Safety Forum?

[Ray916MN]

Over this past year there have been a number of posts with safety related content and we certainly have allot of riders with allot of riding experience as well as experience being safety instructors.

I was thinking about comments like one Ian made about "riding your own ride" not being well defined,as well as discussions of following distance, and thinking it might make sense to create a sub forum solely for these discussions, with the hope that discussions might be distilled into short informative posts which could be stickied to the top of the forum to serve as references for the forum on topics. Properly done, this might help us create a resource for the riding community and help us avoid the sometimes emotional unproductive rehashing of topics.

What does everyone think? Good idea, bad idea, who cares? What topics would people think need to be covered? Is focusing this closely on the topic, asking for Internet drama or a way to minimize it?

[Greg]

What does everyone think? Good idea, bad idea, who cares? What topics would people think need to be covered? Is focusing this closely on the topic, asking for Internet drama or a way to minimize it?

Good idea, and I think it's a way to minimize drama. Perhaps adding a "track" forum is an idea as well.

As a footnote, I'd like to add this. When I read a post, I see the author's face. When I'm then standing in front of that author, I remember the posts they have written. That's something I feel all of us need to remember. One can not separate themselves from their posts. You are your posts.

Greg not Steve

[Ray916MN]

What does everyone think? Good idea, bad idea, who cares? What topics would people think need to be covered? Is focusing this closely on the topic, asking for Internet drama or a way to minimize it?

Good idea, and I think it's a way to minimize drama. Perhaps adding a "track" forum is an idea as well.

As a footnote, I'd like to add this. When I read a post, I see the author's face. When I'm then standing in front of that author, I remember the posts they have written. That's something I feel all of us need to remember. One can not separate themselves from their posts. You are your posts.

Greg not Steve

Is this some subtle way of saying we're all dumbs as posts? 

[Aprilian]

I like the idea.   I suggest you narrowly define each topic and lock them when you think the subject has been well address.   I say that not to quiet comment or restrict discussion, but because it will be much more likely that readers will read a whole thread and get the important points before having to sift throug later posts where the thread devolves or repeats itself.   For example, the PACE thread would not teed to be open for 25 pages of comments.   

[Deplorable, thank you!]

 If you just take the pertinent posts from existing threads and compile them into sub categories.....or---you may have to severely edit new threads to just "cut to the point"---of course then you may as well just type what you think and damn anyone elses opinion, because essentially all you are doing is, posting the information you want conveyed.

I don't see how a thread started about anything safety won't have posts in it muddled with information that some are going to take offense to-and typically you need good clear cut examples to actually make the point properly...examples many can actually relate to-whether it is someone they ride with regularly so they know what the pace is, or video that actually shows speed etc in an environment everyone has been to. (ie...some road we frequently travel)---

Everyone is going to have their own idea on pretty much any topic, and there are always going to be people that refuse to see points the same way. If you edit posts or threads or "lock down" then you essentially aren't letting everyone have an equal voice, so again you may as well just post up what you want and damn anyone elses ideals or opinions.

This may actually work lots better-have a sub forum "safety" or whatever name you want to have it.
Then each individual can start their own thread and voice their own viewpoints. Of course some will comment in-but if you have them locked, likely there will be lots of individual threads commenting on other threads. Perhaps after some trial and error it would get better, perhaps it would just go the way all the threads go?

I don't think there is a right answer---or an easy one---or one that everyone will agree with (just like everything else in life) So you may as well just put up the sub forum and see what happens?

[Jared]

Great idea Ray, especially pulling together a distilled version.  The heart of the message in some of these threads can be drowned out by the shenanigans sometimes.

[Jared]

How about we vote what to name it... I vote "How not to suck when riding a motorcycle"

[Ray916MN]

I like the idea.   I suggest you narrowly define each topic and lock them when you think the subject has been well address.   I say that not to quiet comment or restrict discussion, but because it will be much more likely that readers will read a whole thread and get the important points before having to sift throug later posts where the thread devolves or repeats itself.   For example, the PACE thread would not teed to be open for 25 pages of comments.   

What I have in mind is either someone posting a short simple strawman for a sticky on a topic. Everybody comments. From the comments a trial sticky gets posted as a sticky, and everyone comments, and then a "final" sticky is made. The thread used for comment is never locked, so people can if they like see all the comments and discussion that went into creating the sticky and add their own if they feel something was missed. If something indeed was missed, then the sticky could be edited. No comments or responses would be allowed in the sticky itself and the sticky would have a link in it to the thread with comments on the sticky.

