Physicians Assistant yelling “HELP ME” while stealing a CitiBike ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tbh this is a mess. No judge would find more/less fault on either of these people.

-She tried to take a bike someone else was holding onto, after she asked to use it and he told her no, he was about to use it.

-he was guarding a bike he wasn’t ready to use yet.

They were both wrong. I don’t know why anyone is taking either side here, since they were both wrong, except pure tribalism. I think if races/genders were flipped all of you would be flipping sides too.

If races/genders were switched, there would be no online mob against the person who yelled for help. If anything the online mob would come for the white woman in the scenario anyway!

Exactly.

Well…right. That’s why it’s called “weaponizing white tears”, because black men often get shot by cops with little justification, and at first people thought she was pretending to be in danger from these guys when she was the aggressor.

She didn’t call the cops, though. She eventually got off and rented a different bike. The video proves that. So all these “weaponizing her tears to get him killed” scenarios don’t make a lot of sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The sister’s video makes a big deal about there being other bikes, but perhaps this was the only electric bike there, which is why she told them she was pregnant before the video starts.

But yeah, why would he ride a bike he intended to keep using up to the docks and actually dock it?

Because with a Citibike membership, you get the first 45 minutes for free. Look at his sister's receipt she posted - he had the e-bike for 47 minutes, with a charge of $0.37 for the two minutes over the 45 minutes. I've seen this a lot in NYC with kids, they will use the bike for 45 minutes, let it sit in the rack for a bit, and then take it out again for another 45 minute ride.

Lyft/Citibike just launced the new e-bikes in late April, so they are rare and very desirable to get: https://www.timeout.com/newyork/news/lyft-has-unveiled-new-electric-citi-bikes-in-nyc-042922-1

These teens likely got some e-bikes and were planning on riding them around the city for the evening. As I understood it, they may have had some special promotional codes to use the e-bikes for free. Here's the Citibike charge rates for annual members:

The first 45 minutes of each ride on a classic Citi Bike are included in the annual membership price.

When you upgrade your ride to an ebike, it will be an extra $0.17/min, capped at $3 for rides 45 minutes or less that enter or exit Manhattan.

If you keep a bike out for longer than 45 minutes at a time, regardless of the type, it's $0.17 per minute.

If you incur any extra time or ebike upgrade fees, your card on file will be charged. The fee for a lost or stolen bike is $1200 (+ tax).

If you take an e-bike in/out of Manhattan, you can use it for 45 minutes for only $3. My guess is that they were probably going to take the bikes further down into lower Manhattan after "resetting" the bikes at this docking station to get another fresh 45 minutes of use. Then maybe cross the bridge into Brooklyn for a $3 ride.

With a group of kids, they could probably all dock at the same time and then switch bikes with each other, so it's a new 45 minute ride. They may have been taking a rest at these docks before starting their new ride.

And yeah, a lot of NY'ers will support his actions because there's an unwritten code about not snaking a Citibike for someone waiting for reset of the 45 minutes. Similarly, you don't snake any empty spot on a full Citibike dock if other people are already waiting to return the bike in their possession. The PA likely violated the social code of the Citibikes, but then he escalated by forcing her back onto the dock.

So he was basically scamming then... yeah. Whether or not that's normalized in NYC it's not looking good for this group of losers. The more information that comes out the more it's obvious they were in the wrong

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tbh this is a mess. No judge would find more/less fault on either of these people.

-She tried to take a bike someone else was holding onto, after she asked to use it and he told her no, he was about to use it.

-he was guarding a bike he wasn’t ready to use yet.

They were both wrong. I don’t know why anyone is taking either side here, since they were both wrong, except pure tribalism. I think if races/genders were flipped all of you would be flipping sides too.

If races/genders were switched, there would be no online mob against the person who yelled for help. If anything the online mob would come for the white woman in the scenario anyway!

Exactly.

