<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for JustAnotherCyclist</title>
	<atom:link href="http://justanothercyclist.veloreviews.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://justanothercyclist.veloreviews.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 22:58:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Sympathy for the Devil by JustAnotherCyclist</title>
		<link>http://justanothercyclist.veloreviews.com/2013/02/27/sympathy-for-the-devil/#comment-6386</link>
		<dc:creator>JustAnotherCyclist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 22:58:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://justanothercyclist.veloreviews.com/?p=4124#comment-6386</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;You are quoting the percentage out of the whole population that ends up being killed in these accidents. ... It is the likelihood of these accidents when riding that is relevant.&quot;

You are, of course, absolutely correct Andrew. When I originally drafted this article I compared the percentage of the population killed while cycling with the percentage of the population that actively cycle. However, after checking my facts before publication, I found the latter percentage (number of people who ride) to be so controversial and hard to pin down that I chose to remove that number as unverifiable. While my intent with removing that information was to preserve accuracy, I overlooked the logical fallacy of my argument without that number present.

To your second point, I personally am not sure that I&#039;ll make the assumption that following all laws actually makes me safer on the road. While I don&#039;t endorse rolling through stop signs and stop lights, there are compelling arguments that it is actually **safer** do that than come to a complete stop. There is also compelling evidence that it is safer to take the lane in situations where a bike lane is crammed up against parked cars instead of remaining within in the bike lane, as certain interpretations of California law would dictate I must.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;You are quoting the percentage out of the whole population that ends up being killed in these accidents. &#8230; It is the likelihood of these accidents when riding that is relevant.&#8221;</p>
<p>You are, of course, absolutely correct Andrew. When I originally drafted this article I compared the percentage of the population killed while cycling with the percentage of the population that actively cycle. However, after checking my facts before publication, I found the latter percentage (number of people who ride) to be so controversial and hard to pin down that I chose to remove that number as unverifiable. While my intent with removing that information was to preserve accuracy, I overlooked the logical fallacy of my argument without that number present.</p>
<p>To your second point, I personally am not sure that I&#8217;ll make the assumption that following all laws actually makes me safer on the road. While I don&#8217;t endorse rolling through stop signs and stop lights, there are compelling arguments that it is actually **safer** do that than come to a complete stop. There is also compelling evidence that it is safer to take the lane in situations where a bike lane is crammed up against parked cars instead of remaining within in the bike lane, as certain interpretations of California law would dictate I must.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Sympathy for the Devil by Andrew</title>
		<link>http://justanothercyclist.veloreviews.com/2013/02/27/sympathy-for-the-devil/#comment-6384</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 21:47:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://justanothercyclist.veloreviews.com/?p=4124#comment-6384</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is a decent point, on the relative safety of cycling.

However, you missed a couple things that I think are important here.

One - You are quoting the percentage out of the whole population that ends up being killed in these accidents.  Nowhere near the whole population rides.  It is the likelihood of these accidents when riding that is relevant, and that is a major contributor to the fear you cite.  False stats aren&#039;t convincing.  Stating that a tiny percentage of the human population dies when trying to climb K2 does not make that a safe activity.

Two - You didn&#039;t examine how likely it is for LAW ABIDING cyclists to be injured or killed vs. the more common type, cyclists who constantly break the law, and I do mean constantly.  I ride to work most days, and I have NEVER, not once, seen a fellow cyclist who followed all the laws.  Not a single time.  Drivers are bad, but cyclists are downright scofflaws where I live (south SF bay area).

I believe that for riders that follow the law, and ride smartly and defensively, the risk isn&#039;t high at all.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is a decent point, on the relative safety of cycling.</p>
<p>However, you missed a couple things that I think are important here.</p>
<p>One &#8211; You are quoting the percentage out of the whole population that ends up being killed in these accidents.  Nowhere near the whole population rides.  It is the likelihood of these accidents when riding that is relevant, and that is a major contributor to the fear you cite.  False stats aren&#8217;t convincing.  Stating that a tiny percentage of the human population dies when trying to climb K2 does not make that a safe activity.</p>
<p>Two &#8211; You didn&#8217;t examine how likely it is for LAW ABIDING cyclists to be injured or killed vs. the more common type, cyclists who constantly break the law, and I do mean constantly.  I ride to work most days, and I have NEVER, not once, seen a fellow cyclist who followed all the laws.  Not a single time.  Drivers are bad, but cyclists are downright scofflaws where I live (south SF bay area).</p>
<p>I believe that for riders that follow the law, and ride smartly and defensively, the risk isn&#8217;t high at all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Quill stem conversion by AlleycatUK</title>
		<link>http://justanothercyclist.veloreviews.com/2010/08/13/quill-stem-conversion/#comment-6007</link>
		<dc:creator>AlleycatUK</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Apr 2013 12:24:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://justanothercyclist.com/?p=783#comment-6007</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is late, judging by the post date, but just wanted to say great article. Really useful, especially with the photos. I&#039;m on an old steel frame with a few new bits added on but was thinking the quill could be a problem if I need to swap. Never seen those adapters before so well pleased. Thanks for taking the time to document it and post.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is late, judging by the post date, but just wanted to say great article. Really useful, especially with the photos. I&#8217;m on an old steel frame with a few new bits added on but was thinking the quill could be a problem if I need to swap. Never seen those adapters before so well pleased. Thanks for taking the time to document it and post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on What is a &#8220;Culver&#8221; and how did they get a city? by Meghan Sahli-Wells</title>
		<link>http://justanothercyclist.veloreviews.com/2013/03/29/what-is-a-culver-and-how-did-they-get-a-city/#comment-5944</link>
		<dc:creator>Meghan Sahli-Wells</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Apr 2013 16:57:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://justanothercyclist.veloreviews.com/?p=4132#comment-5944</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Rest assured the policy-makers in Culver City do not share the views of the Chamber of Commerce president about cycling:

