Critical Mass Tunnel Freaks - Page 40 - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

07-15-2004, 07:23 PM

>Jym Dyer [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

wrote in part:

>Do you participate in traffic? Traffic is, after all,
>an event where widespread lawbreaking occurs. It is far
>more destructive and deadly than any bike ride could be.

Didn't you get the flyer, Jym? We ARE traffic.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

(Sorry but I simply couldn't resist.)

07-15-2004, 07:23 PM

>Jym Dyer [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

wrote in part:

>Do you participate in traffic? Traffic is, after all,
>an event where widespread lawbreaking occurs. It is far
>more destructive and deadly than any bike ride could be.

Didn't you get the flyer, Jym? We ARE traffic.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

(Sorry but I simply couldn't resist.)

07-15-2004, 07:23 PM

>Jym Dyer [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

wrote in part:

>Do you participate in traffic? Traffic is, after all,
>an event where widespread lawbreaking occurs. It is far
>more destructive and deadly than any bike ride could be.

Didn't you get the flyer, Jym? We ARE traffic.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

(Sorry but I simply couldn't resist.)

07-15-2004, 07:23 PM

>Jym Dyer [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

wrote in part:

>Do you participate in traffic? Traffic is, after all,
>an event where widespread lawbreaking occurs. It is far
>more destructive and deadly than any bike ride could be.

Didn't you get the flyer, Jym? We ARE traffic.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

(Sorry but I simply couldn't resist.)

07-16-2004, 10:03 AM

16 Jul 2004 03:19:36 GMT,
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].com>, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
(Hunrobe) wrote:

>>Zoot Katz [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>
>wrote:
>
>>They've not yet determined responsibility.
>>
>>I guessing that _if_ he admits having backed up, they'll assign
>>fifty-fifty responsibility to neatly close the claim.
>>
>>IOW, "bend over". Now, get out.
>>--
>>zk
>
>I'm disappointed in you, Zoot, because this very much sounds as if you *are*
>going to just "bend over".
>Insurance adjusters do not "determine responsibility", they merely offer their
>own biased estimate. You're under no obligation to accept what they offer. If
>it- the offer- doesn't seem fair to you, reject it and counter with an offer
>of your own.

Without a witness it's simply my word against his.

The hand written list given me by the adjuster enumerates the things
they will do. Verbatim:
1. ask other party to report claim.
2. order medical records.
3. decide responsibility - ASAP (30 days)
4. settle (dependant on liability)

To challenge their decision I would need a witness.

>Best of luck to you on both your complete physical and economic recoveries.
>
Thanks for that, I'll need it. What I still don't understand is how
financial restitution ($19.96) is supposed to be compensation.

The only good that can come of this is that pus sack will perhaps pay
more attention where he's launching his scud. Hopefully he's a safer
driver now.
--
zk

07-16-2004, 10:03 AM

16 Jul 2004 03:19:36 GMT,
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].com>, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
(Hunrobe) wrote:

>>Zoot Katz [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>
>wrote:
>
>>They've not yet determined responsibility.
>>
>>I guessing that _if_ he admits having backed up, they'll assign
>>fifty-fifty responsibility to neatly close the claim.
>>
>>IOW, "bend over". Now, get out.
>>--
>>zk
>
>I'm disappointed in you, Zoot, because this very much sounds as if you *are*
>going to just "bend over".
>Insurance adjusters do not "determine responsibility", they merely offer their
>own biased estimate. You're under no obligation to accept what they offer. If
>it- the offer- doesn't seem fair to you, reject it and counter with an offer
>of your own.

Without a witness it's simply my word against his.

The hand written list given me by the adjuster enumerates the things
they will do. Verbatim:
1. ask other party to report claim.
2. order medical records.
3. decide responsibility - ASAP (30 days)
4. settle (dependant on liability)

To challenge their decision I would need a witness.

>Best of luck to you on both your complete physical and economic recoveries.
>
Thanks for that, I'll need it. What I still don't understand is how
financial restitution ($19.96) is supposed to be compensation.

The only good that can come of this is that pus sack will perhaps pay
more attention where he's launching his scud. Hopefully he's a safer
driver now.
--
zk

07-16-2004, 10:03 AM

16 Jul 2004 03:19:36 GMT,
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].com>, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
(Hunrobe) wrote:

>>Zoot Katz [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>
>wrote:
>
>>They've not yet determined responsibility.
>>
>>I guessing that _if_ he admits having backed up, they'll assign
>>fifty-fifty responsibility to neatly close the claim.
>>
>>IOW, "bend over". Now, get out.
>>--
>>zk
>
>I'm disappointed in you, Zoot, because this very much sounds as if you *are*
>going to just "bend over".
>Insurance adjusters do not "determine responsibility", they merely offer their
>own biased estimate. You're under no obligation to accept what they offer. If
>it- the offer- doesn't seem fair to you, reject it and counter with an offer
>of your own.

Without a witness it's simply my word against his.