Well…right. That’s why it’s called “weaponizing white tears”, because black men often get shot by cops with little justification, and at first people thought she was pretending to be in danger from these guys when she was the aggressor.

Often? Come on now. This thread is just making it clearer than in the future the cops should be called to avoid engaging with the aggressor. Let the cops sort it out. Who has the time to wait and see if Twitter mobs thinks a woman is actually in danger or not? It's not up for a group vote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tbh this is a mess. No judge would find more/less fault on either of these people.

-She tried to take a bike someone else was holding onto, after she asked to use it and he told her no, he was about to use it.

-he was guarding a bike he wasn’t ready to use yet.

They were both wrong. I don’t know why anyone is taking either side here, since they were both wrong, except pure tribalism. I think if races/genders were flipped all of you would be flipping sides too.

If races/genders were switched, there would be no online mob against the person who yelled for help. If anything the online mob would come for the white woman in the scenario anyway!

Exactly.

Well…right. That’s why it’s called “weaponizing white tears”, because black men often get shot by cops with little justification, and at first people thought she was pretending to be in danger from these guys when she was the aggressor.

She didn’t call the cops, though. She eventually got off and rented a different bike. The video proves that. So all these “weaponizing her tears to get him killed” scenarios don’t make a lot of sense.

PP here. Right. But I’m explaining why this situation doesn’t really hit the same if “races/genders are reversed”. Like…there’s not going to be a black guy “weaponizing tears” because a group of white female teenagers re-docked his bike.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The sister’s video makes a big deal about there being other bikes, but perhaps this was the only electric bike there, which is why she told them she was pregnant before the video starts.

But yeah, why would he ride a bike he intended to keep using up to the docks and actually dock it?

Because with a Citibike membership, you get the first 45 minutes for free. Look at his sister's receipt she posted - he had the e-bike for 47 minutes, with a charge of $0.37 for the two minutes over the 45 minutes. I've seen this a lot in NYC with kids, they will use the bike for 45 minutes, let it sit in the rack for a bit, and then take it out again for another 45 minute ride.

Lyft/Citibike just launced the new e-bikes in late April, so they are rare and very desirable to get: https://www.timeout.com/newyork/news/lyft-has-unveiled-new-electric-citi-bikes-in-nyc-042922-1

These teens likely got some e-bikes and were planning on riding them around the city for the evening. As I understood it, they may have had some special promotional codes to use the e-bikes for free. Here's the Citibike charge rates for annual members:

The first 45 minutes of each ride on a classic Citi Bike are included in the annual membership price.

When you upgrade your ride to an ebike, it will be an extra $0.17/min, capped at $3 for rides 45 minutes or less that enter or exit Manhattan.

If you keep a bike out for longer than 45 minutes at a time, regardless of the type, it's $0.17 per minute.

If you incur any extra time or ebike upgrade fees, your card on file will be charged. The fee for a lost or stolen bike is $1200 (+ tax).

If you take an e-bike in/out of Manhattan, you can use it for 45 minutes for only $3. My guess is that they were probably going to take the bikes further down into lower Manhattan after "resetting" the bikes at this docking station to get another fresh 45 minutes of use. Then maybe cross the bridge into Brooklyn for a $3 ride.

With a group of kids, they could probably all dock at the same time and then switch bikes with each other, so it's a new 45 minute ride. They may have been taking a rest at these docks before starting their new ride.

And yeah, a lot of NY'ers will support his actions because there's an unwritten code about not snaking a Citibike for someone waiting for reset of the 45 minutes. Similarly, you don't snake any empty spot on a full Citibike dock if other people are already waiting to return the bike in their possession. The PA likely violated the social code of the Citibikes, but then he escalated by forcing her back onto the dock.

So he was basically scamming then... yeah. Whether or not that's normalized in NYC it's not looking good for this group of losers. The more information that comes out the more it's obvious they were in the wrong

Living in NYC is all about playing the system to your advantage. There's a reason why the phrase "don't hate the player, hate the game" was coined by a modern philosopher from Jersey.