http://culvercity.patch.com/articles/officials-urge-la-county-drivers-to-share-lanes-with-bicyclists-9c931afb

Most sincerely,
Meghan Sahli-Wells
Culver City Bicycle Coalition Co-founder &amp; Councilwoman]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rest assured the policy-makers in Culver City do not share the views of the Chamber of Commerce president about cycling:</p>
<p><a href="http://culvercity.patch.com/articles/officials-urge-la-county-drivers-to-share-lanes-with-bicyclists-9c931afb" rel="nofollow">http://culvercity.patch.com/articles/officials-urge-la-county-drivers-to-share-lanes-with-bicyclists-9c931afb</a></p>
<p>Most sincerely,<br />
Meghan Sahli-Wells<br />
Culver City Bicycle Coalition Co-founder &amp; Councilwoman</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Mounting tail lights on bikes by Bike Friday turns 21; Book Bike propels literacy &#124; 16incheswestofpeoria</title>
		<link>http://justanothercyclist.veloreviews.com/2010/08/26/mounting-tail-lights-on-bikes/#comment-5918</link>
		<dc:creator>Bike Friday turns 21; Book Bike propels literacy &#124; 16incheswestofpeoria</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Apr 2013 23:11:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://justanothercyclist.com/?p=988#comment-5918</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] The latest challenge? Fitting a Busch &amp; Müller Toplight Flat S Plus taillight to the back of a rack that doesn&#8217;t have matching 50mm or 80mm mounting holes. (Solution: I drilled three holes into an unused Pletscher seatstay bridge plate&#8211;two holes to receive bolts from the light and a third hole to attach the assembly to the rack’s original single-hole reflector bracket.) Might have saved myself a little trouble if I had done a bit of research on taillight standards. (justanothercyclist.com) [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The latest challenge? Fitting a Busch &amp; Müller Toplight Flat S Plus taillight to the back of a rack that doesn&#8217;t have matching 50mm or 80mm mounting holes. (Solution: I drilled three holes into an unused Pletscher seatstay bridge plate&#8211;two holes to receive bolts from the light and a third hole to attach the assembly to the rack’s original single-hole reflector bracket.) Might have saved myself a little trouble if I had done a bit of research on taillight standards. (justanothercyclist.com) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on What is a &#8220;Culver&#8221; and how did they get a city? by Doug</title>
		<link>http://justanothercyclist.veloreviews.com/2013/03/29/what-is-a-culver-and-how-did-they-get-a-city/#comment-5812</link>
		<dc:creator>Doug</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Apr 2013 19:43:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://justanothercyclist.veloreviews.com/?p=4132#comment-5812</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&gt;  insurance policies also have to account for the worst case of those cyclists who don’t carry insurance.

They also have to account for an even worse case -- motorists who don&#039;t carry insurance.  I don&#039;t know about California, but the figure I&#039;ve heard bandied around here is that 20% of drivers aren&#039;t insured.

