BIKEPGH MESSAGE BOARD ARCHIVE

The trend will change a bit in the coming year - we haven't laid out our official plan for the spring yet.

We will probably have fewer rides per month, and will more than likely stick to the original flock of second to last friday in some way, but more than that, I'd say just keep your ear to the ground, and once we get it figured out we'll post up the details

Thank you!!!

hmm... I'll put in placeholders April-Oct for second to last Fridays if I can figure it out.

The best things are always worth waiting for. I'll have to patiently coast on my pedals until they're posted

Thanks!!

There haven't been flock rides since sept, right?

Aside from the specialty rides, nope.

The last one I attended was in September... I don't remember after that. Perhaps it's my wishful thinking that we can flock all year.

The earlier rides are announced the easier it is for me to attend, I have to turn in the schedule I can work into my boss 2 months in advance and it seems I always end up working during special event rides. Then in September I was able to get most Fridays off during the winter and the rides stopped. I am sooooo looking forward to the re-start of Flock and other group rides.

I think it would be helpful if someone, anyone, would roll by Dippy on the last Friday, just in case folks new to the area show up, expecting a Critical Mass ride. CM has all but disappeared in Pgh, thanks to Flock.

Like Rob said, we are working to re-launch this year with some changes that we think will help make us a better asset to the community as well as a more sustainable organization from a management perspective.

We are hoping to make the announcement before the end of the month, so it should give everyone plenty of time to arrange their schedules if they would like to attend events.

Woot!

And for the record, you guys rocked the flock outta the first night parade

@Stu

Even before Flock, when it got cold nobody showed up to CM. I was occasionally one of maybe two or three that did

Pierce is definitely right. Even years ago, when CM was huge, less than a handful of people came when it got cold.

CM was huge in Pgh?

Well, maybe not huge, but it was pretty big at one point. I remember quite at least a few rides that had to be 100-200, maybe more. Keep in mind CM goes back quite a bit.

Yeah, I wouldn't be so quick to say that the Flock killed CM locally, or that it is necessarily dead long-term. People have declared CM dead and useless many times before. While there is some overlap in the participants between the two rides, I'll bet there are more than a handful of CM supporters that would never go on a Flock ride and vice versa.

I don't think the Flock here has much if anything to do with CM participation waning. More coincidental and a reaction of why some people moved away from CM, not the reason they left in the first place.

yeah, i think that's a bit insincere to say that as well. there's no reason to create divisiveness by pitting the two rides against each other. Whether you agree with the tactics of either, they both can be important in their own way and there's room for both. The more things for people to do to get on bikes the better. I have no doubt that if a bunch of people got into promoting CM locally that it would start again.

My point in mentioning it was to get to know people who look for CM, as they might be interested in bike advocacy but not know some of us. Like if they just moved here.

There was a guy who rode in the very first Flock ride who had only moved here the previous week.

I agree with both, Erok and Brad. I actually loved CM for all the years I went. I never really had a negative experience until April 2010, which was a absolute mess. If anything, I think CM killed itself.

At the last August flock, I think it was, when the big thunderstorm was, at the same time there was a very large group of riders gathered at the Frick fountain for an alley cat, larger than the Flock ride. Mostly unhelmeted and unlighted. Just an observation, not sure what that means.

"Mostly" means more the 50% had no lights or helmet. Not like that really matters in the middle of the afternoon standing around a fountain. When the actual riding was happening I guarantee that most people had helmets and blinkies of some sort.

Being that adults in this country are not compelled by law to wear a helmet and that informal alleycat gatherings don't enforce a list of rules upon the participants I don't find it surprising that some people that show up to an alleycat do not have a helmet on.

It was not intended as a criticism of the alley cat folks. I have quite a different train of thought in my head, perhaps the opposite of what you may have assumed, but I sure don't want to light off a helmet "debate" thread right now. Maybe ever.

that was a really fun alleycat. one of the highlights of 2011.

I was talking with my roommate about CM rides the other day. I missed the last few Flock rides of the Fall but he went to a few. He said he went to one and there were waivers. So he left and says he won't ride again. I wonder how many people the waivers turned away.

why would a waiver turn someone away?

if you have to ask...

i can certainly understand that - you show up for a "casual" ride and then suddenly you're supposed to give some strangers your name and address. if i didn't know Nick, Jane, Rob, etc. beforehand i would have thought twice... especially back in my younger days.

i understand why they feel the need to have the waivers (or technically "membership applications") and insurance but i wish there was an easier way without all the overhead and financial drain.

Well, there are always aspirational signatures. Who do you feel best captures you style? Contador, Cadel Evans, the Schlecks? Who knows, maybe even Lance. (Actually, skip Lance; you could end up having to pee in a cup.)

