Wow. Jerk much? Or are you just trying to reinforce stereotypes about American ignorance and arrogance?

Having read your posts in this thread both previously and again now, where does your strong preference for no comments from strangers while exercising imply that when you ask hypothetical questions, a commenter on an open forum is failing by responding to that?

What does being a woman have to do with being mean?

Your brain asked for a reason why you might be given a thumbs up. I gave it one positive one that immediately came to mind. That is all.

Not a video I want to watch. Ever. This women is a really strong argument for contraceptives in the water.

How about because you're on a bike, and I'm on my ass in my car? One of us is automatically healthier right there, IMO.

Enough, already. You've gone far beyond anything necessary to make the point you intended. Now, you're just being mean.

Your "thank you, I guess," is a beautiful response. It will leave someone with good intentions thinking about why you've said it that way and shut up the few who really are just mean jerks. I'll have to think about ways to use that.

Marking has nothing to do with whether the cyclist hit the vehicle. It has everything to do with whether the vehicle "had a right to be there." Vehicles servicing sensitive areas are normally marked, and that it's not just some asshat driving where they shouldn't. Which is apparently the case here - some asshat who's…

Oh, the Jalop comments were more than enough, I agree.

(Hating Kinja at the mo.)

Not requesting further explanation from you, since I've read all of the non-apology apologies, right up to the "at no point here did I blame the cyclist." You indirectly did through your choice of comments, and that would be the reason I pointed it out. Apologizing for making the douchey comment, then denying blaming…

An unmarked maintenance vehicle? Really? Look again.

Hmm... it's apparent you don't consider your curiosity about the cyclist's behaviours at all an attempt to pass blame from the driver of the vehicle. That is, however, how it's being perceived. With the added douchey biker comments, it can be interpreted no other way.

Nah, in a perfect world we'd have drivers, cyclists and pedestrians who respected each other.

And you get to define what's right and just.

Being subtle is a long term strategy of building familiarity through knowledge. It doesn't require your sledgehammers, but as I said, do have fun with that.

Yours is not the only path to the right end, despite your proselytizing.

Calling the restaurateur "the oppressor" is a bit much, but in essence you're correct, since he represents "the system" in this instance.

Da fuck? You really have no point to make, but like to attack, don't you?