Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Homebuilt on June 4, 2009 at 9:48am

Don't you remember Cannondale's 4-chainring set up in the 80's?


Yeah, neither do I.


I suppose you could do a 14 speed Rohloff w/a front derailler.

o0_dan_0o said:

yeah the 2x7 x 2 speed gear hub was what i came up with too, but i didnt think they existed..

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tiberculosis on June 5, 2009 at 2:59am

That's awesome that you sent this to them and great that they actually responded. It seems like a great idea and doesn't seem fair to just just rip it up without letting them know our concerns, I don't see anyone else attempting this. I did see that there is the ability to rate and comment on the result that the program gives you. Safe seems to be a relative term in these regards, they should just split it out to bike lane/path or street.

Julie Hochstadter said:

From the Editor at Urban Daddy -

Hi Julia--

Thanks for letting us see this discussion.

One thing we didn't get into in this piece is that the RTC was designed
to accept feedback with regard to the routes. I think the ultimate
vision of this site is to adopt a sort of a "crowd sourcing"
strategy--so if a route it deems as a good bike route is really not that
good by the users, it allows feedback for you to suggest alternatives,
which presumably will make their way into the routing software.

I hope you're sharing your concerns with the folks at ridethecity.com.
They seem very genuine, earnest and real biking enthusiasts. I am sure
they would love to hear your thoughts and the thoughts of the Chain
Link.

Best wishes,
Chris LaMorte
Editor
UrbanDaddy

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Julie Aberman (Hochstadter) on June 5, 2009 at 5:23pm

Agreed. the site should have researched chicago streets better and/or contacted some chicago cyclists for advice. NO cyclist would recommend riding down Ashland especially when there are so many parallel streets, many with bike lanes (at least on the north side).



h3 said:

Tiberculosis said:It seems like a great idea and doesn't seem fair to just just rip it up without letting them know our concerns, I don't see anyone else attempting this.

The last time this was discussed here the people behind it participated in the discussion. It was assumed they would again this time. Feel free to contact them and give them a heads-up. Discussions stay active here as long as someone is participating.
I think it's a bit unfair of you to dismiss the commentary here as "ripping up" when several people took the time to describe exactly what their problem was.
My main point is really that it's irresponsible to go live with this while it's still sending unwitting cyclists down streets that many riders lost their lives on (I'll name them if you want me to) when much better options are available nearby. I was disappointed to see that they're pursuing promotion and publicity while it's still very much a beta.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jordan Anderson on June 6, 2009 at 3:01am

Hey all, I thought I'd respond to some of the comments here -- most of which I think are valid critiques.

I'm Jordan, one of the two guys from Ride the City. I'm a former Chicago bike commuter and now a cyclist and bicycle advocate in NYC. There is an about us page on Ride the City, but to dispel any misconceptions, we are never going to charge money for the use of this site. In fact we mostly just spend money at the moment -- on hosting and in the time we put into the site in evenings and weekends. (We both have day jobs.)

Our first cut at determining safe routes was based on the Chicago bicycle map and my experience as a Chicago cyclist, and is now based on user feedback. We are effectively finding the shortest path, but giving extra weight to streets and paths that are noted as recommended on the bike map, recommended by other cyclists, or have bike lanes or other facilities. In addition, we have taken entire classes of arterials and secondary roads that do not have bike lanes and effectively downgraded them, making it possible for a route to suggest them, but unlikely.

The mechanism for letting us know there is a problem with a suggested route is through the feedback form (see the link on the menu bar). We especially need your feedback after you run routes you dislike. That lets us look at exactly the route that was suggested and adjust it based on your suggestions. For example, there was a comment about Ashland Avenue being a dangerous one for cyclists. Agreed, but I've just run a bunch of 'safer' routes that could potentially use Ashland and it hasn't been suggested. The weighting system is complex (we're talking about a database of every block in the City of Chicago) so it helps us identify the problem areas quickly if you use the feedback form.

We appreciate your feedback very much -- that's the thing that's going to make the site better for everybody. So please keep it coming!

Thanks,
Jordan
jordan@ridethecity.com

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Julie Aberman (Hochstadter) on June 6, 2009 at 7:11am

Jordan, Thanks so much for posting your response here. Good luck with the site! Great idea!



Jordan Anderson said:

Hey all, I thought I'd respond to some of the comments here -- most of which I think are valid critiques.

I'm Jordan, one of the two guys from Ride the City. I'm a former Chicago bike commuter and now a cyclist and bicycle advocate in NYC. There is an about us page on Ride the City, but to dispel any misconceptions, we are never going to charge money for the use of this site. In fact we mostly just spend money at the moment -- on hosting and in the time we put into the site in evenings and weekends. (We both have day jobs.)

Our first cut at determining safe routes was based on the Chicago bicycle map and my experience as a Chicago cyclist, and is now based on user feedback. We are effectively finding the shortest path, but giving extra weight to streets and paths that are noted as recommended on the bike map, recommended by other cyclists, or have bike lanes or other facilities. In addition, we have taken entire classes of arterials and secondary roads that do not have bike lanes and effectively downgraded them, making it possible for a route to suggest them, but unlikely.

The mechanism for letting us know there is a problem with a suggested route is through the feedback form (see the link on the menu bar). We especially need your feedback after you run routes you dislike. That lets us look at exactly the route that was suggested and adjust it based on your suggestions. For example, there was a comment about Ashland Avenue being a dangerous one for cyclists. Agreed, but I've just run a bunch of 'safer' routes that could potentially use Ashland and it hasn't been suggested. The weighting system is complex (we're talking about a database of every block in the City of Chicago) so it helps us identify the problem areas quickly if you use the feedback form.

We appreciate your feedback very much -- that's the thing that's going to make the site better for everybody. So please keep it coming!

Thanks,
Jordan
jordan@ridethecity.com

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tiberculosis on June 7, 2009 at 12:03pm

Sorry, I was unaware of past participation on this particular sites efforts. I was aware of the Google "bike there" petition thing, but not Ride The City's. So in commenting on the "ripping up", I figured those folks (ride the city) would not be seeing the comments on the Chainlink and only we would be seeing the criticisms.

I do stand by the fact that a site calling any route "safe" could get them into trouble and is pretty irresponsible. There are many dangers even on pathed streets, trails, etc. Potholes...Hello?!?!, kids getting out of school. playing in the street, traffic at different times of day, things you can't count on or map. This project does seem pretty ambitious and I wish them luck, glad to see that they are aware of our comments here and are actually responding.

Julie Hochstadter said:

Agreed. the site should have researched chicago streets better and/or contacted some chicago cyclists for advice. NO cyclist would recommend riding down Ashland especially when there are so many parallel streets, many with bike lanes (at least on the north side).



h3 said:

Tiberculosis said:It seems like a great idea and doesn't seem fair to just just rip it up without letting them know our concerns, I don't see anyone else attempting this.

The last time this was discussed here the people behind it participated in the discussion. It was assumed they would again this time. Feel free to contact them and give them a heads-up. Discussions stay active here as long as someone is participating.
I think it's a bit unfair of you to dismiss the commentary here as "ripping up" when several people took the time to describe exactly what their problem was.
My main point is really that it's irresponsible to go live with this while it's still sending unwitting cyclists down streets that many riders lost their lives on (I'll name them if you want me to) when much better options are available nearby. I was disappointed to see that they're pursuing promotion and publicity while it's still very much a beta.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page