I was on a Tuesday group ride and talk with someone who doesn't like any of the rides in Pittsburgh because of all the rules. He said what he liked about CM in the city he was from he could ride any way he wanted and had a group to back him up. He told me how cyclist would block intersections so whole group could pass thru without stopping at lights or stop signs. He said he was on a Flock and dropped out for being told not to cross the yellow line.

The yellow line is there to avoid getting creamed by a car in the other direction, the last I knew, and generally this rule is followed, except by certain people on two wheels who feel above the law.

Yeah, there are a few outliers like that. We can't worry over the outliers. We're after the much greater population of swayables who would gladly play by the rules if they knew what the rules were.

Maybe better stated by "best practices" rather than rules.

I'm not into signing waivers and I tend to ride on my side of the street.

I don't mind signing waivers, but mildly dislike asking others to do so. (This is why I rarely run official WPW rides, as sign-in sheets/waivers are required by club rules.)

Brevets are a different story, to me, as the primary purpose of the brevet waivers is to ensure that we have emergency contact information for when a rider vanishes somewhere betwixt Deliverance and West Bumfork. We've found that the prospect of getting calls from panic-stricken loved ones really encourages riders who choose to abandon the ride to let us know...

As far as the question of best practices goes, well, hard-and-fast rules are kinda tough. I feel that a good first approximation is "would it make the world a better place if all the other road users did the same thing?"

As someone who has organized rides and worked in another high liability industry (rock climbing), I can say that liability issues used to keep me up at night. About eight years ago, I started a bouldering wall co-op in East Liberty--all friends, all pitched in to cover costs, rent, etc. While it was great while it lasted, I was secretly relieved when the landlord asked us to vacate (he had a tenant lined up to use all of the available space, rather than just the bit we had)--as the guy who held the cash and paid the bills, I was also mildly worried that someone would get hurt, and their parents, or sister, or brother--who really didn't understand the sport--would come after the rest of us. I wasn't necessarily worried that a judge would take every last penny I had, but I was worried I would spend lots of money fighting such a thing.

That said, waivers are generally regarded as smoke and mirrors--required by your insurers (or lawyers), but they often don't provide much protection if someone really wants to hold you liable.

Also, IANAL.

The last alleycat waiver I signed was for Edward Mercks. No one batted an eye, or asked for ID.

Like Brian said, smoke and mirrors anyway. Liability and negligence can't really be signed away anyway.

Also like Brian said liability issues make me pretty nervous at points as well.

Flocks are organized rides, and the organizers immediately expose themselves to liability in the act of organizing, and they deserve some minimum level of protection that the waivers provide. You have to sign a "terms of agreement" to use itunes or facebook, ferchrissakes. As whacked as I think our society presently is, welcome to life in the 21st century.

As far as the above anecdote, CM guy, "He said what he liked about (replace CM with "driving a car" and re-think it) in the city he was from he could ride any way he wanted and had a group to back him up." Really. A little divorced from reality.

Having said all that, I don't think people who don't want to sign waivers, or wear helmets, or adhere to the letter of the law, can be dismissed as outliers, I think there are a large number of people who will ride if they can casually hop a bike and ride, without this "baggage". To open the can of worms that I referred to earlier, I think the ultimate scale of Flocks will be limited by it's appeal to people who don't want to wear helmets, sign waivers, etc. This is why I referred to the side-by-side case of the simultaneous Flock and alleycat. If it ceases to be simply fun or easy, many of the "sway-ables" will simply not participate. IMO.

I like the flocks. I like the ideals. I like the people (both organizing and participating). I like that everybody else there also likes the ideals. I think Flocking is the best idea I've ever seen/heard about to get people new to biking to see it as a useful tool and to feel safer about riding in the streets. And if more people ride in the streets and use bikes as transportation tools, that means more people will be open to spending money on useful cycling infrastructure (like awesome trails along the rivers and street diets) and sharing the road (as motorists) politely and safely with cyclists.

I'm ok with some people being turned off by the requirement that they ride by following the rules of the road. Because I don't think they're going to help the cause.

The waiver... That's a whole other can of worms. I think it's a messy piece of business to start a ride with, but I do think that is more of an outlier thing than a standard reaction.

I think the alleycat got huge numbers because box wine was involved. Booze sells.

Even with the waivers, rules, and helmets I personally love Flock and believe it is important. It my not be for everyone but I enjoy it and will make a greater effort to make it to more if not all the Flocks this year.

I think it says a lot about the depth and breadth of the cycling community here that we can support so many and varied group rides, Flock-type rides, Alley Cats and ad-hoc groups.

Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don't.

Two additional data points.

1) When I rode PNBR, there was no paperwork. Just two thousand people on bikes. Police escort, even. Ride marshals kept people in lanes, since the streets were not closed (at least in the opposite direction), and there were far more bikes and riders than lane width. Not to mention 25,000 people watching. I am not aware of a single serious incident before, during or after the ride.