She violated the rules of the street. He violated the rules of polite society. There's no Good Guy here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The sister’s video makes a big deal about there being other bikes, but perhaps this was the only electric bike there, which is why she told them she was pregnant before the video starts.

But yeah, why would he ride a bike he intended to keep using up to the docks and actually dock it?

Because with a Citibike membership, you get the first 45 minutes for free. Look at his sister's receipt she posted - he had the e-bike for 47 minutes, with a charge of $0.37 for the two minutes over the 45 minutes. I've seen this a lot in NYC with kids, they will use the bike for 45 minutes, let it sit in the rack for a bit, and then take it out again for another 45 minute ride.

Lyft/Citibike just launced the new e-bikes in late April, so they are rare and very desirable to get: https://www.timeout.com/newyork/news/lyft-has-unveiled-new-electric-citi-bikes-in-nyc-042922-1

These teens likely got some e-bikes and were planning on riding them around the city for the evening. As I understood it, they may have had some special promotional codes to use the e-bikes for free. Here's the Citibike charge rates for annual members:

The first 45 minutes of each ride on a classic Citi Bike are included in the annual membership price.

When you upgrade your ride to an ebike, it will be an extra $0.17/min, capped at $3 for rides 45 minutes or less that enter or exit Manhattan.

If you keep a bike out for longer than 45 minutes at a time, regardless of the type, it's $0.17 per minute.

If you incur any extra time or ebike upgrade fees, your card on file will be charged. The fee for a lost or stolen bike is $1200 (+ tax).

If you take an e-bike in/out of Manhattan, you can use it for 45 minutes for only $3. My guess is that they were probably going to take the bikes further down into lower Manhattan after "resetting" the bikes at this docking station to get another fresh 45 minutes of use. Then maybe cross the bridge into Brooklyn for a $3 ride.

With a group of kids, they could probably all dock at the same time and then switch bikes with each other, so it's a new 45 minute ride. They may have been taking a rest at these docks before starting their new ride.

And yeah, a lot of NY'ers will support his actions because there's an unwritten code about not snaking a Citibike for someone waiting for reset of the 45 minutes. Similarly, you don't snake any empty spot on a full Citibike dock if other people are already waiting to return the bike in their possession. The PA likely violated the social code of the Citibikes, but then he escalated by forcing her back onto the dock.

So he was basically scamming then... yeah. Whether or not that's normalized in NYC it's not looking good for this group of losers. The more information that comes out the more it's obvious they were in the wrong

Living in NYC is all about playing the system to your advantage. There's a reason why the phrase "don't hate the player, hate the game" was coined by a modern philosopher from Jersey.

She violated the rules of the street. He violated the rules of polite society. There's no Good Guy here.

LOL. "Rules of the street" is not a real thing. Try using that one in a court of law, bud. She was clearly in the right and there's no talking your way out of it

[Anonymous]

Another factor:

When you use the app to locate a bike, it will tell you how many e-bikes versus regular bikes are a particular station. If you take bikeshare to commute, it's common to check nearby stations on your app before you even leave your workplace, and choose the one with most bikes, and if you want an e-bike, the one most likely to have e-bikes.

That's the problem with the guy docking the bike to reset it. If he did so, the bike will show up people's apps as available, and someone might walk t that exact station specifically to grab that bike. The app doesn't say "1 e-bike but a guy wants to use it in 3 minutes once his app resets."

I personally would be incredibly annoyed if I went to a station specifically to use an e-bike I knew was there, only to be told that I couldn't have it because someone else was going to rent it in a few minutes. Especially if I'd just worked a long day, and especially if I was pregnant.

