Master-Yoda

It was in reply to this; "And Besides, what help are the authorities these days ? - Oops did I just sterotype someone.." (post #71..)

Now now, who said anything about "thousands of people who have had negative experiences with the police to not voice the opinion"? I simply stated my experience and how the police recovered the bike and for that I say well done to the SAPS for doing their job.

So it's not ok for him to judge you or think that he knows you based on a statement that you made (and I agree with you on this one..) but it's ok for you to judge or profile someone based on he/she not "looking the part"? You're kind of contradicting yourself and actually agreeing that it's not ok to judge or stereotype people based on first impressions.

Reporting something suspicious is NOT stereotyping anyone, these are two completely different things which should not be confused. Of course you should report something suspicious which is clearly different to stereotyping a person just because he doesn't look like he can afford an expensive bike. And this nonsense of bad mouthing the police needs to stop, they do what they can with the resources that they have. I reported a stolen bike last year around June July and less than 5 days later they recovered the bike, forum members that know me know this is true and I have pics to prove it ;-)

If you see something suspicious then your duty is to report it to the authorities and NOT to confront the guy that's got the bike. People can't just stereotype others like that and I for one would love to see some clever guy asking where I, my wife or my daughter got our Specializeds from just because we didn't fit his preconceived profile of what a Specialized owner should look like, please.. Now IF someone posts news about their bike having been stolen and if there's pictures and someone sees what seems to be the same bike then yes, I can fully understand this but not out of the blue based of profiling someone. My 2 cents..

Can anyone recommend a good place to get parts (rims, hubs etc..) anodized?

Can anyone recommend a company to anodize rims and hubs?

http://i.imgur.com/nuaC0CN.png http://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/1hlis2/when_i_showed_my_friends_my_bicycle_antitheft/

Hey and here I thought that you were still busy p!issing someone else off that I saw the other day, have you finished with the guy that was trying to selling his brakes on the classifieds section (XT if I recall correctly)? Boy oh boy, aren't you the type that loves sticking his nose in other people's business

Howdy partner, I'm glad to be of assistance! Just remember to bookmark this one for future reference

Rofl..., welcome to THE THREAD

Let me tell you something about how the universe works. Whatever you put out there comes back to you, threefold. Be careful what you wish upon others as I might end up getting hit by a taxi but you mon ami might just end up being hit by a bus. And for the last part of your comment I can only smile and think to myself, what a complete moron. Your comments still insinuate that I am riding against traffic when you've clearly seen my previous replies that state that I don't and never have, and you still don't get it? Why don't you move along and go contribute to another thread that requires less understanding because you're obviously having difficulty keeping up with this one.. :)

Now you see, this is the type of comment I appreciate. It's obviously coming from someone that knows how to express his ideas even if it differs to mine and not try and STAMP his ideas onto others. Dude, triple +++1 to you (Y)

Dude, what's wrong with you? I really don't feel like repeating myself again and again to now also tell you where I do and don't ride but if you must be reminded or if you simply didn't bother to read all posts, then here goes.., a) I asked a question which is not a proposal as you have stated in your comment, b) no one is riding on the right, it's called a poll for a reason and a thread for discussing what ever needs to be discussed, or not.., c) we don't do road biking, d) when we do need to go onto a road, we're talking about roads that are next to farms and not main roads, busy roads and sure as hell not highways and finally.. e) ask me questions that apply to how/where we ride on the road when we have to be on the road and not how you ride on the road (e.i. amount of time, busy/quiet roads/ busy intersections etc..) or how you assume that it would somehow apply to our riding. I suppose that the next thing you're going to say is that those joggers that were killed was because they were running against the traffic flow? What if instead of joggers it had been cyclists, would it have made a difference if they turned around and started running in the other direction and the same driver hit them from behind, would it? And now that I think of it, maybe you're all right, riding against the flow WILL get you killed but then you're all pretty f***d as well if you're on the left because all hope is lost once you throw certain variables into the equation, like a drunk driver coming from behind... Do yourself a favour and search the net and see how many videos you find of cyclists being ridden over by cars from behind and then for cyclists that got hit by cars from the front. Come back when you have those figures and then we can continue our discussion. There, wisdom has been shared now go fetch your GoPro and get those suicide cyclists on camera getting hit left right and centre at those busy intersections..

Ok cool, then how about agreeing to reply to both questions?

It works both ways, you're just as stubborn now aren't you? At least I'm still asking unanswered questions and seeing this from a different perspective unlike a race horse which only sees what's been put in-front of him. When someone says something that you agree with then it's all good but when someone questions it then it's a problem. I tell you what, if you don't want to comment on it then fine but why would you follow a topic that you're not interested in?

I have 2 questions for you; 1: Was the accident caused by them running against traffic or by a drunk driver? 2: Do you think that the end result would be any different if they were running with the traffic flow and the same drunk driver came from behind? I get what you're trying to prove but this is not a valid comparison.