2) Icycle Bicycle just a couple of weeks ago. I joined the ride late and missed the paperwork. I signed the waiver when we got back to REI. The reasoning was that while I might not sue anyone, if I'd gotten killed, my estate/survivors might want to press for some sort of redress even if I had been OK with someone running me over.

So I think the takeaway is, it's better to have the ppwk than not, but chances of anything serious happening are pretty darned slim.

@ Mr Mrvelous I was on a Tuesday group ride and talk with someone who doesn't like any of the rides in Pittsburgh ...

Maybe he should try bowling.

@ Mick I only posted about him just as an idea of maybe why some don't like flock, the way he described CM seemed a bit extreme It can't really be THAT different from Flock...... can it?

I hate asking people to sign waivers, but I've done it before. It probably makes the most sense for Flock to have them in order to keep organizing rides. If anything, I would just like to see them be the simplest, easiest to fill out form possible that still gets the legal point across. When I was filling it out I know I wasn't too excited about having to fill in my birth date (which is today by the way okay maybe I don't really care but someone might).

And while I almost always wear a helmet myself there have been a few times when I would have liked to bring someone else to the ride but they didn't have a helmet so it would be a no go for Flock or pretty much any other organized ride. I understand it, but I also understand that it's going to be a barrier for some people.

Much different Mr Marv.

Happy B-day Tabby!

aw thanks Marko

The waivers were provided and required by an insurance company. They give it to you and tell you not to modify it. If there are any legal experts or insurance industry insiders here that can see a way around them, I'm sure everyone would be thrilled.

I remember signing a waiver for the keg ride, Pedal Pittsburgh, and the MS 150 too. How many rides lack the "sign here" ritual?

I signed one for the one MTCC ride I did last year... or the year before...

I need to do more organized rides.

Regardless, Flock is awesome.

How many rides lack the "sign here" ritual?

Aside from CM and (most) alleycats, not many.

Brian and Brad are completely right. Waivers are mostly designed to act as a deterrent for frivolous lawsuits required by every insurance company, for almost everything.

I know there are people that don't participate in Flock events because of waivers. I also know people who don't participate in other events for various reasons as well. To each there own--you will never please everyone.

As for the specific reasons we have waivers, it was my call, and I will take any complaints about it.

However, if one has an issue with Flock's waiver, they should really read the terms they agree to by using pretty much any form of technology--the agreement to have a simple landline telephone is more limiting and in depth than Flock's waiver.

If one is worried about the information we collect, that's a personal decision, but I have a feeling that if anyone really wanted that info it could all be found in public records.

If organizers of other events don't want to have insurance and waivers, that's on them. I (unfortunately) live in a world where people sue--especially if they think you have something of worth (even though the value might not be what is imagined).

Personally, I don't hold many liquid assets, I do hold some assets which I care enough about to not lose in a petty lawsuit because someone did something stupid on a ride I organized. Luckily, there hasn't been any issues with ride events in Pittsburgh (that I know of), but I am not willing to gamble everything I've worked for on the chance that it will stay that way.

Also, if anyone cares, we will be limiting the waiver/membership form to an annual agreement to make it easier for both sides.

The reason for the 60 day agreement was our insurance is weighted based on the number of "members". To avoid over-paying, we though it would help to make the term 60 days. That way if someone came to the first ride of the year and never came back, we weren't still paying for them.

To me, signing a waiver means that if some ugly driver kills me on a flock ride, my ugly driver relatives might hesitate before they sue Nick D.

Seems reasonable to me.

Nick doesn't want anyone to know, but if you sign the waiver, he will turn you into the human centiPad. He is building a really long tall tandem for it

I'm thinking about starting a group ride just to have participants sign "insurance waivers" to collect personal information to sell to telemarketers, identity thieves and corporate boogeymen.

@ALMKLM - You could corner the coveted "poor-as-dirt" demographic!

Privacy fears are not what turns me off about waivers. Any sane person realizes that any info on an insurance waiver, like your name, address and phone number, is readily available online.

@Brad:Privacy fears are not what turns me off about waivers.

Out of curiosity, what is it you dislike about them?

For me, asking others to sign waivers feels as if I'm treating them like children who require prompting to assume responsibility for themselves.

[ETA:]Note that, as I mentioned above, I don't mind _signing_ waivers, as I understand the majority of those people asking have good and valid reasons to do so.

I hate signing waivers and I hate asking people to sign them. However, they do (hopefully) make one pause to think about responsible behavior. And, unfortunately, even if an injured party were not inclined to pursue a lawsuit, one can be sure that their insurance company and/or family members might. I was quite worried about personal liability during the try a bike event: all it takes is one jack ass. Thankfully, Flock of Cycles was able to present the event and the participants were a great bunch. If that were not the case, I would probably limit it to close friends and hope for the best. That, too comes with risks.