Also, regarding whether he was near or touching the bike when she got on it -- she says he wasn't, his sister says he was. Generally with a dispute like that, I'm betting the truth is somewhere in between. Like he was nearby but not right next to it, and the PA might have suspected he was waiting on the bike but decided "eh, it's the last e-bike and I'm ready to rent it now, tough" and got on anyway. I don't take either of them 100% at their word, but I still think the PA is more in the right because she actually rented the bike and because I find the guys' behavior in getting physical with her to be absolutely crossing a line that no one should cross. Don't lay hands on a person over a bike, come on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The sister’s video makes a big deal about there being other bikes, but perhaps this was the only electric bike there, which is why she told them she was pregnant before the video starts.

But yeah, why would he ride a bike he intended to keep using up to the docks and actually dock it?

Because with a Citibike membership, you get the first 45 minutes for free. Look at his sister's receipt she posted - he had the e-bike for 47 minutes, with a charge of $0.37 for the two minutes over the 45 minutes. I've seen this a lot in NYC with kids, they will use the bike for 45 minutes, let it sit in the rack for a bit, and then take it out again for another 45 minute ride.

Lyft/Citibike just launced the new e-bikes in late April, so they are rare and very desirable to get: https://www.timeout.com/newyork/news/lyft-has-unveiled-new-electric-citi-bikes-in-nyc-042922-1

These teens likely got some e-bikes and were planning on riding them around the city for the evening. As I understood it, they may have had some special promotional codes to use the e-bikes for free. Here's the Citibike charge rates for annual members:

The first 45 minutes of each ride on a classic Citi Bike are included in the annual membership price.

When you upgrade your ride to an ebike, it will be an extra $0.17/min, capped at $3 for rides 45 minutes or less that enter or exit Manhattan.

If you keep a bike out for longer than 45 minutes at a time, regardless of the type, it's $0.17 per minute.

If you incur any extra time or ebike upgrade fees, your card on file will be charged. The fee for a lost or stolen bike is $1200 (+ tax).

If you take an e-bike in/out of Manhattan, you can use it for 45 minutes for only $3. My guess is that they were probably going to take the bikes further down into lower Manhattan after "resetting" the bikes at this docking station to get another fresh 45 minutes of use. Then maybe cross the bridge into Brooklyn for a $3 ride.

With a group of kids, they could probably all dock at the same time and then switch bikes with each other, so it's a new 45 minute ride. They may have been taking a rest at these docks before starting their new ride.

And yeah, a lot of NY'ers will support his actions because there's an unwritten code about not snaking a Citibike for someone waiting for reset of the 45 minutes. Similarly, you don't snake any empty spot on a full Citibike dock if other people are already waiting to return the bike in their possession. The PA likely violated the social code of the Citibikes, but then he escalated by forcing her back onto the dock.

So he was basically scamming then... yeah. Whether or not that's normalized in NYC it's not looking good for this group of losers. The more information that comes out the more it's obvious they were in the wrong

Living in NYC is all about playing the system to your advantage. There's a reason why the phrase "don't hate the player, hate the game" was coined by a modern philosopher from Jersey.

She violated the rules of the street. He violated the rules of polite society. There's no Good Guy here.

If the bike was docked for 6-7 minutes (per the receipt) and he wasn’t near it (she says; sister claims a little implausibly that the pregnant nurse “jumped over” her brother), she didn’t violate anything. If a bunch of guys ran up and redocked the bike with her on it, that explains her surprise and that she thought she was entitled to this unowned bike.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The sister’s video makes a big deal about there being other bikes, but perhaps this was the only electric bike there, which is why she told them she was pregnant before the video starts.

But yeah, why would he ride a bike he intended to keep using up to the docks and actually dock it?

Because with a Citibike membership, you get the first 45 minutes for free. Look at his sister's receipt she posted - he had the e-bike for 47 minutes, with a charge of $0.37 for the two minutes over the 45 minutes. I've seen this a lot in NYC with kids, they will use the bike for 45 minutes, let it sit in the rack for a bit, and then take it out again for another 45 minute ride.