Another issue is the pathetically low mandatory insurance requirements.  Around here, the state mandated minimum for liability auto insurance is $30k/person $60k/incident.  But if there&#039;s a collision and somebody is sent to the hospital, that $30k is often gone *in the first hour*.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt;  insurance policies also have to account for the worst case of those cyclists who don’t carry insurance.</p>
<p>They also have to account for an even worse case &#8212; motorists who don&#8217;t carry insurance.  I don&#8217;t know about California, but the figure I&#8217;ve heard bandied around here is that 20% of drivers aren&#8217;t insured.</p>
<p>Another issue is the pathetically low mandatory insurance requirements.  Around here, the state mandated minimum for liability auto insurance is $30k/person $60k/incident.  But if there&#8217;s a collision and somebody is sent to the hospital, that $30k is often gone *in the first hour*.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on What is a &#8220;Culver&#8221; and how did they get a city? by Erik Mar</title>
		<link>http://justanothercyclist.veloreviews.com/2013/03/29/what-is-a-culver-and-how-did-they-get-a-city/#comment-5785</link>
		<dc:creator>Erik Mar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2013 15:56:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://justanothercyclist.veloreviews.com/?p=4132#comment-5785</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I think the insurance point needs some further explication. Under the current insurance system, it&#039;s conceivable that a motorist&#039;s insurance rate gets raised as a result of additional bicycle collision probability. It&#039;s not enough to say that &quot;many&quot; or &quot;most&quot; cyclists also carry insurance - insurance policies also have to account for the worst case of those cyclists who don&#039;t carry insurance. It&#039;s also not enough to say that a bike at fault in a car collision doesn&#039;t do much damage - simply scratching the paint can set a car owner back hundreds of $$. I think the better argument is to accept that, yes, individual insurance rates may increase incrementally, but those increases will be offset by savings elsewhere. Notably, a) decreased wear and tear on road infrastructure, which is paid largely from general funds, not by gas taxes; b) decreased particulate and carbon emissions, which is an economic externality which we all pay for in myriad ways, not the least through the cleanup after increasingly common and severe extreme weather events; c) decreased health costs, which will improve the cost/benefit ratio of our national healthcare system, which ranks as the world&#039;s worst in terms of its current per capita costs / per capita benefits.
This is a case of narrowly focusing on individual costs while failing to consider the wastage of public funds (which largely come from individuals) due to the lifestyle choices of exactly those same individuals.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the insurance point needs some further explication. Under the current insurance system, it&#8217;s conceivable that a motorist&#8217;s insurance rate gets raised as a result of additional bicycle collision probability. It&#8217;s not enough to say that &#8220;many&#8221; or &#8220;most&#8221; cyclists also carry insurance &#8211; insurance policies also have to account for the worst case of those cyclists who don&#8217;t carry insurance. It&#8217;s also not enough to say that a bike at fault in a car collision doesn&#8217;t do much damage &#8211; simply scratching the paint can set a car owner back hundreds of $$. I think the better argument is to accept that, yes, individual insurance rates may increase incrementally, but those increases will be offset by savings elsewhere. Notably, a) decreased wear and tear on road infrastructure, which is paid largely from general funds, not by gas taxes; b) decreased particulate and carbon emissions, which is an economic externality which we all pay for in myriad ways, not the least through the cleanup after increasingly common and severe extreme weather events; c) decreased health costs, which will improve the cost/benefit ratio of our national healthcare system, which ranks as the world&#8217;s worst in terms of its current per capita costs / per capita benefits.<br />
This is a case of narrowly focusing on individual costs while failing to consider the wastage of public funds (which largely come from individuals) due to the lifestyle choices of exactly those same individuals.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on What is a &#8220;Culver&#8221; and how did they get a city? by Hollywood’s anti-bike green lane myth rises again; Culver City Chamber pres comes out against bikes &#124; BikingInLA</title>
		<link>http://justanothercyclist.veloreviews.com/2013/03/29/what-is-a-culver-and-how-did-they-get-a-city/#comment-5783</link>
		<dc:creator>Hollywood’s anti-bike green lane myth rises again; Culver City Chamber pres comes out against bikes &#124; BikingInLA</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2013 15:22:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://justanothercyclist.veloreviews.com/?p=4132#comment-5783</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] have already taken him to task in the comments to the story. And Just Another Cyclist has done a great job of dissecting the letter, slicing and dicing the fallacies until there’s nothing left but the [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] have already taken him to task in the comments to the story. And Just Another Cyclist has done a great job of dissecting the letter, slicing and dicing the fallacies until there’s nothing left but the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on What is a &#8220;Culver&#8221; and how did they get a city? by Today&#8217;s Headlines &#124; Streetsblog Los Angeles</title>
		<link>http://justanothercyclist.veloreviews.com/2013/03/29/what-is-a-culver-and-how-did-they-get-a-city/#comment-5752</link>
		<dc:creator>Today&#8217;s Headlines &#124; Streetsblog Los Angeles</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Apr 2013 16:20:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://justanothercyclist.veloreviews.com/?p=4132#comment-5752</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] His Article Demolished by Bike Blogger (Just Another Bicyclist) [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] His Article Demolished by Bike Blogger (Just Another Bicyclist) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Coming out of the closet: I Hate Helmets by What is a "Culver" and how did they get a city? &#124; JustAnotherCyclist</title>
		<link>http://justanothercyclist.veloreviews.com/2011/06/14/coming-out-of-the-closet-i-hate-helmets-2/#comment-5696</link>
		<dc:creator>What is a "Culver" and how did they get a city? &#124; JustAnotherCyclist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Mar 2013 05:05:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://justanothercyclist.com/?p=2176#comment-5696</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] they are not. But this question has no relevance either. Debates about cycling helmets aside, Mr. Rose seems to be indicating that an arbitrary number of laws is what is required to [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] they are not. But this question has no relevance either. Debates about cycling helmets aside, Mr. Rose seems to be indicating that an arbitrary number of laws is what is required to [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
