My name is Fritz Knochenhauer. I was raised in the San Francisco Bay Area, am #6 of 8 kids and live in Davis. I'm in my early 50's, am a passionate bicyclist and, for the most part, enjoy the quality of life in Davis. As a neighborhood activist, I routinely FIGHT THE BLIGHT in my neighborhood, building awareness of important issues and try to improve bicycling corridors so our kids and families feel empowered to safely bicycle to school and around town.

Trying to take a nice picture but some old bridge ruined the shot

Knochenhauer (pronounced nok-'n-hower) is an old professional trade name, like Smith, Miller or Baker and means "butcher" in northern Germany. At least 30 different German surnames can be put down to the butcher's trade. This means many Knochenhauer emigrants were related by the union of butchery rather than bloodlines (pun totally intended).

In German, "knochen" means "of bone" and "hauer" (actually "hauen") has various literal meanings from "cutter to hacker, chopper, hitter, crusher or smasher." In my family, we understood Knochenhauer meant "bonecrusher" or "bonechopper." Contrary to popular myth, it does not mean "surgeon," "mortician," or "bone carver."

Things I believe in: * Equality * Non-motorized transportation * Factual, accurate information * People * Friendships * A higher power

BTW, I have been using the Internet since 1985, had a modem when people said, "What's that for?" and first experienced the Web in 1993 by using a customized version of Mosaic [later Netscape] on a Silicon Graphics Onyx workstation I owned while connected to a 128k/bps ISDN line at home. As a former technical and marketing director at an authorized distributor which sold System V Unix, SCO Xenix, Univel, Novell and other personal computer hardware and software, I was an early strategist, believer and investor in various online technologies, lived and worked in Silicon Valley and am connected with many of the early founders of the and online strategy eras. I have no financial or political agenda in Davis other than a "common-sense" agenda for its citizenry so it can maintain its relatively nice quality-of-life.

On the Web

Main Street Consulting My Facebook


You must be logged in to comment on this page. Please log in.

2010-10-31 11:25:20   No problem, it looks like Philip has already fixed it. Welcome to the Wiki, by the way! If you have any questions, feel free to ask! —JoePomidor

2010-12-17 11:37:29   I'm curious if one (i.e. "me") can delete posts made previously? I know. It's like revising history....but sometimes we get stupid and do as stupid does...not a worry, just a question. —fknochenhauer

  • fknochenhauer-You cannot truly remove them—they are in the history but you can remove it via edit if you wish—or if there's nothing posted after it, click on the Info tab and revert to the version just before yours. -PeteB

2010-12-17 12:08:02   Also, if it's something dumb or dangerous, just ask and it can be scrubbed from the history. Every so often somebody posts a social security number or somebody else's home address without asking first. Everybody makes dumb mistakes now and then, so don't be too worried about it. If it's a clear mistake or slipup that might actually harm somebody (like an SSN or address), it can be removed from the history. If it's something you just wish you hadn't said, it's more fair to just remove it and leave it in the history (everybody does that at times, too... so that's not too terrible either). —Evan 'JabberWokky' Edwards

2011-09-13 11:43:11   There is a phrase that is often spoken on the internet that is applicable to this situation: "lurk moar"

Why don't you go to People and look at some pages in /Users ? They're pages associated with actual user accounts on the wiki and they have to do with the person's activities on the wiki. Let's look at the account in question. That user has never done anything, so there is nothing to speak about. Now I could get into some more detail about how the page you created is an ad that violates Wiki Community/For Profit Restrictions, but it's unnecessary at this point. A userpage should not exist for a account that has never done anything. —WilliamLewis

  • "Lurk moar" as "users/WilliamLewis" calls me in this situation. is insulting, demeaning and contemptuous. As a nationally-ranked cyclist, swimming and AYSO youth soccer coach with loads of experience in assisting others, I fail to understand why anyone claiming to be helpful would use such a term. I also have over 30 years of business-to-business marketing communications expertise. I guess "treat others as you would like to be treated" comes to mind here, William Lewis. And, what's wrong with that among editors?

    So, really, if "one-upsmanship" is the goal or it's simply William who has an ego larger than life itself, there's no reason to expound on it to the newest members. I'm sure there will be a "volley" or some sort of "return" to this commentary from others, but i would challenge those to hit the "pause" button and decide if their angst and sense of retribution exceeds the norm and standards of the ethics of the greater Wiki. Afterall, it's just a Wiki...however, if you'd like to get into a battle of wits, I refuse to do so with an unarmed person, William. Your turn. - Fritz Knochenhauer

I do not doubt you have had many varied experiences and accomplished many great things in your life. You still came into the wiki and posted a promotional puff piece and placed it on a userpage for a user with no activity, demonstrating an "ignorance of the customs and social expectations of an online community." I apologize if you found the phrase I used to be insulting, demeaning, and contemptuous because that was not my intent. At no time did I treat you in a way I would not like to be treated myself. Seriously.