@Skubarra; Ignoring your reply #184 will in fact be my reply. And you still wonder why I previously mentioned as being tired of multi quoting to prove a point, it's pretty pointless as nothing's going to get through that thick black helmet of yours.. @Skylark; Claude/ClintZA?? Whatever sparks you having going on in your head best be put to rest. If you’re implying that I'm the same guy that has now simply created a new account then bugger off with that idea, I'm not a young little boy or teenager with pimples on his face that needs to resort to childish games. @Big H*; As garyvdm explained, you are clearly missing the point. You're making the same mistake as others that read and read and read but fail to understand what it is that they're reading or relying to. I am not riding against traffic, this thread/topic/poll refers to a QUESTION and does NOT refer to how I ride my damn bike, do you finally understand what it is that you're commenting on? @GLuvsMtb; I'll be the first to say that I feel sorry for what happened to your boss and that it was most unfortunate, this is a serious matter and especially when someone's life is/was at risk. It should serve as a lesson which others should use as an example so that it does not repeat itself. BUT, you are being misled by 99% of the nonsense that has been discussed in this thread and completely missing my point. What happened to your boss was the cause and effect of cyclists riding against the traffic flow (we all know is illegal) which ended up colliding against another group which was riding with the traffic flow (which is legal). It's obvious who was in the wrong and we are most certainly not debating this. My question does not refer to some riders riding with while others ride against (the flow), it's only logical that there will be a meeting point where someone is going to get hurt. The question that I ask is if I as a rider will have a better chance of avoiding being hit by a vehicle (seeing that 99% of the time I won't be looking back) that is coming from behind or, riding against the traffic flow and see all vehicles coming towards my direction. Now the important point that you're forgetting is that this would obviously have to be in a scenario where it was law to ride against the traffic for ALL cyclist. We could obviously not have some riding on one side while others ride on the other and this would obviously not apply to the way the current traffic law stipulates how cyclists should ride (with the flow). So again, I'm truly sorry for what happened to your boss and hope that you finally understand my point.

Debates are never pointless and will always exist as long as there's at least 2 humans on earth. Debates have been the source of eureka moments and solutions to great problems throughout the history on mankind, we simply could not live without debating the debatable. Off for a ride with my family, on the right-> left side of the road

Ok first of all you need to prove that the ratio is 1 to 10k and not 1-100 or 1-100k, do you have any proof of what the actual ratio is? And let's not forget that for this specific reason, I clearly mentioned (and underlined) the following; "And don't come with studies or other content that cannot be verified, I want video footage showing that there's a higher rate of accidents (percentage wise of course) with cyclists that travel against the traffic flow..."

I get what you're saying and yes, that would likely cause more problems for both parties. However, I've said it a few times that we don't do road riding and the only times that we need to go onto the road is to either cross it or to ride a km or 2 on a road with almost no traffic, no busy intersections (at all) and more than enough space to move further out right if need be.

I'll happily oblige * Yes, there would be theoretical scenarios where riding against the traffic could help you avoid an accident. Why only "theoretical" and not "probable" scenarios and why "could" instead of "would"? Are you telling me that there's no way that a cyclist riding against the traffic flow would avoid being hit by a vehicle? The way you put it, it sounds as if a cyclist would have no chance of saving himself because all scenarios which "could" possibly save him are "theoretical" and not "probable". Sorry but I've got to disagree with that. * I can also give you scenarios where not wearing a seatbelt saved someones life in a fatal car crash , or not stopping at a red robot help you avoid a potential hijacking. But do these examples make compelling reasons for never wearing seatbelts or never stopping at red robots? No, because you also need to look at the problems you create when making these choices. And what happened with comparing apples with apples? The law also states that you can't just go around shooting someone that trespasses your property yet most people would do this without hesitation if and when they feel threatened. Would you like to discuss this as well or should we stick to the topic? * You are only looking at the "benefits" of riding against the traffic for you as a cyclist while completely ignoring the problems it creates for other road users. Wrong again, I've agreed with some members which do not agree with riding against the traffic flow. How about you do yourself a favour and hit the back button a few times and start reading this thread from the beginning. * Again, there are a number of very valid problems with riding on the wrong side of the road pointed out on this thread which you simply choose to ignore. Agree and disagree (and in this order), above reply applies here as well.. * Interesting that you started this thread with a mini-rant against taxi drivers. Imo these okes are prime examples of road users who basically ignore traffic traffic laws when it doesn't suit them and apply their own judgement to each circumstance and scenario accordingly - depending on how they think is the best way to drive. I'm not sure I follow, are you simply expressing your feelings for taxi drivers or are you expecting a reply (I'm not being sarcastic..)? * imo telling cyclists to be your own judge of when to apply road rules or not is even worse than all cyclists riding on the wrong side of the road. Again, no one is telling anyone to do anything that they don't want to. You need to understand this, it's a thread with a topic/question/poll with intent of seeing what both sides have to say. Nothing more, nothing less.

I tell you what, I'm getting bored with snip this and compare it to that type responses so let's see how smart you really are.. Search the net for videos showing cyclists being hit by vehicles that ride against the traffic flow and I guarantee you that for each video that you find, I'll find +100 videos showing vehicles riding into/over cyclists that follow the traffic flow. And to help you on your way..https://www.google.co.za/#q=cyclist+hit+by+car+youtube And don't come with studies or other content that cannot be verified, I want video footage showing that there's a higher rate of accidents (percentage wise of course) with cyclists that travel against the traffic flow. Let's do some research of our own and ring the numbers, I'm sure that at the end we'll have a result that'll favour one side or the other.. So good night and happy surfing, you can bet that I'm looking forward in hearing what conclusion you reached :D

Agree..

Let me finish that off for you..it's a sign of that further explaining is required as you didn't get it first time. Welcome back, ready for another round?