I think the Pace thread would simply be the Pace article posted and a link to thread discussing the Pace. Individual elements of the Pace article, such as not using your brakes could be singled out for their own sticky, so that comments around this could be focused on.

[Chris]

I like the idea.   I suggest you narrowly define each topic and lock them when you think the subject has been well address.   I say that not to quiet comment or restrict discussion, but because it will be much more likely that readers will read a whole thread and get the important points before having to sift throug later posts where the thread devolves or repeats itself.   For example, the PACE thread would not teed to be open for 25 pages of comments. 

I like the idea.
I don't like the locking it, if you don't want to read it don't new idea's and thoughts come up all the time and with that old topics can\should be rehashed.

The only other issue will be people with to thin of skin, the disclaimer needs to be if you post here you will be called names and your ideas will be shredded, deal with it.

[Aprilian]

HMMMMMMM - something get deleted?   Seems odd that Mike posted 3 times 15-20 minutes apart.   And now those posts are gone?
    I checked the URL, I though perhaps I had landed at ZG.   This is particularly  since I was proposing locking threads before they devolved 

[tk]

I'm guessing Mike deleted his posts.

BTW I'm not opposed to the ZG deletion policy. It works to keep discourse civil. I'm no fan of the wild west atmoshere over at MNSBR. It seems even the most odious postings are not deleted.

[Tim...]

Has there been a thread on this forum worthy of a sticky?

[Deplorable, thank you!]

There are topics worthy of sticky--it appears Rays intention is to link the thread to the stickied topic........I am not sure I understand what the intention is for how the original sticky will take place?

I understand what Ray is saying about just copying and pasting the "pace" article-then linking to a thread on the discussion of same......but how and who is writing the sticky on following distances? or any other subject that is deemed worthy of being "sticky".

Perhaps if I understood what is meant by a "strawman" maybe that would shed some light? Because I think that means something like a fall guy or liar...who wants to be that guy??? Furthermore how does that help or start a topic?

[Ray916MN]

There are topics worthy of sticky--it appears Rays intention is to link the thread to the stickied topic........I am not sure I understand what the intention is for how the original sticky will take place?

I understand what Ray is saying about just copying and pasting the "pace" article-then linking to a thread on the discussion of same......but how and who is writing the sticky on following distances? or any other subject that is deemed worthy of being "sticky".

Perhaps if I understood what is meant by a "strawman" maybe that would shed some light? Because I think that means something like a fall guy or liar...who wants to be that guy??? Furthermore how does that help or start a topic?

A strawman is a very rough draft. It is called a strawman because it is a draft which is intended to be beaten up. The idea is have a draft, have the draft rewritten and rewritten. If you've ever look at Wikipedia, this is how the entries get created. The content that makes the final needs to be factually supported or linked to external references to have validity and/or agreed upon by the majority.

So for example, with respect to following distance 2 seconds (MSF) might be cited as the minimum following distance recommended. Reaction times from linked braking studies might be used in conjunction with following distances to calculate how much "safety margin" there is in a 2 second following distance.

If additional information is to be added, it must be supported by a reference or facts or logical derivation (ie. math). No my experience, or I once read stuff. To be used in the sticky, what was read needs to be specifically referenced so it can be read by others, If it is specifically referenced it can be summarized to ad to the sticky.

Some topics are not going to lend themselves to this type of academic treatment, for example "riding your own ride". To tackle something like this, the sticky might be "how you know you're not riding your own ride" and another might be "how you know you're riding your own ride". People propose for stuff to be on the list and if a significant majority agree, then it gets put on the list.

In general though, the idea is to try to use a Wikipedia like approach. Anyone who is interested can read more about Wikipedia here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia . Unfortunately I will not be implementing a Wiki to do this, so we would be heavily reliant on civil and open discourse. Doubly unfortunately, the initial discourse in this thread does not give me much hope for our forum being able to do this.

For example, the definition of obdurate from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/obdurate is "unmoved by persuasion, pity, or tender feelings; stubborn; unyielding." . This characteristic is not conducive to the type of collaborative effort that it takes to do a Wiki. Of course, that's only my opinion and I am open to persuasion.

[Deplorable, thank you!]

 I think you underestimate the group.


My screen name does not represent how I view myself, rather it is a mocking of those who have felt the need to call me 3 very similar names in the past 3 months----all obviously were looked up in the dictionary, since they are all on the same page of the dictionary and since I don't view these words as words used in everyday language. So if you want to pick out my name as a reference for a reason you have no hope........