The hand written list given me by the adjuster enumerates the things
they will do. Verbatim:
1. ask other party to report claim.
2. order medical records.
3. decide responsibility - ASAP (30 days)
4. settle (dependant on liability)

To challenge their decision I would need a witness.

>Best of luck to you on both your complete physical and economic recoveries.
>
Thanks for that, I'll need it. What I still don't understand is how
financial restitution ($19.96) is supposed to be compensation.

The only good that can come of this is that pus sack will perhaps pay
more attention where he's launching his scud. Hopefully he's a safer
driver now.
--
zk

07-16-2004, 10:03 AM

16 Jul 2004 03:19:36 GMT,
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].com>, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
(Hunrobe) wrote:

>>Zoot Katz [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>
>wrote:
>
>>They've not yet determined responsibility.
>>
>>I guessing that _if_ he admits having backed up, they'll assign
>>fifty-fifty responsibility to neatly close the claim.
>>
>>IOW, "bend over". Now, get out.
>>--
>>zk
>
>I'm disappointed in you, Zoot, because this very much sounds as if you *are*
>going to just "bend over".
>Insurance adjusters do not "determine responsibility", they merely offer their
>own biased estimate. You're under no obligation to accept what they offer. If
>it- the offer- doesn't seem fair to you, reject it and counter with an offer
>of your own.

Without a witness it's simply my word against his.

The hand written list given me by the adjuster enumerates the things
they will do. Verbatim:
1. ask other party to report claim.
2. order medical records.
3. decide responsibility - ASAP (30 days)
4. settle (dependant on liability)

To challenge their decision I would need a witness.

>Best of luck to you on both your complete physical and economic recoveries.
>
Thanks for that, I'll need it. What I still don't understand is how
financial restitution ($19.96) is supposed to be compensation.

The only good that can come of this is that pus sack will perhaps pay
more attention where he's launching his scud. Hopefully he's a safer
driver now.
--
zk

07-16-2004, 10:03 AM

16 Jul 2004 03:19:36 GMT,
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].com>, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
(Hunrobe) wrote:

>>Zoot Katz [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>
>wrote:
>
>>They've not yet determined responsibility.
>>
>>I guessing that _if_ he admits having backed up, they'll assign
>>fifty-fifty responsibility to neatly close the claim.
>>
>>IOW, "bend over". Now, get out.
>>--
>>zk
>
>I'm disappointed in you, Zoot, because this very much sounds as if you *are*
>going to just "bend over".
>Insurance adjusters do not "determine responsibility", they merely offer their
>own biased estimate. You're under no obligation to accept what they offer. If
>it- the offer- doesn't seem fair to you, reject it and counter with an offer
>of your own.

Without a witness it's simply my word against his.

The hand written list given me by the adjuster enumerates the things
they will do. Verbatim:
1. ask other party to report claim.
2. order medical records.
3. decide responsibility - ASAP (30 days)
4. settle (dependant on liability)

To challenge their decision I would need a witness.

>Best of luck to you on both your complete physical and economic recoveries.
>
Thanks for that, I'll need it. What I still don't understand is how
financial restitution ($19.96) is supposed to be compensation.

The only good that can come of this is that pus sack will perhaps pay
more attention where he's launching his scud. Hopefully he's a safer
driver now.
--
zk

07-16-2004, 10:45 AM

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
Jym Dyer <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:
>> If I actively participate in Critical Mass, I'd be an
>> hypocrite for not living up to my own lights. If I
>> don't participate, I'm an hypocrite for just giving it
>> lip-service support.
>
> =v= Do you participate in traffic?

Yes, actually. And I think 'participate' is a good word for it.

> Traffic is, after all,
> an event where widespread lawbreaking occurs.

I assume when you say 'traffic', you mean motor vehicle traffic.

I've done some lawbreaking, myself. But while I'm certainly
no letter-of-the-law saint putting a foot down at every stop
line or signalling every turn, I do endeavour to keep my own
transgressions limited. That's just my own, self-applied
approach, without any officiousness directed at anyone else.
My focus isn't so much on law as on /order/, in terms of
co-existing and cooperating with the all other people in the
traffic. So I personally feel sort of incompatible with the
Critical Mass approach. That's not a criticism directed
toward anyone or anything. I'm not /com/plaining; I'm just
/ex/plaining.

> It is far
> more destructive and deadly than any bike ride could be.

> =v= Critical Mass, with all its human flaws,

I have no criticisms toward Critical Mass. In fact I like
that it exists, and I see no more human flaws in it than
in any other form of, or forum for, expression. But my own
conscience would give me a kick in the ass if I rode through
a red light, and I can't get the damn thing to shuddup.

> is a much
> better implementation of traffic.

I figure the best implementation of traffic is that which
allows people to get to work or the shops, or deliver/receive
goods or services as fairly, undestructfully and safely as
possible. Of course, some things have to be changed and some
awareness has to be raised in order for that to happen.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca