet, grow a pair.
Say what you have to say and quit trying to be a site that protects its content while filching others. That is cowardice personified.