Lyft/Citibike just launced the new e-bikes in late April, so they are rare and very desirable to get: https://www.timeout.com/newyork/news/lyft-has-unveiled-new-electric-citi-bikes-in-nyc-042922-1

These teens likely got some e-bikes and were planning on riding them around the city for the evening. As I understood it, they may have had some special promotional codes to use the e-bikes for free. Here's the Citibike charge rates for annual members:

The first 45 minutes of each ride on a classic Citi Bike are included in the annual membership price.

When you upgrade your ride to an ebike, it will be an extra $0.17/min, capped at $3 for rides 45 minutes or less that enter or exit Manhattan.

If you keep a bike out for longer than 45 minutes at a time, regardless of the type, it's $0.17 per minute.

If you incur any extra time or ebike upgrade fees, your card on file will be charged. The fee for a lost or stolen bike is $1200 (+ tax).

If you take an e-bike in/out of Manhattan, you can use it for 45 minutes for only $3. My guess is that they were probably going to take the bikes further down into lower Manhattan after "resetting" the bikes at this docking station to get another fresh 45 minutes of use. Then maybe cross the bridge into Brooklyn for a $3 ride.

With a group of kids, they could probably all dock at the same time and then switch bikes with each other, so it's a new 45 minute ride. They may have been taking a rest at these docks before starting their new ride.

And yeah, a lot of NY'ers will support his actions because there's an unwritten code about not snaking a Citibike for someone waiting for reset of the 45 minutes. Similarly, you don't snake any empty spot on a full Citibike dock if other people are already waiting to return the bike in their possession. The PA likely violated the social code of the Citibikes, but then he escalated by forcing her back onto the dock.

So he was basically scamming then... yeah. Whether or not that's normalized in NYC it's not looking good for this group of losers. The more information that comes out the more it's obvious they were in the wrong

Living in NYC is all about playing the system to your advantage. There's a reason why the phrase "don't hate the player, hate the game" was coined by a modern philosopher from Jersey.

She violated the rules of the street. He violated the rules of polite society. There's no Good Guy here.

I actually do think there's a "Good Guy" here because I subscribe to the rules of polite society and don't care about the rules of the street when the come into conflict.

Like the rules of the street might dictate that you can kill someone if they steal from you, but if I'm on a jury for that case, I don't really care -- murder is morally wrong and also illegal and you don't get to make up different rules because you want to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tbh this is a mess. No judge would find more/less fault on either of these people.

-She tried to take a bike someone else was holding onto, after she asked to use it and he told her no, he was about to use it.

-he was guarding a bike he wasn’t ready to use yet.

They were both wrong. I don’t know why anyone is taking either side here, since they were both wrong, except pure tribalism. I think if races/genders were flipped all of you would be flipping sides too.

If races/genders were switched, there would be no online mob against the person who yelled for help. If anything the online mob would come for the white woman in the scenario anyway!

Exactly.

Well…right. That’s why it’s called “weaponizing white tears”, because black men often get shot by cops with little justification, and at first people thought she was pretending to be in danger from these guys when she was the aggressor.

She didn’t call the cops, though. She eventually got off and rented a different bike. The video proves that. So all these “weaponizing her tears to get him killed” scenarios don’t make a lot of sense.

That was always, from the moment the videographer yells "fake crying" on the video, an argument they were making to justify their abuse of her. It was an excuse for disregarding her well being. The people who have been attacking her have also argued that she's either faking her pregnancy or using her pregnancy to try and elicit sympathy -- they cannot just allow "yes, this woman is pregnant and might be more sensitive to being touched or pushed in the stomach."

Every argument is designed to dehumanize her and deny that she has any rights here or that anything she says or does should be treated as valid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The sister’s video makes a big deal about there being other bikes, but perhaps this was the only electric bike there, which is why she told them she was pregnant before the video starts.

But yeah, why would he ride a bike he intended to keep using up to the docks and actually dock it?