Anyway, since you've stooped to insulting me both here and on my userpage, I doubt it would be worth anyone's time to continue this discussion. But just to put a few things out there... Nothing here is about my ego or one-upmanship. This may be "just a wiki" to you, but to many of us who have put so many hours into making this wiki one of the best of the world, it is so much more. It's a work of which we are justifiably proud and we wish to see it do well. As such, it makes me quite happy to see you add good content like you have over at Cowboy Guy. As long as you continue to do stuff like that, I've got no beef with you. Cheers. —WilliamLewis

  • This "guy" has a Ban William Lewis page, so i doubt he "gets" what an unhappy personality he portrays. If it's not "his way" it's the highway. I seldom engage with such moronic misfits, because they're not worth the mind space, but this stooge thinks he's some kind of wiki "guru" or "brand" up to whom others should look. I'd rather pee in my pants than let this guy have the last say. — Your turn, Willie -

2011-09-13 12:06:25   "Editing is fine. Deleting is not."

That's pretty audacious. As I explained before, user pages are about the account they are associated with. The page you created is associated with an account that has never done anything on this wiki. Again, I link you to the blank edit history of the account. Therefore, there is no reason for it to exist and it should be deleted. —WilliamLewis

2011-09-13 12:32:55   Don't jump to conclusions about why Eve has not made edits to "her" wiki.

We're talking about a "gift" of time made by me to Eve who has for years been frustrated by not being able to create, understand or manage her own wiki. I knocked it out in less than a day cheerfully and without recompense. My first wiki, ever. This is why I've done all those little edits while she has taken a week off from teaching students in Davis (her only vacation this year). Last night, I sent the link to her wiki for her review. A "Comment" box was included today in the page which should have been the first "go to" area for feedback. I'm NOT angry with you, but puzzled by your arbitrary decision to delete valuable information without prior communication. I'm a stakeholder since I spent time and energy on her behalf and expected something tangible on the Davis Wiki. Instead, you've summarily deleted a creative project that was well-formatted.

Since many of the raw data files used for Eve's page reside on my Mac, I must use my account and my Mac for creating Eve's wiki. There is no subterfuge here. I'm not profiting from this nor is Eve who simply doesn't have the time or energy to "play" in setting up her wiki. Personally, I enjoyed the challenge. Until now.

As a 25 + year resident of Davis, Eve West Bessier is considered a community asset, a public figure, a performing artist, an instructor to many youth and adults, as well as a well-regarded citizen. There is no intent here to create "an ad" but rather portray her value to the community and her capabilities in serving it. Perhaps the page was nicely developed, well-linked and "looked" different, but other musicians and music teachers also have personal wikis with such information. Restoring Eve's wiki seems sensible and providing the guidelines as you have done is helpful. Thanks for being rational about this. We look forward to seeing Eve's wiki restored.

I encourage you to review Eve's published works and long-term commitment to the Davis community: Or Google her. —fknochenhauer

2011-09-13 12:37:17   I have not jumped to any conclusions. I am not being arbitrary

It's simple. The account associated with the userpage you've created is not active on the wiki. Thus, under no circumstances is there ANY reason to have a userpage associated with that account. There is nothing to write about the activities of an account when that account has never done anything. Thus, the page should not exist. Period. There no debate over this. —WilliamLewis

2011-09-13 12:43:38   I've been deliberately staying away from this, but I do want to make one clarification: see Wiki Community/Glossary for the difference between a User Page and a Public Figure Page. The problem William is raising is that the page was created as a user page for someone who (as far as I can tell) isn't a user. Hence, it's the wrong page. Eve West Bessier would be the place to make a page about Ms. Bessier, rather than Users/EveWestBessier.

I'll also note that I find it to be pretty promotional. It reads like a an advertisement. The problem isn't the amount of information, it's the tone. —TomGarberson

2011-09-13 12:46:05   Actually, I'm not connected with the Area Music Teachers at all — just someone who edits many pages on many topics. One point of confusion here is that the sort of page you made isn't really what user pages — pages for people who edit the wiki — are for. Rather, the content you created was more appropriate for a "public" page. (See, e.g., Sue Greenwald). So, that page would and should be named Eve West Bessier, not Users/EveWestBessier. A small point, but sometimes small points can be important. As for the content of the page, perhaps this page would be helpful in understanding why some people think the content that you wrote needs to be less ad-like. —CovertProfessor

2011-09-13 13:01:14   Great feedback! When I created my fknochenhauer account over a year ago, I fished for guidelines about what was "acceptable use." It wasn't self-evident.

