Isn't that just typical *political* BS? That is, most politicians are out of touch with their so-called constituents and their needs. Likewise, they all engage in political maneuvering and publicity stunts, etc. What's special about Sam?

Also, I would like to know who you think "most of you" is. (Aside: thanks for the juicy bone, Sam!) We're not a mindless herd, you know, regardless of any biased generalizations that may be inferred from the content and comments of this or any other Web site.

Personally, I think your concern is valid (even if I can't see a reason for your invective). On the other hand, it seems to me that this cycle track or similar projects may serve a useful purpose--I'm not sure yet, but I definitely don't see the attempt as "worthless."

Please explain how Jonathan or Elly have *anything* to do with the creation or promotion of the law that dictates that "...[cyclists] are banned from any motorist lane in Oregon where there is a bike-lane present."

Also, I know for a fact that both Jonathan and Elly "actually ride bikes." I've seen both of them in the act, on multiple occasions. I'm pretty sure it's not just a fad for them, and they're not just in it for the fame and money.

That said, I do agree with the concern you raise with regard to bike lanes and access to the public right-of-way (please forgive me if this isn't a perfectly accurate interpretation). I'll even go out on a limb and guess that J & E share this concern as well, although they may have different opinions about solutions.

cycletrack provides more space for slower, less stable riding on uphill stretches.

Cycletrack is not in the 'Door Zone'

cycletrack provides a method for turning left when crossing two lanes of traffic is not possible or safe. Current alternative is to cycle in the pedestrian crosswalk areas, which is also not safe.

Nothing currently prevents a cyclist from taking the left lane to do a vehicular left turn. While I personally like the cycletrack, I'd hate to see bikes banned from vehicle roads. Portland's roads are not close to supporting fully segregated infrastructure.

"I think you misunderstand how this blog works, not to mention how advocacy works."

Really? Seriously? I personally insult you? What, exactly, about statements of this sort do you find flattering Elly? You, a 20 something noob fresh off the boat. I've had a web-log since before there was such a thing. Who are you to tell me what a blog is, and how they work? As if they're anything but a pop-culture reference in the first place. Ridiculous and highly insulting to my intelligence (Judging from your email, how about a lesson in contemporary email etiquette and protocol?). Who are you to come to my hometown, one in which I've skidded down the road on my butt more miles than you've likely even ridden a bike here, to dictate to me how to be an effective advocate?

Furthermore, you are the one editing a news-site, who when challenged about bias and other amateur-hour B.S., are all of a sudden a blog. You are the one who finds insult in the opinion that you are not dedicated, and are in fact not qualified as a result. Besides which, I live under a dog-pile here, and I've seen you two censor precisely two of these often intensely personal attacks against me. And it's not just me. There are other regulars who are in fairly cogent, albeit often highly irritated, dissent; and they get the same treatment.

My mode of speech, as both your senior, and likely as a much more dedicated advocate, are absolutely none of your business. I was raised to view unsolicited criticism of this sort as an insult, and I find your insensitivity infuriating. You and Jonathan dictate to me what I may say, and how I may say it, and then turn around and write me snide little comments like this, when I do what you say. I mean seriously, why do you guys even allow comments? Right. Hence the finger pointing. Figure it out girl.

It's just beyond you isn't it? I went to your little soy-coccoa hug-a-thons. I listen to you all disclaim every word out of your mouths before you say anything, which by that time is less than nothing. I watched all of this while conservative economically driven interests in this state have laughed all the way to the bank. While you are chastising my mode of speech a transportation stake-holders' staff is pouring over legal precedent in hopes of finding a way to make the state enforce 811.420. When you are not censoring my every word, you are tirelessly advocating for the rope these people are going to hang us both with.

You may sense bitterness. How would you feel if 2 million kids moved to your hometown and set about undoing two decades of advocacy you'd just participated in?

I think you misunderstand how this blog works, not to mention how advocacy works.

If you want someone to be on board with your cause, there are proven ways to do that. How about promoting the cause in a constructive and newsworthy way yourself. As reporters, we'd be thrilled to be able to cover a new initiative to affect how bike infrastructure is built and used -- yes, whether we agreed with it or not.

Throwing insults around doesn't help your cause with us, and I doubt the tone of this post will encourage others to join you. If you want to build a movement, you may want to change your tone.

Also, this is not the tone we want set in the conversation on this site. Please respect this forum even if you can't respect us personally. That's what civil discourse is all about.