Because with a Citibike membership, you get the first 45 minutes for free. Look at his sister's receipt she posted - he had the e-bike for 47 minutes, with a charge of $0.37 for the two minutes over the 45 minutes. I've seen this a lot in NYC with kids, they will use the bike for 45 minutes, let it sit in the rack for a bit, and then take it out again for another 45 minute ride.

Lyft/Citibike just launced the new e-bikes in late April, so they are rare and very desirable to get: https://www.timeout.com/newyork/news/lyft-has-unveiled-new-electric-citi-bikes-in-nyc-042922-1

These teens likely got some e-bikes and were planning on riding them around the city for the evening. As I understood it, they may have had some special promotional codes to use the e-bikes for free. Here's the Citibike charge rates for annual members:

The first 45 minutes of each ride on a classic Citi Bike are included in the annual membership price.

When you upgrade your ride to an ebike, it will be an extra $0.17/min, capped at $3 for rides 45 minutes or less that enter or exit Manhattan.

If you keep a bike out for longer than 45 minutes at a time, regardless of the type, it's $0.17 per minute.

If you incur any extra time or ebike upgrade fees, your card on file will be charged. The fee for a lost or stolen bike is $1200 (+ tax).

If you take an e-bike in/out of Manhattan, you can use it for 45 minutes for only $3. My guess is that they were probably going to take the bikes further down into lower Manhattan after "resetting" the bikes at this docking station to get another fresh 45 minutes of use. Then maybe cross the bridge into Brooklyn for a $3 ride.

With a group of kids, they could probably all dock at the same time and then switch bikes with each other, so it's a new 45 minute ride. They may have been taking a rest at these docks before starting their new ride.

And yeah, a lot of NY'ers will support his actions because there's an unwritten code about not snaking a Citibike for someone waiting for reset of the 45 minutes. Similarly, you don't snake any empty spot on a full Citibike dock if other people are already waiting to return the bike in their possession. The PA likely violated the social code of the Citibikes, but then he escalated by forcing her back onto the dock.

So he was basically scamming then... yeah. Whether or not that's normalized in NYC it's not looking good for this group of losers. The more information that comes out the more it's obvious they were in the wrong

Living in NYC is all about playing the system to your advantage. There's a reason why the phrase "don't hate the player, hate the game" was coined by a modern philosopher from Jersey.

She violated the rules of the street. He violated the rules of polite society. There's no Good Guy here.

I actually do think there's a "Good Guy" here because I subscribe to the rules of polite society and don't care about the rules of the street when the come into conflict.

Like the rules of the street might dictate that you can kill someone if they steal from you, but if I'm on a jury for that case, I don't really care -- murder is morally wrong and also illegal and you don't get to make up different rules because you want to.

There's a lot of people from NYC who would disagree with you and would argue that she "started it." I know, it's all very juvenile.

I'd want to know more about how close he was to the bike. If it was obvious to her that the kids were taking a break and waiting for the bikes, she's pretty snake-like to try to take it. You don't do that in NYC, there's unwritten codes of conduct that apply in NYC (and don't make sense elsewhere). Scarcity mindset is for real in NYC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The sister’s video makes a big deal about there being other bikes, but perhaps this was the only electric bike there, which is why she told them she was pregnant before the video starts.

But yeah, why would he ride a bike he intended to keep using up to the docks and actually dock it?

Because with a Citibike membership, you get the first 45 minutes for free. Look at his sister's receipt she posted - he had the e-bike for 47 minutes, with a charge of $0.37 for the two minutes over the 45 minutes. I've seen this a lot in NYC with kids, they will use the bike for 45 minutes, let it sit in the rack for a bit, and then take it out again for another 45 minute ride.