Last week, when I looked at other Davis-area musicians for comparison to what Eve desired in her wiki, I simply followed what I saw in their wikis; various images, links, performance calendars. Overly promotional? I think not, but anything is changeable, modifiable when reasonable decisions area made. She's a performing artist with a visual and audio story to tell. It takes more than words to bring dimension to her background and service to the Davis community.

Deleting ("nuking") someone's creative effort seems contrary and counter-productive. I'll gladly modify, within the context of existing guidelines, content considered "too promotional." Just because this is my first wiki, which may seem overly promotional to you, it doesn't deserve the death sentence, does it? I'm being professional about this and demonstrating what results from a nice day's effort. But, now there's nothing to show for it. Doesn't seem fair to me....or Eve. Let's let common-sense prevail on this and nudge this in the right direction. - Fritz —fknochenhauer

2011-09-13 13:11:32   I agree that the content should not have been deleted entirely, just moved to a differently named page, as JabberWokky has now done. As for it being promotional, I think it's sentences like the following that sound promotional: "uniquely qualified to be a life coach and creative consultant. Her approach is highly creative, compassionate and tailored to the unique needs of each client." But that is something that can be fixed. (Did you read the link that I gave you? Here it is again: Welcome to the wiki/business owner). —CovertProfessor

2011-09-13 13:19:47   No worries. There is some legitimate concern about the whole IRS and non-commercial restrictions, but any vocal coach or UCD researcher pretty much should have a wiki entry about them. I'm thinking the direct link to the testimonials should probably go, as that leans a wee bit into the commercial promotion, whereas the link to her website (which presumably has the testimonials listed anyway) is more documentary in nature. —JabberWokky

2011-09-13 13:23:05   Incidentally, I think it's just a matter of one person saying "you're doing it wrong!" and deleting it. There was already a discussion underway about how to rewrite it to be a little less commercial in nature (to comply with that pesky IRS restriction), so I think a few people took it as a given that the entry should be put back up. I'm just the one who grasped the nettle and started working on it. I also did some "fancy wiki layout" to try and make it look nice. It's aesthetics, so I can't promise you or Eve will like it better, but it generally matches the rest of the wiki now. Those are some cool photos, by the way! —JabberWokky

2011-09-13 14:05:33   There's a discussion going on Eve West Bessier/Talk about touching up the contents of the page. I went ahead and took a stab at integrating information from the personal statement into the main entry (most of it was duplicated in the entry already), and reworked a couple of the more promotional bits. —TomGarberson

2011-09-13 15:08:57   Now, who would respond to my post on WilliamLewis' page w/o attribution with the "Bullshit..." paragraph as below? Is this for real? Is this aimed at me? Come on, now. I'm missing something here. This is only a wiki. Who posted this insane rant?

2011-09-13 11:59:43 BTW, re: users/evewestbessier (, the wiki page that I created and you deleted was a gift from me to Eve, who has been frustrated for years that she couldn't seem to create, edit and manage a personal wiki page of her own. You have stolen her surprise gift while she has been on vacation this week. I did the edits with her knowledge that I was creating a page on her behalf. If there is some "violation of terms," let's compare with other musicians' pages on the Davis Wiki. Eve's just looked better than most.

You're welcome to provide constructive feedback, link suggestions/guidelines, but restoring the page in its entirety putting your comments in the Comment box seems appropriate and the way to go. Let's work together on this, o.k.? Editing is fine. Deleting is not. —fknochenhauer

2011-09-13 18:18:37   Please allow me to say that before this deletion drama for EveWestBessier occured I noticed that Eve wasn't being a user, so I thought to rename the page to a people page Eve West Bessier. That thought didn't occur to me until I was away from the computer, which is why I didn't rename the page right away, in case anyone was wondring. It's similar to situations that have existed before where a user page gets renamed something other than a user page, for example, International Festival. Besides the issue of whether a user is editing or not, to me what was being created on Eve's user page looked like it belonged on what I call a people page; not all editors may agree with this. If Eve ever decides to do some editing she may recreate her user page. Whatever happened to her previous editing attempts that you mentioned? —BruceHansen

2011-09-13 18:30:59   Thanks, Bruce, Don, David, Evan, et al. Eve's page is now nice and tight, well-formatted and represents her value to the City of Davis and Sacramento Communities. I did move the main graphic of her to the left so it faces toward the main body of text instead of her face and view running off the right side of the page. Aesthetics, look-and-feel, etc. Others (Dr. Andy Jones) have similar formatting.

