I agree with you that there's much, much more we could be doing, and that we should be prioritizing the completion of a maximally-protected bike network across

I agree with you that there's much, much more we could be doing, and that we should be prioritizing the completion of a maximally-protected bike network across NYC vs the patchwork that we have now. But we're still at least doing something, more than any other city in the US, and it's a clearly stated priority of the city government. So, in that context, and in the context of the person I was replying to, it's absurd to blame someone for taking the government at its word and using the kinds of scaleable, non-polluting, lower negative externality transportation options whose use is explicitly being encouraged by the city. When someone chooses to bike instead of drive, that's better for everyone around them, including drivers. You aren't contributing to worsening traffic, you aren't emitting particulate pollution that messes up people's lungs, and you're much less likely to seriously harm or kill someone on a bike than in a car. What rankles me is the guy who's saying it's OK if things are set up to discourage that choice.