Lyft/Citibike just launced the new e-bikes in late April, so they are rare and very desirable to get: https://www.timeout.com/newyork/news/lyft-has-unveiled-new-electric-citi-bikes-in-nyc-042922-1

These teens likely got some e-bikes and were planning on riding them around the city for the evening. As I understood it, they may have had some special promotional codes to use the e-bikes for free. Here's the Citibike charge rates for annual members:

The first 45 minutes of each ride on a classic Citi Bike are included in the annual membership price.

When you upgrade your ride to an ebike, it will be an extra $0.17/min, capped at $3 for rides 45 minutes or less that enter or exit Manhattan.

If you keep a bike out for longer than 45 minutes at a time, regardless of the type, it's $0.17 per minute.

If you incur any extra time or ebike upgrade fees, your card on file will be charged. The fee for a lost or stolen bike is $1200 (+ tax).

If you take an e-bike in/out of Manhattan, you can use it for 45 minutes for only $3. My guess is that they were probably going to take the bikes further down into lower Manhattan after "resetting" the bikes at this docking station to get another fresh 45 minutes of use. Then maybe cross the bridge into Brooklyn for a $3 ride.

With a group of kids, they could probably all dock at the same time and then switch bikes with each other, so it's a new 45 minute ride. They may have been taking a rest at these docks before starting their new ride.

And yeah, a lot of NY'ers will support his actions because there's an unwritten code about not snaking a Citibike for someone waiting for reset of the 45 minutes. Similarly, you don't snake any empty spot on a full Citibike dock if other people are already waiting to return the bike in their possession. The PA likely violated the social code of the Citibikes, but then he escalated by forcing her back onto the dock.

So he was basically scamming then... yeah. Whether or not that's normalized in NYC it's not looking good for this group of losers. The more information that comes out the more it's obvious they were in the wrong

Living in NYC is all about playing the system to your advantage. There's a reason why the phrase "don't hate the player, hate the game" was coined by a modern philosopher from Jersey.

She violated the rules of the street. He violated the rules of polite society. There's no Good Guy here.

I actually do think there's a "Good Guy" here because I subscribe to the rules of polite society and don't care about the rules of the street when the come into conflict.

Like the rules of the street might dictate that you can kill someone if they steal from you, but if I'm on a jury for that case, I don't really care -- murder is morally wrong and also illegal and you don't get to make up different rules because you want to.

There's a lot of people from NYC who would disagree with you and would argue that she "started it." I know, it's all very juvenile.

I'd want to know more about how close he was to the bike. If it was obvious to her that the kids were taking a break and waiting for the bikes, she's pretty snake-like to try to take it. You don't do that in NYC, there's unwritten codes of conduct that apply in NYC (and don't make sense elsewhere). Scarcity mindset is for real in NYC.

Well then we should acknowledge that NYC is full of knuckle dragging mouth breathers.

Society’s foundation is a system of laws that we all agree to. The “rules of the street” don’t matter in NYC or anywhere else. That’s a thug mentality.

[Anonymous]

‘Laws of the street’ sound like justifying a bully.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tbh this is a mess. No judge would find more/less fault on either of these people.

-She tried to take a bike someone else was holding onto, after she asked to use it and he told her no, he was about to use it.

-he was guarding a bike he wasn’t ready to use yet.

They were both wrong. I don’t know why anyone is taking either side here, since they were both wrong, except pure tribalism. I think if races/genders were flipped all of you would be flipping sides too.

If races/genders were switched, there would be no online mob against the person who yelled for help. If anything the online mob would come for the white woman in the scenario anyway!

Exactly.

Well…right. That’s why it’s called “weaponizing white tears”, because black men often get shot by cops with little justification, and at first people thought she was pretending to be in danger from these guys when she was the aggressor.

She didn’t call the cops, though. She eventually got off and rented a different bike. The video proves that. So all these “weaponizing her tears to get him killed” scenarios don’t make a lot of sense.

PP here. Right. But I’m explaining why this situation doesn’t really hit the same if “races/genders are reversed”. Like…there’s not going to be a black guy “weaponizing tears” because a group of white female teenagers re-docked his bike.