Appreciate hanging with me/us on this. After all these years, I know Eve and her community will greatly appreciate her wiki. Keep it simple. Peace & Joy. Thanks once more. —fknochenhauer

  • Peace & Joy??? Wow, now I know you're a socialist! ;) — Wes
  • No worries — as I said, I formatted it to a fairly common wiki layout, which doesn't mean "the one true way". Aesthetics are always bouncing around a bit because everybody has different opinions. I personally like a bit of variety (take a look at Sunflowers), so I'm happy to see a bit of a twist. I'm glad you hung with everybody, realizing that it's a full pack of people, so you have all kinds of folks with different social attitudes. Just like Davis. Peace and Joy back at ya! —Evan 'JabberWokky' Edwards

2011-09-13 22:58:25   There is no "approval" process here — it's just the consensus of who is editing, and that consensus can change. That being said, I too am a little curious about why hankim is editing the way he is. My guess is that he is reacting to your being resistant to many of the links people have added, and so he is reacting by adding lots of them. As JabberWokky said, lots of personalities here. What might help is going away from the page for a little while. Sometimes things can get hot and a cool off is helpful. —CovertProfessor

2011-09-13 22:59:34   The reason why you're getting some resistance is you are removing perfectly good links and generally fiddling with the page to make it worse. Relax and take it easy. —WilliamLewis

2011-09-13 23:20:54   I'm done here. Linking Eve's SFSU English degree internally to a UC Davis English Dept. wiki page is incorrect/misleading. So, I removed it until I could find a SFSU English Dept. link, but hankim reverted the page. Eve also feels a sentence about living with her cat makes her vulnerable and indicates she lives alone. This is a valid PERSONAL SAFETY concern so I removed this verbiage Why is this hard to figure out? G'nite, good luck and I really do hope people Chill Out on the unnecessary editing and linking. —fknochenhauer

2011-09-13 23:24:33   Wow. This comment turned into a treatise. Sorry.

Hey Fritz, have you read the Welcome to the Wiki page and/or the Welcome to the Wiki/Business Owner? One or both might clarify some things.

First, there's no "approved" version of the page. People have many different opinions on page content. Everyone edits to try to come up with a good result. Sometimes there are disagreements over what's the right result. The way to handle that is to explain why your version is preferable to the alternative, rather than to appeal to authority.

Second, interconnectivity is a big part of the wiki. While it's possible to go overboard, as a general rule the idea is that more linkage is good. Links coming in, links going out. Linking English on the page isn't saying that she went to the SFSU English program. It's saying she studied English—and, hey, look, here's info on English on the Davis Wiki! It's not misleading. It's connecting ideas within the Davis context. If someone were looking for the SFSU English program they'd have to resort to Google, but there's nothing wrong with that.

People are also leery about deleting links, because the level of interconnectivity on the wiki is just so cool. I can go from Eve West Bessier to reading about Cats in Davis to learning that Bangoo is the Korean word for fart. From there I can head down the pilates road to the local Jazzercise program... which is horribly under-linked, and I'm damn close to a dead end. That's a page that needs work. And links.

So, collaborative editing and links are both good.

The third point is promotional language. Part of the thing about the wiki is that it's an informational resource for the community that tries to get the individual involved. The general atmosphere here is one of inclusion. Perspectives, opinions, jokes, etc. While you may prefer, as a PR professional, to try to keep things clean and professional, that's not really a part of what happens on the wiki. While a number of us try to keep things relatively civil and business-friendly (not everyone, although that's a conversation for another time), sterility really isn't a part of it. Quirkiness is a big part of what makes the wiki so great. Paesanos isn't really a restaurant on a flatbed. We all realize that. It's a joke.

I guess the point there is to give your readers some credit. The wiki is both a great font of information and a fun place to look around. The people who use the wiki aren't idiots (with a few exceptions). They can read. They won't be deceived into thinking that someone who studied English at SFSU studied English at Davis—because it says where she studied it.

Unfortunately, you kind of got the short end of the stick today. A lot of the regulars around here have gotten kind of jaded. There have been a number of particularly draining disputes on the wiki in the last few months, involving manipulation, abuse, legal threats, and so on. You've caught some of the fallout from that. It used to be that most folks around here would give new users the benefit of the doubt. There'd be some outreach, explaining wiki norms and giving the why underlying changes, reversions, etc.

Sadly, there have been some pretty abusive users recently who took advantage of the friendly atmosphere to try and get their way, get around legal restrictions or abuse wiki norms. Some of the wiki regulars have gotten suspicious. Among the other things that have come up in some of these disputes are appeals to authority ("so-and-so said it was OK, so it's done, stop changing the page!") and micro-management of a page with an insistence on exercising exclusive control over its content. Because both of those things were done so abusively recently, there can be a bit of a knee-jerk reaction to them now. As you've discovered, I'm afraid.

Anyway, I hope you'll continue to engage on the wiki and get a feel for the way things typically blunder along here. It's a great resource and, most of the time, a fun one to work on. I do recommend both trying to get a feel for the norms and relaxing a bit. Taking it too seriously is generally a bad idea, both because many people will have different ideas and because there are those who'll mess with you if you take things too seriously. It is The Interwebs, after all. —TomGarberson

2011-09-15 21:53:53   That morning commute photo is a great iconic photo of 8th. I kicked them all up to the top so they could be increased in size (otherwise they push down the header). —JabberWokky

2011-09-16 10:52:31   Great contributions on East 8th and Mark's page! Looking forward to the addition of the poem and a new photo. —TomGarberson

2011-09-19 09:50:45   In 1993 or thereabouts, I looked over at a friend's IBM RS/6000 screen and proclaimed that "that's neat, but that world wide web thing will never take off — everybody already uses gopher". Oops. Worst prediction of my life. On the other hand, that was when the delphoids, AOLers and other non-netiquette aware folk were pouring into the net, unable to use gopher — and probably not interested in the kind of things there anyway. —JabberWokky

2011-09-20 16:32:09   Thanks for the lot pictures! —PhilipNeustrom

2011-09-20 22:17:38   Trees and a gorgeous blue sky are the things most often missed by metropolitan citizens. Most don't even notice the lack of blue sky or nice, broad, shade-giving trees. We have a wonderful opportunity to save a city-owned parking lot, turn it into something else and avoid a CONCRETE JUNGLE. Why can't we have a small kiosk with a parking dude/dudette charging hourly parking rates at this cute lot? I'm not ingenious, but this makes so much sense if revenue-generation is the goal. If not, then have this parking lot THE PLACE for employees of businesses to park. Give them some reason to park here instead of curbside, using spaces for "valuable" car drivers. I understand that, at times, over 50% of surface-street parking spaces in the downtown area are used by employees. Is this factual? That seems like an easy deal to solve, doesn't it? Keep the faith that, eventually, car-driven excursions will simply not be financially reasonable in favor of cargo-bikes and others pulling trailers, with racks, bags or other conveyances to haul purchases. If I were a downtown businessperson, I'd give a 5% discount to anyone who is a non-motorized patron. Don't ask me how, but I'd do it. If they have car keys in-hand, they don't qualify. Offer an incentive for non-motorists, safe passage and favorable parking for bikes and you've got a winner. Go to Amsterdam. You'll get the idea very quickly. —fknochenhauer

2011-09-20 22:54:52   RussellReagan of Davis Bicycles! was the person to create the page about the proposed parking structure and is responsible for a fair amount of its content. If you go to the "Info" tab at the top of the page, you can go through the edits for any page in as gory detail as you like. —CovertProfessor

2011-09-21 22:19:18   I remember seeing an old General Plan (way back) that had planned out Downtown without any car-streets (at least some sections).

Have you read The High Cost of Free Parking? (short short summary here) —PhilipNeustrom

2011-09-22 21:57:23   As for the "non-motorized discount," I guess if I owned a shop downtown, I'd give a 5% discount PLUS a buy 10 get 1 free deal to anyone who showed me a bike helmet, a stroller, scooter, Rollerblades, skateboard(?), parachute or other non-motorized implement that had them arrive downtown without utilizing a parking space. I also would give a free non-motorized implement to my employees so they wouldn't drive to my work. I don't see people in cars buying MORE than others, but I do see them causing more problems, costing hidden dollars and creating street re-designs where, if there were FEWER cars, it might be a safer and more pleasant downtown in which to shop. Go visit Los Altos, Los Gatos, Saratoga, Burlingame, Redwood City and yes, even, San Jose's Lincoln Avenue to view how traffic-calming efforts and road diets really do work for the benefit of everyone - merchants, shoppers and vendors. —fknochenhauer

2012-03-19 11:57:12   Why delete so much info? —TomGarberson

2013-06-13 20:00:26   Fritz—I started AMD Medical Supply/Talk to discuss your concern. Really is a more productive then outright slamming them on their own page. —PeteB

2013-07-15 14:52:12   Sure. —CovertProfessor