What you’re explaining is that you don’t think white women should ever be able to express genuine emotion in public. We get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The sister’s video makes a big deal about there being other bikes, but perhaps this was the only electric bike there, which is why she told them she was pregnant before the video starts.

But yeah, why would he ride a bike he intended to keep using up to the docks and actually dock it?

Because with a Citibike membership, you get the first 45 minutes for free. Look at his sister's receipt she posted - he had the e-bike for 47 minutes, with a charge of $0.37 for the two minutes over the 45 minutes. I've seen this a lot in NYC with kids, they will use the bike for 45 minutes, let it sit in the rack for a bit, and then take it out again for another 45 minute ride.

Lyft/Citibike just launced the new e-bikes in late April, so they are rare and very desirable to get: https://www.timeout.com/newyork/news/lyft-has-unveiled-new-electric-citi-bikes-in-nyc-042922-1

These teens likely got some e-bikes and were planning on riding them around the city for the evening. As I understood it, they may have had some special promotional codes to use the e-bikes for free. Here's the Citibike charge rates for annual members:

The first 45 minutes of each ride on a classic Citi Bike are included in the annual membership price.

When you upgrade your ride to an ebike, it will be an extra $0.17/min, capped at $3 for rides 45 minutes or less that enter or exit Manhattan.

If you keep a bike out for longer than 45 minutes at a time, regardless of the type, it's $0.17 per minute.

If you incur any extra time or ebike upgrade fees, your card on file will be charged. The fee for a lost or stolen bike is $1200 (+ tax).

If you take an e-bike in/out of Manhattan, you can use it for 45 minutes for only $3. My guess is that they were probably going to take the bikes further down into lower Manhattan after "resetting" the bikes at this docking station to get another fresh 45 minutes of use. Then maybe cross the bridge into Brooklyn for a $3 ride.

With a group of kids, they could probably all dock at the same time and then switch bikes with each other, so it's a new 45 minute ride. They may have been taking a rest at these docks before starting their new ride.

And yeah, a lot of NY'ers will support his actions because there's an unwritten code about not snaking a Citibike for someone waiting for reset of the 45 minutes. Similarly, you don't snake any empty spot on a full Citibike dock if other people are already waiting to return the bike in their possession. The PA likely violated the social code of the Citibikes, but then he escalated by forcing her back onto the dock.

So he was basically scamming then... yeah. Whether or not that's normalized in NYC it's not looking good for this group of losers. The more information that comes out the more it's obvious they were in the wrong

Living in NYC is all about playing the system to your advantage. There's a reason why the phrase "don't hate the player, hate the game" was coined by a modern philosopher from Jersey.

She violated the rules of the street. He violated the rules of polite society. There's no Good Guy here.

I actually do think there's a "Good Guy" here because I subscribe to the rules of polite society and don't care about the rules of the street when the come into conflict.

Like the rules of the street might dictate that you can kill someone if they steal from you, but if I'm on a jury for that case, I don't really care -- murder is morally wrong and also illegal and you don't get to make up different rules because you want to.

There's a lot of people from NYC who would disagree with you and would argue that she "started it." I know, it's all very juvenile.

I'd want to know more about how close he was to the bike. If it was obvious to her that the kids were taking a break and waiting for the bikes, she's pretty snake-like to try to take it. You don't do that in NYC, there's unwritten codes of conduct that apply in NYC (and don't make sense elsewhere). Scarcity mindset is for real in NYC.

Stop trying to say it's a NY thing and accept it's simply a racial and possibly gendered thing. If it was a large group of white women who had rented/used bikes, returned them and were no longer using them, and were standing around, bullying and blocking anyone from accessing them, you're telling me New Yorkers would back them up?! Please. They would be called "entitled" until the cows came home. This is about a kid who was being a jerk and a woman who got attacked and dragged through the mud without a second thought